Sweden swinging hard right!

[eagle1462010]

If you are referring of the Partition of India - there was murder and rape and trains full of the dead due to violence from both Hindu, Muslims and Sikhs. No innocent groups in that mess.

I'm not sure you really understand the history of the region. The Bengali's are an ethnic group divided between several Indian states and Bangladesh. Bengali's are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Sikh and B'ahai - not one religion. When India was partitioned, they decided since the Bengali's were mostly Muslim they belonged with Pakistan - which were mostly a collection of tribal mountain groups that had nothing in common culturally with the Bengali's beyond religion. Bangladesh came out of Bengali nationalist aspirations and a seperate cultural identity from Pakistan. This drive for self determination culminated in a bloody war and genocide

I stated that the divide was via Religious lines.........I'd add to it that Bangledesh was drawn up on religious lines.......without India backing them there would be no Bangledesh at all..............They did it to get Pakistan out of there..............

Riddle me this......Pakistan is made up primarily of WHAT RELIGION.........
India is made up of WHAT RELIGION...
Bangledesh is made up of WHAT RELIGION.
etc.............you get the point.

You would revoke the citizenship of people who commited no crimes?

Where would you throw them?

I already answered it ..........you get tired of reading responses.........I said back where they came from...........and again your waiving the piece of paper around saying .............SEE.........THEY ARE NOW SWEDES.....SEE THE PAPER...........

They haven't been there long and Sweden could most DEFINITELY revoke it if they want to............but hey......a lot of them over there are just as dumb as you..........so they can enjoy the higher crime rates.........rape...............and terror attacks.............because you let them in.............but but but they are so innocent...........cry me a river..............people like you caused the dang mess and then blame others who are pissed at you for causing it.

 

[eagle1462010]

You’re dodging. With so much conviction... You ought to be able to pin this down. So... Explain. I’m listening...

Do any countries have laws legalizing mass murder? That should indicate how far outside the civilized norm it is. The standard is defined by the law which is determined by the people.

Mass murder doesn't need to be legalized... it's a natural outflow of the Human Experiment.

The action that can and should be taken is to agree as a society to punish humans convicted of committing it. The unfortunate reality is that a mass murderer can work with relative impunity as long as he can maintain control over a large enough army to control a piece of land arbitrarily designated with geographic borders as a 'country'.

It's not as bad as in the days of feudal Europe when the 99% were wholly owned right down to their virgin daughters by the good, Christian king, but control of a national military remains the career launching pad for the world's most successful mass murderers.

`​

So now the immigration problem and higher crime is Feudalism...............LOL

Riddle me this........in the middle east how do they treat christians..........they have wiped them out over time...........

So let's invite people from the same area that may be with that crowd........and say all welcome........

Take a look at the Hidu's.......and Bangledesh..........the Hindu's are pissed.............they came there then started doing the extreme Islamic MAMBA............and they pushed back.........and they did so violently...........

And the world goes look at how bad they are............while overlooking what caused them to go postal on them and kick them out.........The Bengals were murdering and raping Hidu's...........and the Hindu's...............said I don't fucking think so.......and kicked their asses out..........same thing with India and Pakistan...........countries line's are Religious lines..........and it's brutal there....

Wow. That's a stretch. Feudal Europe was mentioned only as a comparison, emphasizing with an extreme example the still relevant point that he or she who controls the military makes the rules, and mass murder is just one of the things still easily justifiable in the name of 'National Security'.

And this applies more to dictators and warlords in places like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and some of the other places where organizations of humans who control at least one army are pounding other organizations and individuals to bloody hell for whatever reason, not to modern, stable democracies.

Too true. Look at Myanmar.

Myanmar fought back after the Bengali's went postal on their people..........so they through them out violently............

They defended their nation..............by throwing out the ones that were raping.........and murdering their people.

But you have blinders on...........you only EVER see the Muslim side.

 

[eagle1462010]

Those enamored by mass murder usually have a degree of warpage.

You’re dodging. With so much conviction... You ought to be able to pin this down. So... Explain. I’m listening...

