• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Migrants will cost Germany £17,000,000,000 per Year!

Looks like Jean-Marie just won't die, no matter how hard his daughter shovels.:roll:

Presumably the move to keep Muslims out of France also entails removing any French citizen.
 
Looks like Jean-Marie just won't die, no matter how hard his daughter shovels.:roll:

Presumably the move to keep Muslims out of France also entails removing any French citizen.

Well it seems they got their inspiration from a German friend who died in 1945...
 
Well it seems they got their inspiration from a German friend who died in 1945...
..............contrary to popular accounts, possibly in the Auvergne :mrgreen:
 
Well it seems they got their inspiration from a German friend who died in 1945...

That German guy got many of his ideas from Islam.
 
One last thing: we should use propaganda to make Europe looks like the most horrible place for Arabs. We should spread false rumors about refugees forced to convert in France, female refugees forced to marry French Christians, burnt Mosques, anti-Muslim gangs attacking refugees under the police's sight, refugees' children killed to give their organs to Christian children, etc.


Looks like Jean-Marie just won't die, no matter how hard his daughter shovels.:roll:
Why are you comparing me, a progressive social-democrat atheist, to a conservative libertarian catholic? Because we both oppose Islam, as all non-Muslims should do? You do this to personally attack me because planting scarecrows is easier than arguing. "Le Pen!" "Islamophobe!" "National Front!" Once those words are dropped, the argumentation ceases and everyone knows what opinion they must have.

Presumably the move to keep Muslims out of France also entails removing any French citizen.
You need to invent things I never said, because you find nothing better to say. This a severe defamation, and once again you do this because you have nothing more relevant to answer than scarecrows.

Well it seems they got their inspiration from a German friend who died in 1945...
Better and better, now I am Hitler because I want to control the inflow of refugees. What a deep thinking.



Now tell me both of you, what is the good amount of Islam? How much of it do you want in our countries? Do you think that:
a) Islam will not change France further, regardless of how much it grows, regardless of how many Muslims there are in the population?
b) Islam will spontaneously stop growing even though its demographics quickly increased and are set to continue this course over the foreseeable future?
c) Islam will continue to change France and you approve this.

And as Muslims will continue to become more and more many, do you think there will be more or less ethnic conflicts? More or less terrorism? More or less freedom for non-Muslims, especially for women, Jews and gays?
 
Last edited:
One last thing: we should use propaganda to make Europe looks like the most horrible place for Arabs. We should spread false rumors about refugees forced to convert in France, female refugees forced to marry French Christians, burnt Mosques, anti-Muslim gangs attacking refugees under the police's sight, refugees' children killed to give their organs to Christian children, etc.
Great idea
Why are you comparing me, a progressive social-democrat atheist, to a conservative libertarian catholic? Because we both oppose Islam, as all non-Muslims should do?
If you want me to take your word for it, I prefer going on demonstrated views and behavior rather than on what anybody claims of themselves.

As to the rest, I believe I already outlined how I deal with gish gallops. In case it's forgotten, by dismissing them.
 
Chagos, you didn't answer about how much Islam we should have according to you.

They already amount to 28% of high-schoolers in the Bouches-du-Rhône and a third in Ile-de-France, which reflect the future demography of those places. What should be the right amount for you? 50%? 70%? 100%?
 
Chagos, you didn't answer about how much Islam we should have according to you.

They already amount to 28% of high-schoolers in the Bouches-du-Rhône and a third in Ile-de-France, which reflect the future demography of those places. What should be the right amount for you? 50%? 70%? 100%?

Do not expect an answer from him. He thinks he controls the narrative. Posters, like yourself, prove that he cannot defend that narrative. Hence the veiled insults and deflections.
 
Before I enter the details, I do not expect this to be cheap or easy. But the rise of Islam will cause problems for centuries and it is therefore an absolute necessity we keep Muslims out of our country. If we have to pay WTO fines, so be it. If this damages EU enterprises, so be it. If we have to stop eating meat to dedicate vast surfaces to fuel production (agrofuel or hydrogen through solar power), so be it. If everyone points fingers at us, so be it. Islam is a civilization-scale problem and we need a more radical mindset to fix our situation.

France will be more beautiful, happier, safer and wealthier for the centuries to come if it is not ethnically divided between Muslims and koufars, if Islam has as little influence as possible.


