I read exactly what you wrote you hypocrite you call yourself a Christian? you say you have morals..sure just send some money over there somewhere over to Jordan where they have already taken millions? People are starving and freezing in the UN camps because the areas are unstable and difficult to reach, you dumb fuck. try catching some news from a source that doesn't pat your back and say yeas great white Christian you are in the right.



funny because it's not jailbait? I suppose you'd find room to shelter some 14yr. old virgins wouldn't you?





It's good that you can convince yourself of that. Seems like the "do for the least of these, you also do for me" didn't mean keep the dirty savages out of my borders, but hey when you explain why that was important to the integrity of the country, well then God will understand.

...phony preacher raining down the fire and brimstone...this is hilarious

It seems like you are overemphasising emotional arguments and ignoring objective truths.

You've basically said that the only way you can care about these people is to take them into your country and fuck the real pressures on labour, education, housing and healthcare services that the taxpayer has to fund and deal with.

This post was edited by dro94 on Sep 26 2015 07:00pm

Main problem is western countries are responsible of the crap in many of those "poor countries"
btw recently read an article about syrians refugees, so 95% of them are in borderlines countries (turky, liban, jordany, irak, egypt)...

http://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2015/09/24/les-migrants-tous-des-hommes_4770522_4355770.html

whatever i think it's time for USA to start taking some of them. like a little million.

The Shah wasn't a religious radical.



Nor was he a war-monger. He did run a police state, but we liked him because he was a bulwark against Soviet expansionism.

Carter played a large role in the Shah's overthrow. The Shah began to implement reforms in light of Carter's emphasis on human rights. The secular left began denouncing the government. When the Shah refused to crack down (a historic mistake) the business class abandoned him and the regime fell. The Islamists had, by this time, hijacked the revolutionary movement and the Islamic Republic was born.

Iran today would probably be a better place had the Shah remained in power. A heavy hand is necessary when you're dealing with a poor, radicalized population. The liberals have been on the wrong side of history every time.

This post was edited by bogie160 on Sep 26 2015 07:53pm

A real tear jerker.. Nice race card pull... Again..

laugh all you want you phony christian (plays high and mighty..yet fantasizes about pedophilia)..how will your judgment turn out?




"these people" need a place the camps are full they aren't getting the services to all the people who need them in the UN camps people are starving to death and have frozen to death. There is virtually no medical help in the UN camps. It's not just as easy as sending in a check. This is a problem that society needs to address. The number of refugees that need to come to the Western countries is a very small fraction of the refugees overall. And it will make a very small percentage of any countries population that they come to. This perception of masses invading and taking over a country's culture is being perpetrated by the ultra right wingers who are so goddamn stingy and careless that they'ed rather have human beings die at sea then land on their shores.

What kind of society have we become where the factors are even weighed before we give aid or shelter to those in desperate need? "will it affect our economy? our infrastructure? our culture? very slightly if at all but are those questions that we as human beings even ask ourselves before accepting those needing help in?



I'm willing to take people in Boogie, your worn out argument is so sad. I haven't said that anyone should sell everything they own it really won't be that big of a cost in the long run. I could reverse it and say personally are you willing to watch people die without helping them?

The UK government has just spent £1bn on those camps and millions in our country have donated clothes, tents etc. The US has spent even more probably. I don't know what propaganda outlet you've been reading, but nobody has been dying and there is enough food, water and shelter for all refugees at the UN camps. The migrants coming to Europe have just acted in their own self interest of being unwilling to wait out a possibly never ending war and being reliant on the UN. I don't blame them for acting in their own self interest, I'd probably do the same in their position, but that doesn't mean we indulge economic migrants by opening the floodgates.

At the moment the migrants coming into Europe are 3% of total worldwide refugees. However the incoming stream is consistent, and by taking in huge numbers of refugees it is foolish to think that it won't encourage even more to come. Using your logic we should take in 20m if that's how many come. Again, this just goes back to my original point of whether it is really our responsibility to take in everyone that happens to have a lower standard of living than us. In my opinion the answer is no, and the only way you could be justified in your current beliefs is if you disagree with that question in principle.

This post was edited by dro94 on Sep 27 2015 09:34am

I am probably the strongest internationalist on this forum. I want to help these people by offering them development and progress at home. Saving the few who jump the border and ignoring the millions left behind is moral conceit.

why do you repeat the same lies over and over

This post was edited by duffman316 on Sep 27 2015 12:10pm