Do any countries have laws legalizing mass murder? That should indicate how far outside the civilized norm it is. The standard is defined by the law which is determined by the people.

Mass murder doesn't need to be legalized... it's a natural outflow of the Human Experiment.

The action that can and should be taken is to agree as a society to punish humans convicted of committing it. The unfortunate reality is that a mass murderer can work with relative impunity as long as he can maintain control over a large enough army to control a piece of land arbitrarily designated with geographic borders as a 'country'.

It's not as bad as in the days of feudal Europe when the 99% were wholly owned right down to their virgin daughters by the good, Christian king, but control of a national military remains the career launching pad for the world's most successful mass murderers.

`​

So now the immigration problem and higher crime is Feudalism...............LOL

Riddle me this........in the middle east how do they treat christians..........they have wiped them out over time...........

So let's invite people from the same area that may be with that crowd........and say all welcome........

Take a look at the Hidu's.......and Bangledesh..........the Hindu's are pissed.............they came there then started doing the extreme Islamic MAMBA............and they pushed back.........and they did so violently...........

And the world goes look at how bad they are............while overlooking what caused them to go postal on them and kick them out.........The Bengals were murdering and raping Hidu's...........and the Hindu's...............said I don't fucking think so.......and kicked their asses out..........same thing with India and Pakistan...........countries line's are Religious lines..........and it's brutal there....

Wow. That's a stretch. Feudal Europe was mentioned only as a comparison, emphasizing with an extreme example the still relevant point that he or she who controls the military makes the rules, and mass murder is just one of the things still easily justifiable in the name of 'National Security'.

And this applies more to dictators and warlords in places like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and some of the other places where organizations of humans who control at least one army are pounding other organizations and individuals to bloody hell for whatever reason, not to modern, stable democracies.

You brought up feudalism.........I didn't......

This is a OP on Sweden and increased crime there via the refugees they allowed in...........Those rates went up after they got there..........the people there are getting pissed........people are getting pissed across Europe over it...........and that is causing this discussion..........If the newbs don't adapt they can go back to where they came from.......

Take the rape.........and increased crime with them.

 

[jillian]

Well duh.....these people are suddenly freaked out due to recent immigration! The way it is going in Sweden, in three generations, blondes in Sweden will be a relic of a former era!

The top story on DRUDGE right now >>

Anti-immigration party set for election gains as Sweden swings right

What a disaster for these folks....might be too late! And some people wonder why there is such strong support for immigration control in America?!! Again.....duh

There’s an evil ugly streak right now. Fueled by Russian ops. Congrats bigot boy

 

[Coyote]

If you are referring of the Partition of India - there was murder and rape and trains full of the dead due to violence from both Hindu, Muslims and Sikhs. No innocent groups in that mess.

I'm not sure you really understand the history of the region. The Bengali's are an ethnic group divided between several Indian states and Bangladesh. Bengali's are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Sikh and B'ahai - not one religion. When India was partitioned, they decided since the Bengali's were mostly Muslim they belonged with Pakistan - which were mostly a collection of tribal mountain groups that had nothing in common culturally with the Bengali's beyond religion. Bangladesh came out of Bengali nationalist aspirations and a seperate cultural identity from Pakistan. This drive for self determination culminated in a bloody war and genocide

I stated that the divide was via Religious lines.........I'd add to it that Bangledesh was drawn up on religious lines.......without India backing them there would be no Bangledesh at all..............They did it to get Pakistan out of there..............

Riddle me this......Pakistan is made up primarily of WHAT RELIGION.........
India is made up of WHAT RELIGION...
Bangledesh is made up of WHAT RELIGION.
etc.............you get the point.

You would revoke the citizenship of people who commited no crimes?

Where would you throw them?

I already answered it ..........you get tired of reading responses.........I said back where they came from...........and again your waiving the piece of paper around saying .............SEE.........THEY ARE NOW SWEDES.....SEE THE PAPER...........

They haven't been there long and Sweden could most DEFINITELY revoke it if they want to............but hey......a lot of them over there are just as dumb as you..........so they can enjoy the higher crime rates.........rape...............and terror attacks.............because you let them in.............but but but they are so innocent...........cry me a river..............people like you caused the dang mess and then blame others who are pissed at you for causing it.

What I think you don't realize is how divided India and that region was during that era with a lot of nationalist post-Brit aspirations. Blood was on everyone's hands. India's Hindu's were just as bloody as India's Muslims and Sikhs. Even today - conflicts are just as frequently at the hands of Hindu extremists as they are at Muslim extremists yet many by far live and work peaceably together and serve on the government. Pakistan is a completely different entity culturally - it's not just religion, it's a very different culture.

So if you revoked citizenship you still have no place for them to go. They will have no citizenship anywhere. What do you do them?

I didn't cause any mess. Nice strawman. If you want to know what caused it - look at what is causing the displacement of people around the world at greater rates then ever before: climate change leading to droughts, flooding, starvation, economic hardship - look political instability, civil war, persecution and failed states. People aren't undertaking incredibly dangerous journeys at a whim, not when so many die. They have to be pretty desperate. That doesn't mean they have any right to stay, but it does mean there is no easy or convenient "blame" for the mess. It's not just a matter of letting them in - it's how do you change the forces that are driving them out. But that is to complex to fit on a bumper sticker or headline nor does it feed nationalist anger.

 

[pismoe]

maybe Coyote is muslim .

 

[eagle1462010]

If you are referring of the Partition of India - there was murder and rape and trains full of the dead due to violence from both Hindu, Muslims and Sikhs. No innocent groups in that mess.

I'm not sure you really understand the history of the region. The Bengali's are an ethnic group divided between several Indian states and Bangladesh. Bengali's are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Sikh and B'ahai - not one religion. When India was partitioned, they decided since the Bengali's were mostly Muslim they belonged with Pakistan - which were mostly a collection of tribal mountain groups that had nothing in common culturally with the Bengali's beyond religion. Bangladesh came out of Bengali nationalist aspirations and a seperate cultural identity from Pakistan. This drive for self determination culminated in a bloody war and genocide

I stated that the divide was via Religious lines.........I'd add to it that Bangledesh was drawn up on religious lines.......without India backing them there would be no Bangledesh at all..............They did it to get Pakistan out of there..............

Riddle me this......Pakistan is made up primarily of WHAT RELIGION.........
India is made up of WHAT RELIGION...
Bangledesh is made up of WHAT RELIGION.
etc.............you get the point.

You would revoke the citizenship of people who commited no crimes?

Where would you throw them?

I already answered it ..........you get tired of reading responses.........I said back where they came from...........and again your waiving the piece of paper around saying .............SEE.........THEY ARE NOW SWEDES.....SEE THE PAPER...........

They haven't been there long and Sweden could most DEFINITELY revoke it if they want to............but hey......a lot of them over there are just as dumb as you..........so they can enjoy the higher crime rates.........rape...............and terror attacks.............because you let them in.............but but but they are so innocent...........cry me a river..............people like you caused the dang mess and then blame others who are pissed at you for causing it.

What I think you don't realize is how divided India and that region was during that era with a lot of nationalist post-Brit aspirations. Blood was on everyone's hands. India's Hindu's were just as bloody as India's Muslims and Sikhs. Even today - conflicts are just as frequently at the hands of Hindu extremists as they are at Muslim extremists yet many by far live and work peaceably together and serve on the government. Pakistan is a completely different entity culturally - it's not just religion, it's a very different culture.

So if you revoked citizenship you still have no place for them to go. They will have no citizenship anywhere. What do you do them?

I didn't cause any mess. Nice strawman. If you want to know what caused it - look at what is causing the displacement of people around the world at greater rates then ever before: climate change leading to droughts, flooding, starvation, economic hardship - look political instability, civil war, persecution and failed states. People aren't undertaking incredibly dangerous journeys at a whim, not when so many die. They have to be pretty desperate. That doesn't mean they have any right to stay, but it does mean there is no easy or convenient "blame" for the mess. It's not just a matter of letting them in - it's how do you change the forces that are driving them out. But that is to complex to fit on a bumper sticker or headline nor does it feed nationalist anger.

Baloney............it was over religion...........the dang boundaries are religious in nature...........Hindus's left Pakistan.........and Muslims left India.........

Why are you trying to rewrite history.............Ghandi couldn't bring peace there.........if he couldn't do it........Nobody can.

 

[Coyote]

If you are referring of the Partition of India - there was murder and rape and trains full of the dead due to violence from both Hindu, Muslims and Sikhs. No innocent groups in that mess.

I'm not sure you really understand the history of the region. The Bengali's are an ethnic group divided between several Indian states and Bangladesh. Bengali's are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Sikh and B'ahai - not one religion. When India was partitioned, they decided since the Bengali's were mostly Muslim they belonged with Pakistan - which were mostly a collection of tribal mountain groups that had nothing in common culturally with the Bengali's beyond religion. Bangladesh came out of Bengali nationalist aspirations and a seperate cultural identity from Pakistan. This drive for self determination culminated in a bloody war and genocide

I stated that the divide was via Religious lines.........I'd add to it that Bangledesh was drawn up on religious lines.......without India backing them there would be no Bangledesh at all..............They did it to get Pakistan out of there..............

Riddle me this......Pakistan is made up primarily of WHAT RELIGION.........
India is made up of WHAT RELIGION...
Bangledesh is made up of WHAT RELIGION.
etc.............you get the point.

You would revoke the citizenship of people who commited no crimes?

Where would you throw them?

I already answered it ..........you get tired of reading responses.........I said back where they came from...........and again your waiving the piece of paper around saying .............SEE.........THEY ARE NOW SWEDES.....SEE THE PAPER...........

They haven't been there long and Sweden could most DEFINITELY revoke it if they want to............but hey......a lot of them over there are just as dumb as you..........so they can enjoy the higher crime rates.........rape...............and terror attacks.............because you let them in.............but but but they are so innocent...........cry me a river..............people like you caused the dang mess and then blame others who are pissed at you for causing it.

What I think you don't realize is how divided India and that region was during that era with a lot of nationalist post-Brit aspirations. Blood was on everyone's hands. India's Hindu's were just as bloody as India's Muslims and Sikhs. Even today - conflicts are just as frequently at the hands of Hindu extremists as they are at Muslim extremists yet many by far live and work peaceably together and serve on the government. Pakistan is a completely different entity culturally - it's not just religion, it's a very different culture.

So if you revoked citizenship you still have no place for them to go. They will have no citizenship anywhere. What do you do them?

I didn't cause any mess. Nice strawman. If you want to know what caused it - look at what is causing the displacement of people around the world at greater rates then ever before: climate change leading to droughts, flooding, starvation, economic hardship - look political instability, civil war, persecution and failed states. People aren't undertaking incredibly dangerous journeys at a whim, not when so many die. They have to be pretty desperate. That doesn't mean they have any right to stay, but it does mean there is no easy or convenient "blame" for the mess. It's not just a matter of letting them in - it's how do you change the forces that are driving them out. But that is to complex to fit on a bumper sticker or headline nor does it feed nationalist anger.

Baloney............it was over religion...........the dang boundaries are religious in nature...........Hindus's left Pakistan.........and Muslims left India.........

Why are you trying to rewrite history.............Ghandi couldn't bring peace there.........if he couldn't do it........Nobody can.

I did not say it was not over religion - religion was certainly a part of it, but you also had different nationalist groups - such as the Bengali's wanting independence despite sharing religion with Pakistan, they were culturally different.

 

[Coyote]

..

Do any countries have laws legalizing mass murder? That should indicate how far outside the civilized norm it is. The standard is defined by the law which is determined by the people.

Mass murder doesn't need to be legalized... it's a natural outflow of the Human Experiment.

The action that can and should be taken is to agree as a society to punish humans convicted of committing it. The unfortunate reality is that a mass murderer can work with relative impunity as long as he can maintain control over a large enough army to control a piece of land arbitrarily designated with geographic borders as a 'country'.

It's not as bad as in the days of feudal Europe when the 99% were wholly owned right down to their virgin daughters by the good, Christian king, but control of a national military remains the career launching pad for the world's most successful mass murderers.

`​

So now the immigration problem and higher crime is Feudalism...............LOL

Riddle me this........in the middle east how do they treat christians..........they have wiped them out over time...........

So let's invite people from the same area that may be with that crowd........and say all welcome........

Take a look at the Hidu's.......and Bangledesh..........the Hindu's are pissed.............they came there then started doing the extreme Islamic MAMBA............and they pushed back.........and they did so violently...........

And the world goes look at how bad they are............while overlooking what caused them to go postal on them and kick them out.........The Bengals were murdering and raping Hidu's...........and the Hindu's...............said I don't fucking think so.......and kicked their asses out..........same thing with India and Pakistan...........countries line's are Religious lines..........and it's brutal there....

Wow. That's a stretch. Feudal Europe was mentioned only as a comparison, emphasizing with an extreme example the still relevant point that he or she who controls the military makes the rules, and mass murder is just one of the things still easily justifiable in the name of 'National Security'.

And this applies more to dictators and warlords in places like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and some of the other places where organizations of humans who control at least one army are pounding other organizations and individuals to bloody hell for whatever reason, not to modern, stable democracies.

Too true. Look at Myanmar.

Myanmar fought back after the Bengali's went postal on their people..........so they through them out violently............

They defended their nation..............by throwing out the ones that were raping.........and murdering their people.

But you have blinders on...........you only EVER see the Muslim side.

Bullshit.

Myanmar is committing genocide. You're defending genocide. They are not a country with good human rights records against ANY of their minorities - including Christians. They have a horrific record. The only reason you are defending their actions is because it's conducted against Muslims.

I think I've made my case and you've convinced me that the Nazi analogies are accurate if you defend what Myanmar has done.

 

[LuckyDuck]

we have seen thru history what happens when a country goes 'nationalist'

It worked real swell for Germany in the 1930s & 1940s

Ghandi ran India until his assassination and he was a Nationalist.
Stalin was a Nationalist.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Nationalist.
Mussolini was a Fascist Nationalist.
Hitler was a Socialist Nationalist (National Socialist German Workers Party).
Hugo Chavez was a Socialist Nationalist.
Fidel Castro was a Nationalist.
John F. Kennedy was a Nationalist.
Nationalist only means someone who believes in his/her country and supports its interests. Nothing wrong with that.
As for Sweden, they're not caring of the color of the skin of the migrants, but rather the Islamic Theocracy beliefs and demands that come with them.

 

[Vastator]

If you are referring of the Partition of India - there was murder and rape and trains full of the dead due to violence from both Hindu, Muslims and Sikhs. No innocent groups in that mess.

I'm not sure you really understand the history of the region. The Bengali's are an ethnic group divided between several Indian states and Bangladesh. Bengali's are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Sikh and B'ahai - not one religion. When India was partitioned, they decided since the Bengali's were mostly Muslim they belonged with Pakistan - which were mostly a collection of tribal mountain groups that had nothing in common culturally with the Bengali's beyond religion. Bangladesh came out of Bengali nationalist aspirations and a seperate cultural identity from Pakistan. This drive for self determination culminated in a bloody war and genocide

I stated that the divide was via Religious lines.........I'd add to it that Bangledesh was drawn up on religious lines.......without India backing them there would be no Bangledesh at all..............They did it to get Pakistan out of there..............

Riddle me this......Pakistan is made up primarily of WHAT RELIGION.........
India is made up of WHAT RELIGION...
Bangledesh is made up of WHAT RELIGION.
etc.............you get the point.

You would revoke the citizenship of people who commited no crimes?

Where would you throw them?

I already answered it ..........you get tired of reading responses.........I said back where they came from...........and again your waiving the piece of paper around saying .............SEE.........THEY ARE NOW SWEDES.....SEE THE PAPER...........

They haven't been there long and Sweden could most DEFINITELY revoke it if they want to............but hey......a lot of them over there are just as dumb as you..........so they can enjoy the higher crime rates.........rape...............and terror attacks.............because you let them in.............but but but they are so innocent...........cry me a river..............people like you caused the dang mess and then blame others who are pissed at you for causing it.

What I think you don't realize is how divided India and that region was during that era with a lot of nationalist post-Brit aspirations. Blood was on everyone's hands. India's Hindu's were just as bloody as India's Muslims and Sikhs. Even today - conflicts are just as frequently at the hands of Hindu extremists as they are at Muslim extremists yet many by far live and work peaceably together and serve on the government. Pakistan is a completely different entity culturally - it's not just religion, it's a very different culture.

So if you revoked citizenship you still have no place for them to go. They will have no citizenship anywhere. What do you do them?

I didn't cause any mess. Nice strawman. If you want to know what caused it - look at what is causing the displacement of people around the world at greater rates then ever before: climate change leading to droughts, flooding, starvation, economic hardship - look political instability, civil war, persecution and failed states. People aren't undertaking incredibly dangerous journeys at a whim, not when so many die. They have to be pretty desperate. That doesn't mean they have any right to stay, but it does mean there is no easy or convenient "blame" for the mess. It's not just a matter of letting them in - it's how do you change the forces that are driving them out. But that is to complex to fit on a bumper sticker or headline nor does it feed nationalist anger.

Baloney............it was over religion...........the dang boundaries are religious in nature...........Hindus's left Pakistan.........and Muslims left India.........

Why are you trying to rewrite history.............Ghandi couldn't bring peace there.........if he couldn't do it........Nobody can.

I did not say it was not over religion - religion was certainly a part of it, but you also had different nationalist groups - such as the Bengali's wanting independence despite sharing religion with Pakistan, they were culturally different.

So... stealing land was perfectly reasonable...? Yeah fuckin right!

 

[eagle1462010]

If you are referring of the Partition of India - there was murder and rape and trains full of the dead due to violence from both Hindu, Muslims and Sikhs. No innocent groups in that mess.

I'm not sure you really understand the history of the region. The Bengali's are an ethnic group divided between several Indian states and Bangladesh. Bengali's are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Sikh and B'ahai - not one religion. When India was partitioned, they decided since the Bengali's were mostly Muslim they belonged with Pakistan - which were mostly a collection of tribal mountain groups that had nothing in common culturally with the Bengali's beyond religion. Bangladesh came out of Bengali nationalist aspirations and a seperate cultural identity from Pakistan. This drive for self determination culminated in a bloody war and genocide

I stated that the divide was via Religious lines.........I'd add to it that Bangledesh was drawn up on religious lines.......without India backing them there would be no Bangledesh at all..............They did it to get Pakistan out of there..............

Riddle me this......Pakistan is made up primarily of WHAT RELIGION.........
India is made up of WHAT RELIGION...
Bangledesh is made up of WHAT RELIGION.
etc.............you get the point.

You would revoke the citizenship of people who commited no crimes?

Where would you throw them?

I already answered it ..........you get tired of reading responses.........I said back where they came from...........and again your waiving the piece of paper around saying .............SEE.........THEY ARE NOW SWEDES.....SEE THE PAPER...........

They haven't been there long and Sweden could most DEFINITELY revoke it if they want to............but hey......a lot of them over there are just as dumb as you..........so they can enjoy the higher crime rates.........rape...............and terror attacks.............because you let them in.............but but but they are so innocent...........cry me a river..............people like you caused the dang mess and then blame others who are pissed at you for causing it.

What I think you don't realize is how divided India and that region was during that era with a lot of nationalist post-Brit aspirations. Blood was on everyone's hands. India's Hindu's were just as bloody as India's Muslims and Sikhs. Even today - conflicts are just as frequently at the hands of Hindu extremists as they are at Muslim extremists yet many by far live and work peaceably together and serve on the government. Pakistan is a completely different entity culturally - it's not just religion, it's a very different culture.

So if you revoked citizenship you still have no place for them to go. They will have no citizenship anywhere. What do you do them?

I didn't cause any mess. Nice strawman. If you want to know what caused it - look at what is causing the displacement of people around the world at greater rates then ever before: climate change leading to droughts, flooding, starvation, economic hardship - look political instability, civil war, persecution and failed states. People aren't undertaking incredibly dangerous journeys at a whim, not when so many die. They have to be pretty desperate. That doesn't mean they have any right to stay, but it does mean there is no easy or convenient "blame" for the mess. It's not just a matter of letting them in - it's how do you change the forces that are driving them out. But that is to complex to fit on a bumper sticker or headline nor does it feed nationalist anger.

Baloney............it was over religion...........the dang boundaries are religious in nature...........Hindus's left Pakistan.........and Muslims left India.........

Why are you trying to rewrite history.............Ghandi couldn't bring peace there.........if he couldn't do it........Nobody can.

I did not say it was not over religion - religion was certainly a part of it, but you also had different nationalist groups - such as the Bengali's wanting independence despite sharing religion with Pakistan, they were culturally different.

Benghali's move into a region and take it over.........and get shocked when people stand up and say I don't think so.........and I see you try to downplay the religion side of the equation........the lines are religion............and you know it.

 

[eagle1462010]

..

Mass murder doesn't need to be legalized... it's a natural outflow of the Human Experiment.

The action that can and should be taken is to agree as a society to punish humans convicted of committing it. The unfortunate reality is that a mass murderer can work with relative impunity as long as he can maintain control over a large enough army to control a piece of land arbitrarily designated with geographic borders as a 'country'.

It's not as bad as in the days of feudal Europe when the 99% were wholly owned right down to their virgin daughters by the good, Christian king, but control of a national military remains the career launching pad for the world's most successful mass murderers.

`​

So now the immigration problem and higher crime is Feudalism...............LOL

Riddle me this........in the middle east how do they treat christians..........they have wiped them out over time...........

So let's invite people from the same area that may be with that crowd........and say all welcome........

Take a look at the Hidu's.......and Bangledesh..........the Hindu's are pissed.............they came there then started doing the extreme Islamic MAMBA............and they pushed back.........and they did so violently...........

And the world goes look at how bad they are............while overlooking what caused them to go postal on them and kick them out.........The Bengals were murdering and raping Hidu's...........and the Hindu's...............said I don't fucking think so.......and kicked their asses out..........same thing with India and Pakistan...........countries line's are Religious lines..........and it's brutal there....

Wow. That's a stretch. Feudal Europe was mentioned only as a comparison, emphasizing with an extreme example the still relevant point that he or she who controls the military makes the rules, and mass murder is just one of the things still easily justifiable in the name of 'National Security'.

And this applies more to dictators and warlords in places like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and some of the other places where organizations of humans who control at least one army are pounding other organizations and individuals to bloody hell for whatever reason, not to modern, stable democracies.

Too true. Look at Myanmar.

Myanmar fought back after the Bengali's went postal on their people..........so they through them out violently............

They defended their nation..............by throwing out the ones that were raping.........and murdering their people.

But you have blinders on...........you only EVER see the Muslim side.

Bullshit.

Myanmar is committing genocide. You're defending genocide. They are not a country with good human rights records against ANY of their minorities - including Christians. They have a horrific record. The only reason you are defending their actions is because it's conducted against Muslims.

I think I've made my case and you've convinced me that the Nazi analogies are accurate if you defend what Myanmar has done.

I call BS on you.............they drove them out after they started the damn fight..........I've shown those video's and evidence on those type of threads.......and it WAS SURE AS HELL NOT ONE SIDED.................as you claim.

 

[Aba Incieni]

I asked you first.

The answer is simple I thought you would realize it. If someone rapes someone. You arrest them and try them for rape. If someone goes on a killing spree, you arrest them and charge them with the appropriate offenses. If someone molests children...well ditto. I'm not going to suggest we mass murder Catholics because of the actions of some.

Mass murder by definition is never justified except in the most warped minds that decide to collectively punish a population because of who they are not what they did.

What constitutes a “warped” mind? And what is the standard by which this mind is deemed “warped”?

Those enamored by mass murder usually have a degree of warpage.

You’re dodging. With so much conviction... You ought to be able to pin this down. So... Explain. I’m listening...

Do any countries have laws legalizing mass murder? That should indicate how far outside the civilized norm it is. The standard is defined by the law which is determined by the people.

Like the people of Sweden who have the right to vote for the government they want.

Refugees are not citizens and can be deported. Your globalist views have been rejected by the Swedes.

 

[skookerasbil]

The answer is simple I thought you would realize it. If someone rapes someone. You arrest them and try them for rape. If someone goes on a killing spree, you arrest them and charge them with the appropriate offenses. If someone molests children...well ditto. I'm not going to suggest we mass murder Catholics because of the actions of some.

Mass murder by definition is never justified except in the most warped minds that decide to collectively punish a population because of who they are not what they did.

What constitutes a “warped” mind? And what is the standard by which this mind is deemed “warped”?

Those enamored by mass murder usually have a degree of warpage.

You’re dodging. With so much conviction... You ought to be able to pin this down. So... Explain. I’m listening...

Do any countries have laws legalizing mass murder? That should indicate how far outside the civilized norm it is. The standard is defined by the law which is determined by the people.

Like the people of Sweden who have the right to vote for the government they want.

Refugees are not citizens and can be deported. Your globalist views have been rejected by the Swedes.

Yep.....only k00k progressives think the Swedes would be getting all giddy with the idea of embracing Arabic as a second language. Duh.....I guess that makes the Swedish people racist too!! Ask them if they care?

 

[CowboyTed]

we have seen thru history what happens when a country goes 'nationalist'

It worked real swell for Germany in the 1930s & 1940s

Lol
The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism… So shut the fuck up

Nationalism killed 10 million people in concentration camps...

What did Globalism do that comes close to that?

 

[skookerasbil]

we have seen thru history what happens when a country goes 'nationalist'

It worked real swell for Germany in the 1930s & 1940s

Lol
The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism… So shut the fuck up

Nationalism killed 10 million people in concentration camps...

What did Globalism do that comes close to that?

Oy.......members should really have to graduate from People.com before they get to post in here!

 

[CowboyTed]

we have seen thru history what happens when a country goes 'nationalist'

It worked real swell for Germany in the 1930s & 1940s

Lol
The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism… So shut the fuck up

Nationalism killed 10 million people in concentration camps...

What did Globalism do that comes close to that?

Oy.......members should really have to graduate from People.com before they get to post in here!

That is not an answer... It is the usual insult first policy from the pro-NAZIs...

What a few jews in an oven really... That is not that evil...

 

[Aba Incieni]

we have seen thru history what happens when a country goes 'nationalist'

It worked real swell for Germany in the 1930s & 1940s

Lol
The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism… So shut the fuck up

Nationalism killed 10 million people in concentration camps...

What did Globalism do that comes close to that?

Oy.......members should really have to graduate from People.com before they get to post in here!

for whom they wish?

That is not an answer... It is the usual insult first policy from the pro-NAZIs...

What a few jews in an oven really... That is not that evil...

Swedes don't have the right to vote for whom they wish? They don't have the right to deport non-citizens?

 

[CowboyTed]

we have seen thru history what happens when a country goes 'nationalist'

It worked real swell for Germany in the 1930s & 1940s

Lol
The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism… So shut the fuck up

Nationalism killed 10 million people in concentration camps...

What did Globalism do that comes close to that?

Oy.......members should really have to graduate from People.com before they get to post in here!

for whom they wish?

That is not an answer... It is the usual insult first policy from the pro-NAZIs...

What a few jews in an oven really... That is not that evil...

Swedes don't have the right to vote for whom they wish?
They kind a do... They have a thing called a representative democracy...
And F*ck this is embarassing
Democracy Index - Wikipedia
Sweden ranked 3rd and US ranked 21st...

They don't have the right to deport non-citizens?
Sweden's Elected Government campaigned on not deporting people and they keep there campaign promise.

When you say 'right to deport' are you talking citizen right? Which country in the world allow individual citizens to deport other individuals...
That is all NAZI like...