ballaughbiker Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 The Americans still have significant military bases here and fly in and out of the middle east from here. Can't be that simple. The americans have dozens of bases much closer to the middle east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 And nothing to do with the USA, UK and half of the west bombing the shit out of all those middle eastern countries So why Germany? Angela Merkel and her open invitation to come and do your worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Some of you people are monsters, letting innocent people die over and over again to suit your need to feel like you're doing "good". Thirteen people aren't going to see Christmas because of it. Are you suggesting that society should not help refugees in general because amongst those refugees there may also be people (often mentally ill people) who have been infected with dangerous ideas? I don't believe that a society like that would be worth defending. Previously you mentioned the Canadian immigration model. Canada actively promotes immigration. It has also resettled appx 35,000 Syrians in 2016. The UK - 3,000. I believe that you and Gerry both take a simplistic approach to these issues. The reality is much more complicated and nuanced. Liberal democracy, the post WW1 model and the freedoms we value, inevitably mean a society which is complicated and potentially dangerous. But whilst the nature of the threats we face inevitably changes continuously, the level of threat remains fairly consistent. I do not see any evidence of society becoming any more dangerous. Also - terrorism isn't going to go away. The IRA terror cells and the PLO hijackings seemed just as awful (they were). The Islamic extremists are their heirs. One day it will be something else and we will probably look back on this era as an age of relative safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 The Americans still have significant military bases here and fly in and out of the middle east from here. Can't be that simple. The americans have dozens of bases much closer to the middle east. None as big as they have in Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Some of you people are monsters, letting innocent people die over and over again to suit your need to feel like you're doing "good". Thirteen people aren't going to see Christmas because of it. Are you suggesting that society should not help refugees in general because amongst those refugees there may also be people (often mentally ill people) who have been infected with dangerous ideas? I don't believe that a society like that would be worth defending. Previously you mentioned the Canadian immigration model. Canada actively promotes immigration. It has also resettled appx 35,000 Syrians in 2016. The UK - 3,000. I believe that you and Gerry both take a simplistic approach to these issues. The reality is much more complicated and nuanced. Liberal democracy, the post WW1 model and the freedoms we value, inevitably mean a society which is complicated and potentially dangerous. But whilst the nature of the threats we face inevitably changes continuously, the level of threat remains fairly consistent. I do not see any evidence of society becoming any more dangerous. Also - terrorism isn't going to go away. The IRA terror cells and the PLO hijackings seemed just as awful (they were). The Islamic extremists are their heirs. One day it will be something else and we will probably look back on this era as an age of relative safety. The only perceptive part of this is the last fourteen words. If you see no evidence of society becoming more dangerous you are sleepwalking to disaster which is the liberal default position. And for good measure I see you played the "mentally ill" card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 If you see no evidence of society becoming more dangerous you are sleepwalking to disaster In what way is society more dangerous? The threat levels are just signalled more today. Flying was certainly more dangerous during the 1970s and early 80s. And there were the annual IRA Christmas bombing 'campaigns' - people often forget today that they were not just about soft targets and false alarms. Germany and Italy lived under the constant threat of hard left terrorism. France was repeatedly bombed. And, especially during the early 1980s, there was a grim fear of nuclear war. ETA - also when you people talk about the "liberal position" what do you actually mean and what do you specifically propose as an alternative? Liberal Democracy is the post WW1 model for democratic society. It's the foundation of modern Conservatism. Do you propose, instead, some sort of illiberal alternative - one in which the liberal values of democracy and freedom would no longer be considered sensible goals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 In what way is society more dangerous? Radicalisation of the susceptible is far easier now and done over a much wider scale that was ever previously possible. It is also much easier to feel dispossessed in your middle east shithole looking at multimillion pound houses in Surrey on the net with a Ferrari outside in this apparent paradise called the UK. The Irish question had a definied goal in mind that really didn't come down to religious belief and/or manipulation of religion to justify the terrorism used to get what they want. I think Woolley makes fair points in #50 and I don't like the playing of the mentally ill card either. It is designed to lead others to accept that it might not be all their fault after all. Bollox. Edit: even murdering nutters have human rights here. That was not a factor years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 I don't like the playing of the mentally ill card either. It is designed to lead others to accept that it might not be all their fault after all. Bollox. It's not a "card". It's genuinely the case that many of those attracted to violent causes are mentally ill. The Irish question had a definied goal in mind that really didn't come down to religious belief and/or manipulation of religion to justify the terrorism used to get what they want. It was, in its time, the latest and most sophisticated form of terrorism. Like Islamic extremism, Irish terrorism was built around a distorted historical and world view. And like Islamic extremism it played to those with a victim complex. In an ultimately democratic society it was equally inexcusable. It was genuinely terrifying. Today's terrorists are the heirs of that. They are more similar than different. Terrorism is what terrorists have in common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminal Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 German police are seeking a Tunisian man who left a document with his name on it under the drivers seat. How convenient is that hey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 German police are seeking a Tunisian man who left a document with his name on it under the drivers seat. How convenient is that hey? A bit like fire proof passports that survive plan crashes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 The fatal flaw in the liberal perspective is the certainty that everybody can be reasoned with and every danger can be rationalised away. It sees this view as highly intelligent when in fact it is the ultimate folly. It does not accept that sometimes tea and sympathy just doesn't cut it and evil must be faced down with harsh measures. A country should always put its own people first with others a very long way down the list and a leadership inviting a million aliens into its midst with no idea of their disposition or intentions towards the West is playing Russian roulette with its own well-being and being reckless to the point of criminal negligence. But hey, so long as we display our "basic humanity" for all to see all will be well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 German police are seeking a Tunisian man who left a document with his name on it under the drivers seat. How convenient is that hey? A bit like fire proof passports that survive plan crashes... What are you saying? It's a right wing nutter job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 The fatal flaw in the liberal perspective is the certainty that everybody can be reasoned with and every danger can be rationalised away. What "liberal perspective" are you actually talking about? Did you do history at school? Liberal-democracy, the post WW1 model which has its roots in the 19th century, is imperfect. But is the the basis of modern democracy - and the foundation of contemporary Conservatism. What is your alternative suggestion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 The fatal flaw in the liberal perspective is the certainty that everybody can be reasoned with and every danger can be rationalised away. It sees this view as highly intelligent when in fact it is the ultimate folly. It does not accept that sometimes tea and sympathy just doesn't cut it and evil must be faced down with harsh measures. You've completely made that up. There's no such certainty. And plenty of examples of the "liberal west" using pretty harsh, violent measures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 What "liberal perspective" are you actually talking about? Everything is relative Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.