Paris might be problem for Trudeau

[cannuck]

Paris having suffered a direct and clearly identified attack from ISIS, it poses a few problems for the half-baked policies of our new government.

Obvious one is the whole business of 25,000 essentially un-screened immigrants being rushed onto Canadian soil. The Yanks have figured this out on day one, but our new government-by-PC-doctrine will probably never get their head out of their arse on this one.

The other is withdrawl of combatant aircraft (and troops, limited though they are) from the ISIS campaign. Our NATO ally has just been attacked, and it would seem extremely ignorant (but typical) for us to withdraw our niggardly contribution to support of embattled Kurds who are the only real opposition to ISIS.

[cannuck]

Paris having suffered a direct and clearly identified attack from ISIS, it poses a few problems for the half-baked policies of our new government.

Obvious one is the whole business of 25,000 essentially un-screened immigrants being rushed onto Canadian soil. The Yanks have figured this out on day one, but our new government-by-PC-doctrine will probably never get their head out of their arse on this one.

The other is withdrawl of combatant aircraft (and troops, limited though they are) from the ISIS campaign. Our NATO ally has just been attacked, and it would seem extremely ignorant (but typical) for us to withdraw our niggardly contribution to support of embattled Kurds who are the only real opposition to ISIS.

[Bryan]

It could be an opportunity for Trudeau as well. He'll be able to diverge from the ill-conceived promises and just do the right thing.

[ReeferMadness]

Really, guys? It's not too soon for you to be using this tragedy to support your petty partisan views? Wow.

[Bryan]

Nothing partisan about what I wrote.

[Black Dog]

Nothing partisan about what I wrote.

Except for the whole thing.

[scribblet]

I expect my gov't to live up to their responsibility for me and my family regardless of campaign promises. As Canadian citizens our rights are paramount over prospective terrorists; any thing less than that is blood on the gov't hands Please protect my life and my children regardless of promises and ideology.

[Guest]

Nothing partisan about what I wrote.

Partisan, common sense, some people don't know the difference.

[Big Guy]

I assume that the OP suggests that these terrorists in Paris were there because of the large number of Syrian refugees that France accepted? But the facts appear not to back that:

http://www.ibtimes.com/paris-attacks-european-migrant-refugee-crisis-could-be-fueling-attacks-france-2184317

"France has not accepted as many Syrian refugees as other European countries. Only about 20,000 Syrians over the last several years have entered France, according to the United Nations."

Canada accepts about 250,000 immigrants a year. Another 3,000 refugees arrive and soon disappear into the population or across the border into the USA. Does anybody really think that these ISIS terrorists need to hide among refugees - refugees who will screened?

As to our contribution, it is no secret that this and previous attacks took place because other countries want to insert themselves into a local civil war. In fact that is the excuse these ISIS guys are using. They are telling other countries to butt out.

And the solution from some bright lights is that we increase Canadian involvement into their civil war - that sure makes a lot of sense.

[Guest]

As to our contribution, it is no secret that this and previous attacks took place because other countries want to insert themselves into a local civil war. In fact that is the excuse these ISIS guys are using. They are telling other countries to butt out.

Well, I guess we should then. If they are telling us.

[Argus]

Really, guys? It's not too soon for you to be using this tragedy to support your petty partisan views? Wow.

Yes, it's clearly wrong to think of reconsidering a dumb policy in light of a clear demonstration of where dumb policies can lead.

Surely that's not the progressive way!

[Black Dog]

Yes, it's clearly wrong to think of reconsidering a dumb policy in light of a clear demonstration of where dumb policies can lead.

Surely that's not the progressive way!

What dumb policy, specifically, lead to this? Was it France's military campaign against ISIL or their failure to properly integrate their immigrant populations?

[Argus]

"France has not accepted as many Syrian refugees as other European countries. Only about 20,000 Syrians over the last several years have entered France, according to the United Nations."

Your statement is irrelevant. Given the open borders of the European Union, once a group arrives in one country they can then simply drive or fly to any other country in the union without restraint or checks. There are no border controls blocking someone who arrives in Greece as a refugee from traveling wherever he or she wishes to go.

As to our contribution, it is no secret that this and previous attacks took place because other countries want to insert themselves into a local civil war. In fact that is the excuse these ISIS guys are using. They are telling other countries to butt out.

Canada has always had this 'thing' about genocide, you see. And it has always believed in confronting hostile groups through alliances. There are those who wish to simply hide in the back of the crowd and let others do the fighting, of course. And there are those who would want us to ignore genocide as long as it doesn't directly involve us. They would even wish us to ignore the united Arab attacks on Israel in hopes the Arabs commit genocide and remove those horrible Jews from the picture.

