cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 I'm not sure why we'd want to bring in the followers of any sky fairy to be honest. For the same reason we don't kick out the ones we have now? Quote
G Huxley Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) The press and parties are hysterical over this. What's Canada going to do let in all the Syrian refugees and increase the population of the country by 50%? Maybe NATO shouldn't have f^cked up these countries in the first place. As Stalin said "you kill one it's a tragedy. You kill 10 million it's a statistic." Edited September 5, 2015 by G Huxley Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 It is a figure that can only be estimated. Our government estimates it between 80,000 and 500,000. http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3866154&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=2&File=141#part1 I hope this helps. I take it you probably didn't read this: it is believed that most enter legally and fall out of status while still in Canada. This is unlike the situation in the United States, where many migrants cross the border into the country illegally are therefore never known to authorities. Or this: We recognize that these people are contributing to our society by filling a labour need that is not being met domestically. We understand that in many cases, these people were failed by our immigration system that provided them with no realistic opportunity to immigrate to Canada legally. We know that these people and their families are vulnerable to marginalization and mistreatment, and that many suffer chronic anxiety. This contradicts your statement: we already have many illegal immigrants who have arrived by trying to jump the queue and will have difficulty finding work. Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 The press and parties are hysterical over this. What's Canada going to do let in all the Syrian refugees and increase the population of the country by 50%? Tell me again who's saying we should bring in 17.5 million refugees? Quote
G Huxley Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 No one, but it follows the logic. If the tragedy was a Syrian refugee couldn't get in and this 'caused their death.' Then the only way to stop this in the future is to let in all of them. Quote
Big Guy Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 ...This contradicts your statement: I stand by my statement. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Smallc Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 For the same reason we don't kick out the ones we have now? I'm just saying they're both nonsense. I'm in favour of any immigrant that can improve Canada. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) And an opinion piece from the Toronto Star: They won’t come to Canada because you can’t be a refugee until you leave. And these children haven’t managed to do that — they’re still part of the millions of civilians trapped within the bloody centrifuge that is Syria. For those younger than 5, war is all they’ve ever known. They won’t come to Canada, ever. Because like Alan, they will die. And the overwhelming evidence suggests it will be the indiscriminate weapons of Syrian President Bashar Assad — including illegal barrel bombs dropped on residential areas by regime helicopters — that kill them. A case to "whip out our CF-188s" even further over the skies of Syria? But as the blame storm widens and Canadians fixate on refugee numbers, reaction elsewhere is beginning to look beyond an ISIS-or-nothing approach to Syria — including the possibility that, in the face of a seemingly unstoppable civil war, global anger now will galvanize around the impositions of safe havens and a no-fly zone within Syria proper. So, to save potentially millions more Syrians, including small children like Alan Kurdi, should the West, including Canada, broaden the current mission, to not only include targeting ISIS on the ground in Syria and Iraq, but also the Syrian Assad regime's air force? One possible hitch in such a plan though........ Russia is providing “serious” training and logistical support to the Syrian army, Vladimir Putin has said, in the first public confirmation of the depth of Russia’s involvement in Syria's civil war. Commenting on reports that Russian combat troops have been deployed to Syria, the Russian president said discussion of direct military intervention is “so far premature,” but did not rule out that such a step could be taken in future. So to prevent a growing humanitarian crisis, do we start engaging the Assad regime, with the chance we could also face off against the Russians? Edited September 5, 2015 by Derek 2.0 Quote
Big Guy Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 If we take out Assad then who sets up a government, social structure and starts to rebuild the infrastructure so the refugees can come home? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 I'm just saying they're both nonsense. I'm in favour of any immigrant that can improve Canada.Why does someone's religiosity mean they can't improve Canada? Religious organizations have been doing charitable work for generations, picking up the slack of public service. Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 So to prevent a growing humanitarian crisis, do we start engaging the Assad regime, with the chance we could also face off against the Russians?You know what you do? You go back to the Treaty of Westphalia 1648 and you respect nations' sovereignty. States have the right to national self-determination. Canada cannot engage in war in Syria without violating international law. If they request assistance, then we can respond. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 You know what you do? You go back to the Treaty of Westphalia 1648 and you respect nations' sovereignty. States have the right to national self-determination. Canada cannot engage in war in Syria without violating international law. If they request assistance, then we can respond. So you're in agreement with the Western military assistance afforded to the Government of Iraq? Inversely, if the Assad regime requests further assistance from Russia in quelling the Syrian civil war, that too would be ok with you? I find it odd that you refer to a 17th century treaty, whose signatories spent the ensuing time since fighting each other and involving themselves in each others civil wars......... Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 I find it odd that.....I find it odd that you ask a number of very silly questions that are clearly answered by the post you quoted. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) I find it odd that you ask a number of very silly questions that are clearly answered by the post you quoted. Is it silly to ask for clarification for ones own point of view? Your bespoken principle of Westphalian sovereignty further precludes all forms of intervention, including humanitarian aid........following this principle, if Assad refused humanitarian aid for his self defined opponents, be they political/religious/ethnic groups etc within his country we would be forced to oblige. Likewise, if Assad demanded all Syrian refugees be extradited back to Syria to face charges of State treason, terrorism, apostasy etc here too we would be forced to oblige......... That seems rather silly......... Edited September 5, 2015 by Derek 2.0 Quote
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 So let's turn our back on refugees and become an embarrassment to the rest of the world. Do they think badly of Japan because it doesn't resettle refugees or allow immigration? Nope! Nobody even considers it. Japan is a well-respected state, as are all the others who don't accept refugees. And if someone out there does want to complain, well screw them. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Wanted for hire: refugees to haul away dead mothers, children, husbands. Emotionally overwrought, much? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 We have an infrastructure deficit because Harper decided to give money to corps. Believe it or not you can't blame every single thing in the world you don't like on Stephen Harper. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 In the meantime, what do we do about these refugees? Let them die on trains, in trucks, in the sea? Their choice. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 And just how do you reckon ISIS came to be? Hint, bombing Iraq. How did ISIS come to be? Hint: Ali ibn Abi Talib Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) you are diplomatic... I just said it was a stoopid post! Why is it every time I read one of your posts I think of Donald Trump? Edited September 5, 2015 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 Your bespoken principle of Westphalian sovereignty further precludes all forms of interventionNot today, Derek. Go troll someone else. Quote
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) Clark said it’s possible to send Canadian officials to United Nations refugee camps, where they can directly meet and interview applicants. “We have an extraordinary capacity to absorb refugees,” he added." Yeah, if you don't give a damn about what kind of people you get, what it costs, or what it does to the country. Clark was the longest running joke in Canadian political history. Even the conservative Sun newspapers were always drawing him with mittens tied to his sleeves because he was such a clueless clown. Edited September 5, 2015 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 Believe it or not you can't blame every single thing in the world you don't like on Stephen Harper.No, but Stephen Harper did directly slash federal revenues as a proportion of GDP. Not being able to afford infrastructure is a direct results of his gutting of the federal bank accounts. Quote
Scotty Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 More bombing won't make already failed bombing any better. So your solution is to do nothing. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
On Guard for Thee Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 When we whip out our F 18's we are are continuing dow a path that has no end game and is in effect making us a defacto aid of Assad's. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.