Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Dalai Lama speaks on too much immigration


seeder

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, DieChecker said:

There are literally millions of refugees in Lebanon and Turkey, who are fleeing the violence in Syria. Instead of allowing those people to come to Europe and get on the Dole, and get free housing, and whatnot, why don't we spend a couple thousand for each and arm them and send them back at ISIS?

That would be like arguing that we should arm Americans who want leave in the event of a Trump regime instead of letting them go.  Large groups of people might not like the politics that are going on at home, but they aren't going to pick up arms and kill their former neighbors over it.  Especially when the country they would be killing for is long dead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
14 hours ago, DieChecker said:

There are literally millions of refugees in Lebanon and Turkey, who are fleeing the violence in Syria. Instead of allowing those people to come to Europe and get on the Dole, and get free housing, and whatnot, why don't we spend a couple thousand for each and arm them and send them back at ISIS?

I think instead of treating a symptom, we should treat the cause. Obama is just pis*ing around when we could have ended this war years ago with direct intervention. Of course, Europe could do the same, as they have more people under standing arms then the US does, when taken as a whole. 

Is it more helpful to house and feed people after they travel thousands of miles on foot, or more helpful to give them back their own homes?

 It is not easy for ordinary people (e.g., carpenter, a medical student, a teacher, an engineer etc) to take arms and go for killing other people, especially if you have a family.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎26‎/‎06‎/‎2016 at 4:19 AM, seeder said:

 

We celebrate Christ of course, and Christmas, thats not to say there are not other faiths in the UK. We are taught about Christ even in primary school

 

Senior Church of England positions, get a seat in the House of Lords and the Queen is the Head of the Church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/26/2016 at 10:33 AM, Gromdor said:

That would be like arguing that we should arm Americans who want leave in the event of a Trump regime instead of letting them go.  Large groups of people might not like the politics that are going on at home, but they aren't going to pick up arms and kill their former neighbors over it.  Especially when the country they would be killing for is long dead. 

They are armed.... with the First Amendment. Unless people's actual lives are threatened (Are you suggesting this about Trump?), then I'd say the armament needs to be equal to the threat.

Are you seriously saying that people left Syria for political reasons? There wasn't any physical danger? That the people who chased them out weren't trying to actually kill them (if only by accident/collateral damage.)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/26/2016 at 2:25 PM, philly said:

 It is not easy for ordinary people (e.g., carpenter, a medical student, a teacher, an engineer etc) to take arms and go for killing other people, especially if you have a family.

It would be for their family that they would be fighting for.

As to not easy... I was not a drill sergeant, but I did train a lot of newbies when I was in the Army, and it isn't rocket science. You just teach them how to shoot correctly, how to maintain their weapon, and how to follow orders, and your 90% of the way there. It's not rocket science.... It actually is easy to take ordinary people and make them into soldiers.

Edited by DieChecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

They are armed.... with the First Amendment. Unless people's actual lives are threatened (Are you suggesting this about Trump?), then I'd say the armament needs to be equal to the threat.

Are you seriously saying that people left Syria for political reasons? There wasn't any physical danger? That the people who chased them out weren't trying to actually kill them (if only by accident/collateral damage.)?

Of course they left for political reasons,  if they agreed with ISIS or Assad they would have stayed.  You're the one saying that they should be forced to get arms and fight instead of being allowed to leave.  Have you ever consider that going somewhere safe and then using "1st amendment" weaponry might be the better way?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

It would be for their family that they would be fighting for.

As to not easy... I was not a drill sergeant, but I did train a lot of newbies when I was in the Army, and it isn't rocket science. You just teach them how to shoot correctly, how to maintain their weapon, and how to follow orders, and your 90% of the way there. It's not rocket science.... It actually is easy to take ordinary people and make them into soldiers.

But is it easy to take a normal person and make them a killer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Of course they left for political reasons,  if they agreed with ISIS or Assad they would have stayed.  You're the one saying that they should be forced to get arms and fight instead of being allowed to leave.  Have you ever consider that going somewhere safe and then using "1st amendment" weaponry might be the better way?

