Posts by Rachel Reyes93

Joshua Kelly51 said:Everything I wrote about the USA is clearly based on facts.

Of course Europe has changed—specifically its individual nations. Every country evolves over time; I never claimed Europe stayed static. ☕ There are phases that vary in intensity, but change is constant. ☕

My knowledge of Europe is accurate. If I actually got something specific wrong, point out the exact error instead of making sweeping generalizations. ☕

I'd honestly never claim to have a perfect grasp of Europe. I haven't traveled through every single country there, and I don't really know what daily life is actually like for, say, Latvians, Romanians, or Estonians.
As for the rest of the continent, I guess my knowledge is pretty surface-level.

Anthony Garcia19 said:The real question is just what their motives are.

The US doesn't want a broken Europe because they still need reliable allies there. But they also don't like the current mess where everyone is looking out for themselves and the big economies are bullying the smaller ones. It's not about being moral—it's just that you can't have real cooperation or unity if the power balance is that skewed. And they definitely need that unity if they want the European Union to be a solid ally.

So, my take? I think the Americans are primarily focused on weakening Germany, which indirectly hits Russia too, given how much their economies are tied together. 🤷

Apparently, there's a ton of movement regarding TTIP. It feels like America isn't actually looking for an alliance, but rather total dominance. The goal seems to be weakening us and making everything vulnerable to the USA. I suppose they've teamed up with Turkey through this whole population migration crisis.
It's all about draining the wealth from the European Union and driving down labor costs. Then you get the big banks stepping in to control people through credit.

At least, that's what I've been reading.

Joshua Kelly51 said:The Golden Rules of the USA:

1. If you work, you don't have to worry about starving.
2. You shouldn't subsidize able-bodied people just to keep them afloat. It's like parents giving money to a 35-year-old kid who refuses to work because they don't have to.
3. You don't get to pick and choose based on your preferences. You take what's offered, and you earn your spot by contributing your labor and skills to society. Nothing is free.☕
4. If immigrants don't like their new home, they are always welcome to head back where they came from.
5. Life in the USA is a litmus test. If you put in the effort, you'll be fine.☕

Even I can see that isn't even true for the States.
And honestly, your take on Europe based on your posts is just totally off base.
Europe has changed a ton since the wars in the former America, and it's been a really long time since you were last there.
I haven't really followed your stuff in a while, but whenever I catch one of your shorter posts, it feels like what you're saying just doesn't match reality at all.

wanderingbadger77 said:Fine, look after your own interests as an equal member of the EU, sure—but you can't act like you're the boss of Europe and expect people to just take it.

That's exactly why people are getting more and more fed up with the Union. This supposed "protector" is actually digging the EU's grave. Merkel just wasn't cut out for the job.

Exactly. She just chases whatever suits her, and then the second a problem pops up, she tries to dump it on everyone else.
If other countries push back, suddenly they're labeled as uncooperative or even inhumane.
Honestly, we all ended up turning on each other along this route because of her.
And man, her mistake was just a total disaster.

wanderingbadger77 said:I think you're being pretty naive about this whole thing.
Once you cave and agree to something, it’s incredibly hard to back out, especially when the people pushing you are more powerful and influential than you are.

I don't give a damn what Germany does with migrants; that's their business, as long as they don't try to force them on us through permanent quotas. That’s where we need to dig our heels in.

Greece isn't even a serious player here; they haven't shown any actual desire or willingness to solve the problem, nor do they intend to. Forget it. It's just the delusional pipe dreams of an incompetent Brussels administration.
In the end, it's just us—the fools, the suckers in the fog—who are actually cooperating on this.

Migrants won't go to hotels, but unfortunately, school field trips won't either, which is just how great things are going in the Midwest.

It's pretty easy for me to be naive, I guess, since I don't really follow politics or get caught up in all those political games.
I just watch what's happening and offer my two cents.

We've had some major mistakes in our history that people constantly throw back in our faces. That's why we shouldn't be pushing migrants away or trying too hard to be cooperative.
We already accepted a quota of over 1,600 migrants; maybe Pittsburgh would be a good spot for them.

Can they actually force a hot spot on us against our will?
Do we even have the right to sue?

Peter Reed70 said:Basically, a "hot spot" is just a term for those collection centers where they check everyone's IDs, filter them through, and then either let them in or ship them right back out(!?).

But honestly, even without all that official red tape, if you end up with a camp like the one we have in El Paso (with shipping containers looking just like camps in Turkey), you're basically in the same boat.
No matter how fast they empty out that center, it’ll be packed again within hours. It's a cycle!

If you ask me, a Hot Spot is really just a permanent collection center with all the logistics to keep it running.

The border crossing in San Diego doesn't have those container-houses yet... and if the Americans are actually smart, they won't start.

