On Guard for Thee Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Canada doesn't even have the resources to fulfil our own needs. We have a massive infrastructure deficit, communities and households without safe water (not just aboriginal ones), etc. etc. We have an infrastructure deficit because Harper decided to give money to corps. in tax breaks and they took the money into offshore accounts. Let the corps. pay their fair share and put people to work on infrastructure and watch what it will do for our current recession. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 By ending their need to flee, or doing our best to do that. In the meantime, what do we do about these refugees? Let them die on trains, in trucks, in the sea? Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
On Guard for Thee Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 It's much better if they're beheaded by ISIS. And just how do you reckon ISIS came to be? Hint, bombing Iraq. Quote
eyeball Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) By ending their need to flee, or doing our best to do that. According to some that's we've been doing for the last 100 years or so. I'd hate to see what things would be like if we'd really tried to piss them off. Edited September 5, 2015 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
waldo Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 I'm not an apologist, but i'm not thinking that dropping a few points on some list, is a matter of national importance that would take over an election campaign......i think it is being used to gain votes..... Are you denying the liberals said they wanted to take in 25,000 immediately.... pointing out that drop is clearly symbolic... symbolic of yet another failed Harper policy! You said "TOMORROW... NO QUESTIONS ASKED"! Feel free to translate that "immediately" literally! . It's much better if they're beheaded by ISIS. don't bother with your ongoing prattle about changing your vote from Harper Conservatives! Your fear-mongering clearly casts your vote with Harper! . Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 We can't bring them all here, in case you haven't noticed. Thanks for mentioning that because I was thinking to myself, "why don't we just bring everyone here?" Quote
waldo Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Thanks for mentioning that because I was thinking to myself, "why don't we just bring everyone here?" you are diplomatic... I just said it was a stoopid post! Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 I'm saying that we should be working to improve safety, living conditions, and economic opportunity in their countries of origin. Do you have any idea how much more that would cost, as well as having absolutely zero economic benefit to us? Bringing them here IS the cheaper route. Quote
Army Guy Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 pointing out that drop is clearly symbolic... symbolic of yet another failed Harper policy! You said "TOMORROW... NO QUESTIONS ASKED"! Feel free to translate that "immediately" literally! . I din't realise how important list where to you waldo....I asked you how is that a failed policy....i know you don't have time to answer questions....just one linners, you have this need to control the conversation, with your own questions, but no time in answering anyone elses..... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Bonam Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Looks like many of those Arab brothers are doing a lot more per capita for refugees in general than Canada. Yes... they (Jordan and Lebanon) sure are doing "a lot". You know, keeping the "refugees" in camps for generations, not letting even those born in those countries become citizens. Would you like Canada to help the refugees in this same very generous manner? Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 Yes... they (Jordan and Lebanon) sure are doing "a lot". You know, keeping the "refugees" in camps for generations, not letting even those born in those countries become citizens. Would you like Canada to help the refugees in this same very generous manner? You don't get it both ways. You don't get to say "why don't people go there" then argue about why they shouldn't go there. Quote
Bonam Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 You don't get it both ways. You don't get to say "why don't people go there" then argue about why they shouldn't go there. Where did I say "why don't people go there"? Quote
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 Where did I say "why don't people go there"? You didn't, but that's the argument you jumped into. Quote
Bonam Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 You didn't, but that's the argument you jumped into. Well, in that case, it's a dumb argument. Obviously, if people are facing significant danger of death/injury due to war/terrorism, then even a Jordanian or Lebanese refugee camp is a better place for them to be. So if that option is available and others are not, they should take it. But you pointing to those countries as shining beacons of how the world should be helping refugees is a bit ironic, considering you would be the first to condemn Canada if it treated refugees that came to its soil in such a manner. Quote
Army Guy Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Smallc has valid points that in my opinion well thought out....and to waldo you crossed the line.... but no one wants to asked the tough questions, like What are we going to do with 100,000 refugees, where do they stay, who feeds them cloths them employs them.....how much will it cost tax payers, and what about tommorrow, do we except 100,000 more because some one else washes ashore....excepting these people does not do anything to end this crises.....in fact how many more refugees have not even left, does this aceptance of refugees entice more.....to risk everything including their lives....That shit does not matter to you....because your thinking with your heart, and not your head, some of you even suggested it was stupid......when has thinking a problem over in this country become stupid.... The solutions to this mess are not going to happen over night..... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
cybercoma Posted September 5, 2015 Author Report Posted September 5, 2015 Well, in that case, it's a dumb argument. Obviously, if people are facing significant danger of death/injury due to war/terrorism, then even a Jordanian or Lebanese refugee camp is a better place for them to be. So if that option is available and others are not, they should take it. But you pointing to those countries as shining beacons of how the world should be helping refugees is a bit ironic, considering you would be the first to condemn Canada if it treated refugees that came to its soil in such a manner. At no point did I say nor imply they were "shining beacons of how the world should be helping refugees." Quote
Bonam Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 At no point did I say nor imply they were "shining beacons of how the world should be helping refugees." Shining beacons was an exaggeration, but you clearly pointed to them as doing "more than Canada" to help refugees. The reality is, they are helping more people to stay out of immediate physical danger (by virtue of the fact they share borders with the countries in question), but the people they do accept are locked into a life of poverty and degradation. Meanwhile, while Canada and other Western nations take in smaller numbers of refugees (since the ones in immediate physical danger flee to front line countries first anyway), they offer those refugees that do come here a chance to make a new life for themselves. Given that Canada allows the refugees to join the general population and has to integrate these people in a reasonable way, it is to be expected that this system could only handle a far smaller number of people than one which simply crams them into camps. Quote
Smallc Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Wanted for hire: refugees to haul away dead mothers, children, husbands. Nothing of substance, then? Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 An article by Joe Clark. His government saw 60,000 Indochinese asylum seekers come to Canada. "Canadian civil servants are capable of assessing possible security risks among Syrian refugees, Clark said, as they did when his government sent teams of officials overseas to process thousands of Vietnamese applicants living in crowded refugee camps. Clark said his Progressive Conservative government adopted and expanded on the policies put in place by a former Liberal government to directly assist Indochinese refugees who fled in rickety boats after the Communists took power in Hanoi." "With strong political direction from the federal cabinet, 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." Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Smallc Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 We have an infrastructure deficit because Harper decided to give money to corps We've had an infrastructure deficit for decades. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) Nothing of substance, then? More jobs: Refugees to roam the refugee camps to help curtail rape of women and children. You want substance? That is substance. That is the real world these refugees are living in. Edited September 5, 2015 by WestCoastRunner Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Smallc 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? We make the camps they live in more liveable. Quote
Smallc Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 And just how do you reckon ISIS came to be? Hint, bombing Iraq. And just what do you think that has to do with what we're doing now? Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 We make the camps they live in more liveable. What a humanitarian effort. Good on you! Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Smallc Posted September 5, 2015 Report Posted September 5, 2015 Thanks for mentioning that because I was thinking to myself, "why don't we just bring everyone here?" Why stop at 25K? Why not 100K? Why not 1M? Why take half measures? Do you have any idea how much more that would cost, as well as having absolutely zero economic benefit to us? Bringing them here IS the cheaper route. Use the same amount of money. It will go further there. 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.