The US conflict with Iraq was unjustified and based on blatant lies. Whatever their reasons for invading, they were certainly to further their own interests, the economic boost of a war machine and rebuilding infrastructure, geo-politics, etc. The interests of the "poor Iraqi people" come about dead last on the list of reasons the wars occurred.

So "protecting your civilisation and way of life" from the fallout of an unjustified war that one's country (coalition of the willing?) participated in, does make one a bit of a bastard, and that's putting it lightly.

Last time I checked we're all humans and until we all live in relative comfort there's a bunch of fatties on one end consuming more than their fair share.

The social costs of the US directly meddling in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and elsewhere, along with the subsequent fallout that came from this meddling, has not fallen on the USA.

It has fallen almost solely on Europe. If the US were providing adequately for its victims, the Middle East taking in their fellow Muslims, and China showing some semblance of humanity in offering a home to some, we wouldn't be seeing the rise of nationalism in Europe that we now are.

> If the US were providing adequately for its victims, the Middle East taking in their fellow Muslims, and China showing some semblance of humanity in offering a home to some, we wouldn't be seeing the rise of nationalism in Europe that we now are.

I don't think you can pin the rise of nationalism solely on migration - non-European countries are also experiencing sharp increase in (right-wing) nationalism - including the US which you noted hasn't bourne the social cost.

My pet theory is that nationalism is on rise due to economic frustration post-great recession, as well as a loss of social memory on how awful war is. I remember reading that the big wars tend to happen every 3 generation - I bet nationalist sentiment would closely track that, and our last big war was WWII

> I don't think you can pin the rise of nationalism solely on migration - non-European countries are also experiencing sharp increase in (right-wing) nationalism - including the US which you noted hasn't bourne the social cost.

Hold on. The US has also seen massive demographic change due to migration (just not from migrations from the Middle East). Indeed there have been US politicians and other mainstream figures openly celebrating the "end of white America".

Immigration into the US from central & south America has been steadily going down for years now. The demographic change is mostly due to differences in birthrates, not even whittling down immigration to 0 will change this.

No. It's not my problem. It's not our problem. The endless guilt trip ends here. We are not obliged to take a single soul from these countries. Our only obligation is to leave those areas the hell alone and look after our own civilization.

They have radically different ideas than us on how society should be run. That means both mass immigration from those countries and our own attempts at spreading liberal democracy to them are both equally foolish.

If your country is a signatory to the UN Convention on Refugees then yes, it is your problem whether or not you feel happy about that.

And what will the UN do if we chose not to comply because the original intent of said convention is now being abused as an excuse for mass third-world immigration?

No, I'm serious, what will the UN, a cabal of unelected bureaucrats who I have never voted for, do to my country if we don't comply with said convention?

Treaties like are predicated on the will of the signatories to sanction each other for non-compliance, which can take subtle or overt forms. While that by itself is no guarantee of change, it may be that you have underestimated the depth of others' political feelings on the topic.

In other words, the worse that will happen is strongly-worded letter from timid bureaucrats.

Extremists always whine 'you made me do it' rather than take responsibility for their actions. It's just a gambit to increase their rhetorical leverage and need not be taken seriously.

Refusing to accept people fleeing from death, torture and sorrowful life, because you are afraid they might interfere with your way of life, is a bastard move, to say the least.

The ultra-wealthy Middle East, USA and China should start doing their part so.

I don't know ME but China has a policy of not meddling other's internal fare. It didn't bomb Libya while Europa did.

But it's more than that: Even China didn't cause the refugee disaster of ME but since the disaster was caused by good intention of Europeans with the naive human rights view,and it's already happened, China still should share some responsibility from humanity point of view. However there's another reason at the opposite side that is always misunderstood as selfishness by westerners : Accept a lot of refugee will definitely cause the internal turmoil because of the collision between bastards and non-bastards. That would be a bigger concern by government. Direct cost of settling refugee should be trivial given the size and wealth of China.

The same situation is applicable in Europa. The direct social cost of settling refugees is a relatively smaller problem. The internal conflicts and political polarization is a high-order problem.

China, which is busy stuffing Muslims into re-education camps? Why would you ever think they would open their arms to a bunch of unruly military-age Muslim males (the overwhelming demographic of refugees fleeing to Europe)?

https://popula.com/2018/08/27/baizuo/

https://theintercept.com/2018/08/13/china-muslims-uighur-det...

How many refugees are living in your spare bedrooms?

Is this argument equivalent to "You can't say you support single-payer healthcare unless you run a hospital from your garage" or "You can't say you support NASA unless you have an orbital rocket launch pad in your garden"?

Not really.

With his pithy comment, lawnchair_larry touches on an interesting aspect of this discussion. Many of those who support mass 3rd-world immigration (engaging in much grandstanding and moral preening in the process) are entirely removed from the actual consequences of it. They have no "skin in the game" so to speak as they know 3rd-world immigrants will not be settling in their neighborhoods (or guest bedrooms) anytime soon.

Utter BS, a specious argument we've heard a million times before (often from Larry, who has been here a long time). You should go for a more subtle sty;e, right wing trolls are always endorsing pithiness, perhaps because of Andrew Anglin's fondness for that adjective in his Daily Stormer trolling guides. I'm sure you would not wish to be mistaken for keeping such noisome company.

Sounds like you are the expert. Will have to take your word on it.

It's interesting phenomena though, isn't it? Those who praise diversity and immigration the loudest are often those most insulated from it. Why is that? Why don't those people move to those diverse, ethnic neighborhoods they claim to love so much?

They seem to only care for the abstract idea of it all, not the reality.

> Those who praise diversity and immigration the loudest are often those most insulated from it.

Do you have any data to support that assertion? Someone could claim just as confidently that the people most comfortable with diversity and immigration are those who have had (assumedly positive) exposure to it. That would seem just as valid a hypothesis, except there is actually some evidence that supports it, at least in one political context:

http://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-areas-with-low-...

Doesn't sound like anyone I know. Perhaps you have had a different experience.

Uncontrolled immigration will cause the dispute between 2 parties like you and Larry, and polarization of the society which neither party can convince the the other one.

I'm not making a judgement about which party is correct or wrong. I'm just saying that there's an high order problem being ignored by a lot of people.

I just want to point out that I didn’t actually say that I oppose immigration or refugees. This is the internet in 2019, so unfortunately that means we assume that anything other than unwavering support for one tribe means you’re a member of the enemy tribe.

Like most issues, I’m personally more on the fence than I am in either camp. I do think it’s worth challenging someone when they make comments that take such strong positions on complicated issues, particularly when they are someone else’s problem.

Likewise, I don’t support the border wall. But that’s an easy position for me to take, because as far as I can tell, it doesn’t affect my life. However, I’m not in a position to assume anything about the character or motivations of those who live near the border and have strong opinions about it.

And I do find it odd that when it comes to judging the character and motivations of others, so many are willing to give more benefit of the doubt to foreigners than they are for their fellow countrymen with a different political affiliation. I mean, consider that it would be a statistical miracle for America to be the only country with so many “shitty” people. If you think half of the US are deplorable Nazis, then it stands to reason that the worst half of any other country is approximately as bad, so letting them in indiscriminately has to be at least as bad as supporting Republicans. Believe it or not, but some countries have democratically elected people even worse than Trump. If you let in 10 random filipinos, that means 4 of them voted for fucking Duterte. And in case it needs to be said, I have nothing whatsoever against filipinos - they’re just a convenient example. If your belief system is such that people from other countries are fundamentally as good as us, you are dishonest if you reject that this means they must also be fundamentally as bad as us (which becomes increasingly problematic if you happened to decide the right are all Nazis).

I could have it completely wrong, but I just can’t help but think that maybe not everyone on the right is an evil greedy Nazi. Just maybe there are reasonable people over there whose circumstances have led them to a different view on some issues, and maybe the world isn’t black and white.

I do agree with your comment though, and that’s been happening elsewhere already.

Oh my, have we met? I don’t recall commenting on this particular topic previously, let alone often.

I don’t see how my comment would be misunderstood as trolling, to be honest. I’m also far from right wing. My conservative friends, of which I do have a few, give me a hard time for being a lefty, so being called a Nazi is rather perplexing.

I do have a bit more exposure to this issue than most Americans, and admittedly, my experience has caused my view to shift heavily over the past several years.

Not so long ago, I would be calling people out for their lack of compassion on this issue. It turns out that real life is a lot more complicated.

I can be honest with myself. I do have sympathy, but I’m not going to open my home to a refugee. I am not going to sponsor one. I am not xenophobic. Hell, I wouldn’t want my sister-in-law to live with me either.

Unless you’re willing to do those things, then respectfully, I must declare that it is you who is full of BS. Much like I once was. You see, I wanted to see these people helped, and I thought that someone should help them, but it was only an abstract concept. I wanted someone else to do it. Now I realize I have no right or moral high ground to criticize anybody else unless I’m willing to do it myself.

If you in fact are willing and helping, then I will gladly accept criticism from you. And some people are. And I have great respect for them. But personally, I find it difficult enough to take care of my own family.

The backlash in places like Germany, Canada and the UK are very real. All of them poll left-leaning, yet recent polls indicate that the majority of the population feels that they have taken in too many immigrants. That isn’t because they all started reading the Daily Stormer, it’s because unlike you over there calling people out from the cheap seats, they have been faced with complexities that go along with mass immigration of people who are not able to easily integrate with their new society and be self-sufficient.

Thank you for clarifying, and I'm sorry for having misread your position. I do in fact live out these values in very concrete fashion.