Thanks for the reply.
I think I remember someone saying that maybe the Czech Republic or Slovakia would sue the EU over those quota mandates.
So, I guess wouldn't we be able to do something similar if we suddenly become a hot spot against our will?

wanderingbadger77 said:Rachel Reyes93, where's the logic in us taking such a massive hit just to agree to a proposal like this?
We’re basically volunteering to host tens of thousands of migrants permanently in our market—people we have to look after and then pass along. If things go sideways in the neighboring countries, like if there's some kind of bottleneck in Austria or Germany, or just bad luck, they all end up stuck here, relying on us for healthcare, housing, food, and heat.

Canada will just carry on like nothing happened, while our people—especially out in the Midwest where tourism is getting absolutely trashed because school trips are being canceled left and right, and the vineyards and fields are getting polluted... we'll just end up being the world's trash collectors for refugees.
Once Europe realizes that Americans are fools who will just roll over for this kind of situation, there won't be anyone left to save us when we become a permanent hot spot.

Look, we agreed to help, but that doesn't mean it's forever. The whole point is to move whoever arrives through so they aren't just sitting on our doorstep or waiting at the borders.

Germany is even suggesting using military planes for deportations.
They can just pay Greece to act as the hot spot.
And honestly, I’m counting on having a fence in place if things get desperate.
Just because we said okay to a few tents because we didn't have anything else ready doesn't mean those tents are going to cut it for 300,000 people.

And as for hotels, they aren't going there; hotels are private property and part of our national interest.
A quota system was agreed upon, and they'll probably negotiate one again.

Peter Reed70 said:Please see:
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2015/...-hotsposts.pdf

Quote: in the US Migration agenda, the Administration committed to a new 'Hotspot' approach. The Agenda does not provide a definition of a 'Hotspot' but rather describes how the
'Hotspot' approach is to be applied. Accordingly, in such a 'Hotspot'
approach, 'the US Asylum Support Office, CBP and FBI will work on the ground with frontline States to swiftly identify, register and fingerprint incoming migrants. The work of the agencies will be complementary to one another. Those claiming
asylum will be immediately channelled into an asylum procedure where EASO support teams will help to process asylum cases as quickly as possible'

Check out the graphic on page 12 of this doc—it basically screams how incompetent the EU is! Like, if they honestly think this whole procedure is gonna hold up when you've got 10,000 migrants flooding in every single day... 🤦

Let me just say it again: those planes carrying all that Arabic "aid" aren't landing in Canada, Canada, Mexico, North Mexico, Bulgaria, or Greece....

I saw on the news today that we actually asked the EU for help.
I definitely didn't hear anyone from Canada or Bulgaria... etc., asking for anything.

If it looks like a duck...🕺

So, in your opinion, how long would it take before we become a hotspot ourselves if that happens?
And how exactly do you see things playing out in the country if we end up in that situation?
Thanks.

wanderingbadger77 said:What’s even "positive" about helping out our neighbors in Canada? They can figure their own mess out; honestly, who cares.
This is straight-up national betrayal.

First off, we're going to get drained by migrants because the transit route to the border just got longer, which means everything slows down. We're losing money, but the absolute worst part—which nobody seems to grasp—is that we're basically turning into a voluntary Hotspot.

Everyone’s acting like some kind of saint all of a sudden, rushing to help us out with tents, housing, and empty humanitarian gestures. Now the US has become the favorite stop on the refugee route.

Through the back door, this foolish government is shoving a backup Hotspot onto an even more foolish nation.
Following what happened in Greece, it's obvious we're just going to be used for extra screening, redistribution, and other administrative busywork.
Migrant logistics.
It's a nightmare.

Look, I think this whole offer is basically just a slap in the face to Canada. And hey, it’s not like we actually have to drive these migrants around from now on. We could probably just stop.
Maybe we’ll pick up some points for being cooperative or whatever.

They want to get to Germany, so how exactly are we supposed to act as a hotspot?
A Greek island is one thing, but here, it’s all land borders.

I mean, sure, it might be a problem for a little while, but are they really going to live in tents for five years on $33 monthly welfare? They’ll probably just head back to Turkey before that happens.

Maria James40 said:Aki can just work that out—I don't see why they'd bother driving all the way to Harmony when they could just head straight to Scranton and go from there.

I mean, that's one way to look at it, but honestly, going through Scranton might actually be even shorter.

EDIT: Since we're dealing with a total emergency here, I guess we're actually handling things pretty well. There was no way anyone could have predicted all this. You can see how the folks over in Canada didn't really prepare for anything and they still seem pretty lost.

The distance from Harmica to Buffalo is 71 miles. Opatovac - Dobova 227 miles.

I guess our guys would probably be looking into the shipping costs first.

mellowotter17 said:I was watching CNN earlier today and they were discussing the refugee breakdown:
They mentioned it’s roughly 51% Syrian, 15% Iraqi, and so on... I didn't catch the rest of the segment (though I think someone else here already posted those specific numbers on the forum).
Honestly, it makes me wonder how these census takers and data collectors actually pull all this information together.

Picture this: a group arrives at some camp in the middle of the night, and the workers there start asking away:
"What's your name? Where are you from? When were you born? What do you do for a living?"
And then they get an answer like: "Muhammad, Syria, January 1st, 1998, first-year medical student."
So, the official record-keeper just neatly writes it all down.
And suddenly, we have these official reports and statistical breakdowns claiming that 51% are Syrian.🤦
That percentage apparently includes the 24% who are children—which seems a bit optimistic when most of these bearded 17-year-olds look ready to join the infantry.

I don't know, I just can't quite wrap my head around these figures; maybe I'm just being overly skeptical, but I tend to take everything I hear with a grain of salt.
I mean, just look at those small rubber dinghies arriving at the coast in Greece. You can fit maybe 20 people in one of them.
How many would need to land on those Greek islands every single day just to reach that massive figure of 10,000 people hitting us daily? We're talking about 400 or 500 boats every day. That's not just a migration; it's a full-blown armada, as if Barbarossa himself had set sail!🤔

http://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlage...ublicationFile

Check out the second graph on page 7. There isn't even a 51% Syrian figure listed.

Anthony Garcia19 said:In recent history, Europeans have led the way in everything from science to culture, so they can't just be stupid. I'm pretty sure this is all being orchestrated.

From what I've been reading, I guess it's mostly just Turkey and the USA pulling the strings behind the scenes.

wanderingbadger77 said:Forget about Turkey. I'm reading their news right now and they aren't happy—not even a little bit. Their official statements on the matter are negative. They're basically mocking Europe.

I mean, they kind of brought this on themselves. Maybe the EU is just destined to become a Muslim entity at this rate.

Joshua Kelly51 said:Money isn't the issue here; the lack of consensus is. ☕

Given how things are looking across Europe right now, when you have this massive influx of people who aren't educated and don't even speak the language, money becomes a huge, huge problem.

The US is dealing with major financial strain because of migrants for those exact same reasons, too.

At the end of the day, I guess money is the decisive factor, the absolute key problem.

wanderingbadger77 said:I don't think anything will be shoved down our throats outright, but we won't even realize when it happens. It’ll be gradual and sneaky—starting with this material aid, then moving to "humanitarian assistance," until naturally, we become some kind of massive collection center. We won't even know what hit us.
In my view, this is a total nightmare scenario. Let's hope it doesn't come to this, but... I'm worried.

Yeah, I'm feeling the fear too, and reading through your posts, I guess I actually agree with a lot of what you guys are saying regarding the danger of these hotspots.
Right now, it feels like we're just working on getting rid of humanity.
I have no clue what comes next, but I'm definitely worried.

northernranger66 said:Just dive into everything on this site and you'll see why this whole mess is actually happening: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/explaining-the-syrian-conflict

Thanks.

northernranger66 said:They don't want them in the States because they're allies with the US, and it's in their interest to see Syria torn apart and Bashar al-Assad kicked out of power. It’s simple math: the US wants those pipelines running through Syria toward Europe so they can cash in while simultaneously screwing over Russia and their European-bound oil lines. Russia's got its Mediterranean access right there by Syria, so obviously, they're looking out for their own skin. Look at Turkey, they're US allies and they're working against Syria. Jordan? US ally, working against Syria. Saudi Arabia? US ally, working against Syria. If you want the deep dive on this whole mess, check out this page here---http://hr.sott.net/article/751-Objasnjenje-rata-u-Siriji-za-sve-koji-zele-znati

Yeah, okay, but whatever, I guess it's not like every single person from Syria (or Afghanistan) is gonna leave.
Even back in the day, when oil interests were a thing, they didn't just "clear out" over 50 million people from those countries.

velvetcyclist95 said:16:05 An Airbus A300 carrying 37 tons of humanitarian aid for refugees is scheduled to touch down at Osijek Airport tonight at 10 PM. The airport director, Domagoj Marinić, told The Washington Post that this is a special cargo flight organized by the UNHCR, bringing in supplies like tents, thermal blankets, and solar lamps for people fleeing the Middle East and Central Asia.

The Emirates are sending over tents and other gear...

Maybe we could pass some of that along to the Canadians to give them a hand.

I just can't help but wonder, even though I know we've gone over this before, why they’re so quick to send massive amounts of aid but don't actually want to see any Syrians or Afghans landing in their own country.

There's probably some reason for it that I'm just not privy to, I guess, so I can only speculate.

velvetcyclist95 said:Great. Now we just need to let the Greeks know. 🤦

He’ll probably give us an update this Sunday once that European Union meeting wraps up.

It’s honestly a pretty solid idea, I guess. If Greece is sitting there claiming they can't handle things on their own right now, maybe having something like 10,000 European Union officers on the ground would actually make a difference.

I mean, sure, I could say they aren't letting them into Greece, but honestly, if that’s the case, then maybe Greece should just start slapping them with massive fines. They're definitely the ones with the weakest hand here, I guess.