I'd disagree. They left of Safety reasons. The various factions have lived together in Syria for a thousand years, yet, just now, they leave en masse, due to politics? And not violence?

Even if we assume they fled for safety reasons, and I don't blame them for that, if they Want to return home, why shouldn't we arm them and help them reclaim their previous territories? Because some people might die? That thinking would have left Europe all speaking German 60 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

But is it easy to take a normal person and make them a killer?

Most of the soldiers I knew, and currently know, aren't killers. Most are just ordinary people. It is easy to teach people to defend themselves, and how to act as a unit. Dealing with the stress and violence and death is something I don't think anyone, or any nation, still knows how to deal with correctly. 

Basically people are going to be OK at killing or they will not be OK with killing. A study I read said that those people who joke around a lot are actually the ones who are the most likely to not get PTSD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you are sounding like Hillary and McCain.  You left out the part of them making a friendly democracy, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2016 at 11:41 PM, DieChecker said:

It would be for their family that they would be fighting for.

As to not easy... I was not a drill sergeant, but I did train a lot of newbies when I was in the Army, and it isn't rocket science. You just teach them how to shoot correctly, how to maintain their weapon, and how to follow orders, and your 90% of the way there. It's not rocket science.... It actually is easy to take ordinary people and make them into soldiers.

I am not talking about incapability of people learning to get training, I am talking about people who  do not want to get armed with intellectual, moral, religious, or  philosophical reasons. The best thing that you can do in war-torn country  is to try getting to a safe country with your family

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, philly said:

I am not talking about incapability of people learning to get training, I am talking about people who  do not want to get armed with intellectual, moral, religious, or  philosophical reasons. The best thing that you can do in war-torn country  is to try getting to a safe country with your family

This is modern Industrial World thinking. The individual outweighs the whole. If the people don't want to fight, they should support someone to fight for them, or they need to give up their claim on their homeland, as without violence, very few governments get turned around for the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
On 6/27/2016 at 9:10 PM, Gromdor said:

Now you are sounding like Hillary and McCain.  You left out the part of them making a friendly democracy, though.

So you'd have no problem with speak German right now? 

I don't care if they form a Democracy, a Kingdom, a Oligarchy, or go Communist. If they want their land back, they need to fight for it, or they might just as well get used to living in camps, like the Palestinians who left Israel 50+ years ago. They don't have citizenship, and don't have many rights in their sponsor nations. Doubtless these people would rather have the lands in Israel where they originated, rather then living in camps. Actually, I read that one of the first things all Palestinian children learn is their home village, even if their parents never lived there. That seems like deep regret to me, and a yearning for their old homeland. I'm not going to be easily convinced that these Syrians don't feel the same. Those that wanted to flee, fled... To Europe, or elsewhere. Those hoping to return are still there in Lebanon and Turkey and Iraq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DieChecker said:

So you'd have no problem with speak German right now? 

I don't care if they form a Democracy, a Kingdom, a Oligarchy, or go Communist. If they want their land back, they need to fight for it, or they might just as well get used to living in camps, like the Palestinians who left Israel 50+ years ago. They don't have citizenship, and don't have many rights in their sponsor nations. Doubtless these people would rather have the lands in Israel where they originated, rather then living in camps. Actually, I read that one of the first things all Palestinian children learn is their home village, even if their parents never lived there. That seems like deep regret to me, and a yearning for their old homeland. I'm not going to be easily convinced that these Syrians don't feel the same. Those that wanted to flee, fled... To Europe, or elsewhere. Those hoping to return are still there in Lebanon and Turkey and Iraq.