The details:
a) Use aggressive policies and increase border surveillance to pressure the countries where refugees are, to make sure they keep them. Turkey has a lot of trade with the EU, if we need to stop it to convince them to do so, so be it. The current deal is a complete submission from the EU. Turkey and Russia have grabbed our parts, probably because they could stop the oil pipelines, this is a situation we must remedy, both by demonstrating to Turkey that we are ready to go at war if they push us too far, then by starting to produce expensive fuel in Europe.

b) For the remaining refugees, bargain with other countries to make them take the refugees. Some Arab countries may be convinced to host them for money.

c) For the remaining ones, build small comfortable detention camps far from cities. We will first have to legalize indefinite detention and DNA identification, but anyway this is needed so we can deport again every illegal immigrant we do not want

d) If after all this the number of refugees is still too big, deport them back to Syria. I am sorry for them but Islam will turn France into Syria if we massively let them in.

e) As for the situation in Syria, I do not think we can do much more than we are already doing.

You have to depose the current leadership to get this done, and the longer the invaders are there the harder it will be to get them removed. Everybody once knew that the best thing to do was to stabilize the mid east and Africa and Afghanistan and do what we could to help them to be prosperous, but over the years but over the years this wisdom of the leaders of the West evaporated. As these areas melted down and large numbers of refuges was created everyone once knew that they refuges should be housed supported by the West as close to their homeland as possible to make return easy, and that we had to redouble our efforts on the problems that were creating the refuges, but here again the wisdom dissipated. America has by far the biggest share of the blame here, arming radicals in Afghanistan, destabilizing Iraq, ignoring Africa, not supporting Asad, going along with the idiotic Sarkozy/Cameron plan to destabilize Libya. Then as the final blow in a long run of failure of proper management, the icing on the cake, the final collapse, we have Merkel and her catastrophic decision to on her own with apparently very little thought and as she tells the story full of emotion tell the refuges 'Come on over, we love you!".

And now Europe is pretty well ****ed.
 
Last edited:
You have to depose the current leadership to get this done, and the longer the invaders are there the harder it will be to get them removed. Everybody once knew that the best thing to do was to stabilize the mid east and Africa and Afghanistan and do what we could to help them to be prosperous, but over the years but over the years this wisdom of the leaders of the West evaporated. As these areas melted down and large numbers of refuges was created everyone once knew that they refuges should be housed supported by the West as close to their homeland as possible to make return easy, and that we had to redouble our efforts on the problems that were creating the refuges, but here again the wisdom dissipated. America has by far the biggest share of the blame here, arming radicals in Afghanistan, destabilizing Iraq, ignoring Africa, not supporting Asad, going along with the idiotic Sarkozy/Cameron plan to destabilize Libya. Then as the final blow in a long run of failure of proper management, the icing on the cake, the final collapse, we have Merkel and her catastrophic decision to on her own with apparently very little thought and as she tells the story full of emotion tell the refuges 'Come on over, we love you!".

And now Europe is pretty well ****ed.

proper ****ed...

Merkel must go, und schnell...
 
There will be elections in the fall of next year and Merkel will emerge as chancellor one again. Where support for her has certainly waned, she still gets around 45 pct of Germans supporting her. With nobody else even near.

Of course the chancellor is not elected directly, it'll depend on the votes that every party can garner and what coalition possibilities will emerge.
 
There will be elections in the fall of next year and Merkel will emerge as chancellor one again. Where support for her has certainly waned, she still gets around 45 pct of Germans supporting her. With nobody else even near.

Of course the chancellor is not elected directly, it'll depend on the votes that every party can garner and what coalition possibilities will emerge.

30 minutes of terror in Berlin could change all that.
 
30 minutes of terror in Berlin could change all that.
A whole night of that in Munich (until the threat was evaluated) didn't.

Everything "could" but "could" is not a sound basis for forecasts.
 
A whole night of that in Munich (until the threat was evaluated) didn't.

Everything "could" but "could" is not a sound basis for forecasts.

Merkel cant delay much longer deciding.

Or telling us what she has decided.

What comes after comes.
 
Merkel cant delay much longer deciding.

Or telling us what she has decided.

What comes after comes.
Why don't you find out yourself what Germany is doing about refugees? Both what is currently implemented, what is planned and what is debated (often controversially).

It's not as if there weren't enough news items about it all.
 
Why don't you find out yourself what Germany is doing about refugees? Both what is currently implemented, what is planned and what is debated (often controversially).

It's not as if there weren't enough news items about it all.

I likely know more than you do about that.

I was talking about Merkel running, or not running, a decision that has been long delayed.
 
I likely know more than you do about that.

I was talking about Merkel running, or not running, a decision that has been long delayed.
Sorry, I misunderstood.

Well, with a year to go, what's the hurry in declaring? The SPD's Gabriel isn't declaring nor is the CDU's chief Seehofer.
It's a backwards variation of the game of musical chairs, first one to sit down is out. Not uncommon in Germany from way back.

FWIW my forecast is that she'll run again.
 
Sorry, I misunderstood.

Well, with a year to go, what's the hurry in declaring? The SPD's Gabriel isn't declaring nor is the CDU's chief Seehofer.
It's a backwards variation of the game of musical chairs, first one to sit down is out. Not uncommon in Germany from way back.