But another of Canada's habits is thinking strategically. We could have done nothing and let Hitler overrun Europe, for example. Not our problem. Until, of course, the new, massive Hitler regime starts coming over here. Then we could have fought them on our shores instead of Europe's. We could have let the Soviet Union take over nation after nation and draw half the world into its grasp. Not our problem. Until it became our problem with a newly powerful Soviet Union attacking us directly. And we could ignore ISIS, not our problem. Let them spread out and take over more and more of the middle east (and hopefully do away with those filthy Jews eventually). But groups like ISIS are never satisfied with what they have. They will keep expanding until they are stopped. So strategic thinking says stop them in their infancy, rather than wait until they've got million man armies.

That is hard for the "Not my problem" set to understand since they don't look further than their full bellies and their comfortable chair before the fire, and lack the imagination to see what future present dangers can lead to.

[Argus]

What dumb policy, specifically, lead to this? Was it France's military campaign against ISIL or their failure to properly integrate their immigrant populations?

Given the context of the discussion I would have thought you would have had no difficulty figuring out the reference was to the imperative of bringing over 25,000 people from a war involving religious extremism without the elementary precaution of checking them out first.

[GostHacked]

Given the context of the discussion I would have thought you would have had no difficulty figuring out the reference was to the imperative of bringing over 25,000 people from a war involving religious extremism without the elementary precaution of checking them out first.

We would not need to bring them here if we did not help with making life hell in Syria.

[Black Dog]

Given the context of the discussion I would have thought you would have had no difficulty figuring out the reference was to the imperative of bringing over 25,000 people from a war involving religious extremism without the elementary precaution of checking them out first.

I think you need to revisit the statement to which I was responding, specifically the bolded portion. Or do you need me to explain the logic of your own words to you?

[Argus]

We would not need to bring them here if we did not help with making life hell in Syria.

We didn't help. Get over your conspiracy theories.

[Argus]

I think you need to revisit the statement to which I was responding, specifically the bolded portion. Or do you need me to explain the logic of your own words to you?

Your poor communications skills are no more my problem than the illogic of your beliefs.

[jacee]

We didn't help. Get over your conspiracy theories.

Bombing their homes doesn't help.

.

[Black Dog]

Your poor communications skills are no more my problem than the illogic of your beliefs.

You must be getting senile in your dotage. You clearly implied some "dumb policy" on the part of France was to blame for the attacks in Paris. I simply request clarification as to what policy you had in mind.

But I suppose it's my own fault for expecting that you put some actual thought into the statement you made instead of recognizing it for what it was: a terribly lazy and illogical attempt to connect two unconnected things in support of a pre-existing and unshakeable worldview. Your typically ignorant and dismissive response shows you gave this as much thought as I gave my morning crap, with similar results.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Black Dog

[jacee]

Given the context of the discussion I would have thought you would have had no difficulty figuring out the reference was to the imperative of bringing over 25,000 people from a war involving religious extremism without the elementary precaution of checking them out first.

Who said nobody's checking them out?

Did you make that up?

.

[Wilber]

This country has always welcomed refugees but there is absolutely no excuse for not doing everything we can to ensure the refugees we take in will not be a threat to this country. This rush to get 25,000 in by the end of the year is totally irresponsible. The people who arrive a few months later will be just as grateful as those who arrive in December.

[Wilber]

Who said nobody's checking them out?

Did you make that up?

.

How did they set up the infrastructure to properly vet 25,000 people in less than two months when they have only been in power less than weeks?

A simple question that everyone should be asking.

[Argus]

Bombing their homes doesn't help.

.

We must remember that the the bombing didn't happen out of the blue. Obama wanted to ignore the whole thing. It happened because ISIS was progressing unchecked, and slaughtering people, especially minorities, in large numbers. It was practicing genocide, and it was about to take a very large Kurdish town filled with refugees. That was the start of the bombing. We didn't do it to prop up a dictator or to interfere in a civil war. We did it because ISIS are bloody savages who burn people in cages and set up slave trading stations for 12 year old girls. Is there not a moral imperative to intervene under such circumstances? Have we not committed to fighting against genocide wherever we find it?

Since then a coalition of countries has tried to deter ISIS in what I regard as a fairly sensible, but at the same time cowardly way, by bombing them from above so as to not put any of our own soldiers in danger. On the one hand, I agree that we should not put our people at risk if we can avoid it. Why the hell can't the locals fight this group off? On the other hand, the locals suck at fighting unless it's for Allah, and they're a disorganized and corrupt shambles.

Honestly, I think the West needs a bigger version of the French Foreign Legion in order to send them into places like this to do what needs doing, but which timid democratic governments terrified of losing popularity when 'our' soldiers get killed, refuse to do.

[Argus]

You must be getting senile in your dotage. You clearly implied some "dumb policy" on the part of France was to blame for the attacks in Paris. I simply request clarification as to what policy you had in mind.

I implied no such policy on the part of France. That is your knee-jerking in typical zealot fashion, insisting on condemning the West for the brutality of the East. The discussion was on Trudeau's policy w/rt bringing over refugees from Syria.

Do try to keep up, old boy.