It's just dirt.  Killing people for special or Holy dirt is half the problem the world has right now.  Leaving people to rot and die because you think they should stay and fight for the dirt that people are murdering each other for?  That's what makes no sense to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎26‎/‎06‎/‎2016 at 4:54 AM, seeder said:

Religious education isnt forced upon anyone, nor is being a Christian, with exception to that being most of us are baptised/Christened at some point after birth which can only happen if the parents choose it. Newborns clearly cant make that call

Primary school is from age 4 to 11. The school day is typically started with 'assembly' in a hall....words from a headmaster or teacher.....with a hymn or 2 sung, or at least it was in my day

No-one is forced to sing, no-one forced to pray... its just 'our way'. No doubt changes may have taken place in light of differing faiths at school.... but I cant speak about that, my primary school days were in the 60's/70's

Speaking as a primary school teacher, it depends what kind of school you are in. All schools are required to teach about a variety of religions, although parents can instruct the school that their chid is not to take these lessons (very few do). Faith schools, e.g. C of E or Roman Catholic, tend to have a very strong slant that there are lots of religions but ours is the right one and focus on it far more than the others. In RC schools, you can't hold senior positions unless you are catholic.

Leaving faith schools aside, most still have an assembly but these are not religious affairs. They tend to be for celebrating children's achievements (One of the schools I trained in did this in the middle of every morning - it's exhausting trying to think of a new achievement for a child every day!) and don't usually include hymns.

Ultimately, there is not really 'our way'; every school seems to handle it differently. I've been in C of E schools with a very balanced approach to R.E. and non-faith schools with a clearly religious agenda, usually from the headteacher.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Setton said:

Speaking as a primary school teacher, it depends what kind of school you are in. All schools are required to teach about a variety of religions, although parents can instruct the school that their chid is not to take these lessons (very few do). Faith schools, e.g. C of E or Roman Catholic, tend to have a very strong slant that there are lots of religions but ours is the right one and focus on it far more than the others. In RC schools, you can't hold senior positions unless you are catholic.

Leaving faith schools aside, most still have an assembly but these are not religious affairs. They tend to be for celebrating children's achievements (One of the schools I trained in did this in the middle of every morning - it's exhausting trying to think of a new achievement for a child every day!) and don't usually include hymns.

Ultimately, there is not really 'our way'; every school seems to handle it differently. I've been in C of E schools with a very balanced approach to R.E. and non-faith schools with a clearly religious agenda, usually from the headteacher.

 

Thanks for that! as said....its been a while since I last went to school, specially Primary..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 6/25/2016 at 7:27 PM, Leto_loves_melange said:

Interesting. Very political of a religious leader such as the Dalai Lama to voice such an opinion. Not suggesting that the Dalai Lama is wrong, but its certainly in his interests to be dealing with a sympathetic Christian/atheist West rather than a radicalised Islam.  

I can't imagine it being in anyone's interests to deal with fundamentalist Islam. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, and then said:

I can't imagine it being in anyone's interests to deal with fundamentalist Islam. ;)

There's Saudi Arabia and Turkey that would beg to differ. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

There's Saudi Arabia and Turkey that would beg to differ. ;)

True enough.  But I'm just not sure WHO'S interests are being served.  Pity we can't just let one or the other fundamentalist flavors of this religion eliminate the other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, and then said:

True enough.  But I'm just not sure WHO'S interests are being served.  Pity we can't just let one or the other fundamentalist flavors of this religion eliminate the other. 

I think the Israelis do it best. They're constantly encouraging one group or another to attack each other and when that group gets too strong they turn against it. Just look at what they did to Lebanon. Too splintered to ever pose a problem to the Jewish state. Maybe that's what Syria was... another Lebanon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

I think the Israelis do it best. They're constantly encouraging one group or another to attack each other and when that group gets too strong they turn against it. Just look at what they did to Lebanon. Too splintered to ever pose a problem to the Jewish state. Maybe that's what Syria was... another Lebanon. 

Comes with the territory of being the biggest target in any situation...  use the enemy's hatred against them.  But no, I think Syria was just another part of the "Arab Spring" that went badly off the rails when Assad decided he'd swim in blood before he'd leave.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, and then said:

Comes with the territory of being the biggest target in any situation...  use the enemy's hatred against them.  But no, I think Syria was just another part of the "Arab Spring" that went badly off the rails when Assad decided he'd swim in blood before he'd leave.

Well Assad is still there and will be for some time. Syria was definitely part of the Arab Spring regime change festival. A failed policy at best. An other one of Obama's follies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.