Scotty

I'm no fan of the current immigration system, but how exactly have they failed? I have never seen you do more than ferociously defend every aspect of the immigration system against any and all criticism against any part of it. I have never seen you criticize anything about immigration either.

And again, it must be our fault, even though the so-called Arab Spring caught everyone by surprise. It was a home grown revolution in Libya, and I remember all the do-gooders crying over the misery and death there and demanding we intervene. Now, because the locals screwed up the aftermath we're at fault AGAIN.

Our numbers are higher than most Europeans. Most refugees in the world go to wherever is closest to them.

If we did nothing. You'd blame us. If we put in sanctions, you'd blame us. If we traded with them, you'd blame us. We try to do something like bombing ISIS and training Iraqis, you blame us. The fact is no matter what we did you and your ilk would blame us for it.

Of course, in context, which you hate, I know, we're well above the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain, New Zealand, Japan, Ireland and Germany, Italy, Greece, France and Finland, Belgium, Australia, and other vicious, cruel, evil right wing regimes, eh Waldo? Among the superior countries Waldo is holding up to us as star examples, Chad, Afghanistan, Camaroon, Congo, Iran, Lebanon, well, you get the idea. And by the way, Lebanon still has palestinian refugees who have been living there for three generations and are still not considered citizens, so I have to wonder at just how this chart defines 'resettlement'.

Ponder this, Citizen. I may be mistaken, and no doubt someone can correct me if I am. But I do not believe beating or raping your wife is against the law in any Muslim country. And it is specifically legal in some countries, after court decisions.

Do you want dictators running every country in the middle east? Do you think things would have gone any better if a civil war had toppled him, as happened in Libya? The problem is the peoples in that country refuse to cooperate in any way. It's each group for itself, and yet they're stuck in the same country. The same issue is at play in Syria, among both tribes and religions.

The UN has only the enforcement abilities as its member states grant it, and no member state is going to allow the UN to redraw borders against its will. As for the refugees or migrants or whatever you want to call them, the UN is too swamped to even be able to interview them to determine which are or are not real refugees, or even what countries they're from. So like I said, the word is getting out. Go to Europe. If you can get into Germany or Austria or France or Sweden or some others, then you're now a citizen and will never have to return to the miserable overheated crap hole of the middle east. Why wouldn't any Egyptian or Lebanese or Turk who can pretend to be Syrian not go?

The Shia were shut out of government during Sadaam's time, so there is more than a little dislike between them which goes beyond the usual shia and suuni religious crap. Nevertheless, two thirds of the country is Shia and so Shia's can live there most places without fear of persecution. You can't say the same for Christians anywhere in the middle east or in any muslim country.

Trudeau ran up the debt and left it to Mulroney when the interest rates were in the high double digits, and so was the unemployment rate. Guess what happens when you owe a ton of money and there's high interest rates...

It was a bullshit source, so it didn't need any countering.

Why were the Liberals never charged with election fraud for the 'free' services provided to them during election time by the advertising firms they gave government money to for no jobs? Why haven't the NDP been charged for illegally using the money which was supposed to go to constituency work for partisan election purposes?

d

Iraq is a majority Shia country. Two thirds of the population are Shia, including the Kurds.

So you got nothing then?

I turn the channel when I see political ads. But you're hardly one to accuse anyone else of being partisan.

That's a realistic scenario, but it ignores the fact that places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China will inevitably interfere. And what do we do about the millions and millions of refugees? Furthermore, I've seen interviews with that mob which is heading through Hungary. Many are Syrians. Others are Afghans, Iraqis, Yemenis, Tunisians, Sudanese, Libyans, even Pakistanis. The word is getting out in the big toilet of the middle east. Go to Europe and they'll let you stay! You can live and work in Europe now! All you have to do is get there! The more you allow in and resettle, the more will pick up stake and head on that journey. Wouldn't you?

But there are Shia places, like Iraq and Suuni places like Egypt. There are no Christian places anywhere in the middle east, meaning in any Muslim country, they won't be persecuted.

Nope. It's all Trudeau's got, though.

The US didn't put him in. He was elected in a UN supervised election. Which only means all the Shias voted for him, and since they were the largest tribe, that was that.

Your unworkable approach? I didn't miss it. I dismissed it.

I remember them talking about the need to rebuild roads and bridges back in the 1980s.

I would tend to agree, but that just means the war will go on and on and on and produce more refugees.

Like send blankets?

Again, we do not pick refugees based on their education, skills or adaptability. You're thinking of immigrants. We pick them based on how endangered they are in their current location, as well as who might be willing to sponsor them, and their possible danger to Canada.