FWIW my forecast is that she'll run again.

What is the reason for the delay in your opinion? Is it because she wants to get right with the Bavarian's first as I see so often claimed? Did she want to get more of a look see on how badly her migrant actions will hurt her which depends upon what happens terror wise in the interim? Is she burned out? Does she think that it is time for a new hand at the helm because she is out of ideas so she is delaying out of a lack of enthusiasm to do the gig again because she does not now what to do now? Does she have health issues to maybe make her not want to go on?
 
What is the reason for the delay in your opinion? Is it because she wants to get right with the Bavarian's first as I see so often claimed? Did she want to get more of a look see on how badly her migrant actions will hurt her which depends upon what happens terror wise in the interim? Is she burned out? Does she think that it is time for a new hand at the helm because she is out of ideas so she is delaying out of a lack of enthusiasm to do the gig again because she does not now what to do now? Does she have health issues to maybe make her not want to go on?
As I pointed out already
Not uncommon in Germany from way back.

Elections are a year away, nobody shows their hand this early. That gives others the edge of then possibly setting the rules for the game to come. Leave 'em dangling and you play your game with all options open. Of course not indefinitely, since declaration will have to be made (where parties are elected, the Germans will eventually want to know "people"), but right now she's high and dry by saying nothing.

As to the variations you list, none of them are improbable and none impossible.

There is one aspect though and I'm not sure whether she's considering it (although she doesn't miss much, ever). All chancellorships in the history of the FRG ended badly if the 4th term was entered into.

I doubt though that she's superstitious. She's a scientist.
 
As I pointed out already

Elections are a year away, nobody shows their hand this early. That gives others the edge of then possibly setting the rules for the game to come. Leave 'em dangling and you play your game with all options open. Of course not indefinitely, since declaration will have to be made (where parties are elected, the Germans will eventually want to know "people"), but right now she's high and dry by saying nothing.

As to the variations you list, none of them are improbable and none impossible.

There is one aspect though and I'm not sure whether she's considering it (although she doesn't miss much, ever). All chancellorships in the history of the FRG ended badly if the 4th term was entered into.

I doubt though that she's superstitious. She's a scientist.

Did she or did she not announce that she would probably decide in the Spring, and then not do it? Are you claiming that such lies are routine, that only the chumps thought that she would decide then? OCT/Nov are by no stretch of the imagination "Spring", and it appears that is what we are looking at.
 
Blatant greed and hatred dully-noted.

Why should Germans be forced to pay so much for these people? And have their country's security and cohesion compromised? We're literally talking about millions of refugees and migrants entering the country, the majority of whom have no education and skills and cannot speak English, never mind German.

Lunacy, folks! Send 'em home!
 
Did she or did she not announce that she would probably decide in the Spring, and then not do it? Are you claiming that such lies are routine?
I'm probably going to do all sorts of things tomorrow. Call me a liar if I don't and I'll tell you where you can go and what you can do there.:mrgreen:

Anyway, where did you get this? All I currently hear is that she'll announce in spring of next year.
 
But let me ask the OP and all the other anti-refugee people.. what would YOU do with these refugees?

Firstly, the majority of these people aren't even from Syria. They're from Africa and other Arab countries.

Secondly, most are males, and young males at that.

Europe should send these people packing. All of them.

I mean, the principle at risk here is the right of sovereignty. If Germany accepts a million or two, why not just keep the doors open forever? What would remain of Germany in that case?

Borders are what concretely define countries. Language, culture, ethnicity, race is the substance and spirit. Borders tie it together. People like yourself who oppose borders are encouraging absolute chaos and mayhem!
 
Firstly, the majority of these people aren't even from Syria. They're from Africa and other Arab countries.

At best that is spin. Most of the refugees do indeed come from Syria and Iraq.

Secondly, most are males, and young males at that.

I'm not entirely sure that is entirely accurate or accurate at all.

Europe should send these people packing. All of them.

No, they and the United States need to stop allowing warmongers and egotistical authoritarians into power that bomb these peoples' countries into the stone-age and displace millions and kill hundreds of thousands more.

I mean, the principle at risk here is the right of sovereignty.

Brexit disagrees with you.

If Germany accepts a million or two, why not just keep the doors open forever? What would remain of Germany in that case?

Non-sequitur.

Borders are what concretely define countries.

Borders are merely the property lines of the super-wealthy power elite, nothing more.

Language, culture, ethnicity, race is the substance and spirit.

Your opinion is noted.

Borders tie it together.

Borders have nothing to do with it and change frequently depending on what best suits the elite of that particular nation-state and its government/ruling regime.

People like yourself who oppose borders are encouraging absolute chaos and mayhem!

:lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom