Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

Man, I guess if they don't like goulash, then maybe Canada isn't the place for them.

Jessica Gonzalez said:I’m not trying to say the USA or NATO shouldn't be held accountable—everyone bears some responsibility, and what happened in Iraq was a massive historical blunder that future generations will likely still be feeling. But at the end of the day, Syria is Syria, and it belongs to the Syrian people. I guess if they collectively allow barbarians to take everything over, then maybe they're facing the consequences of that choice, as harsh as that sounds. It seems to me that both individuals and large groups earn the most respect when they handle their own problems.

Even if you agree with that logic, you still can't just tell refugees, once they've knocked on your door, to "get lost" and head back to a country torn apart by war—even if sending them back would technically be the most efficient way to solve this whole mess.
First off, because people are fleeing actual war zones. We can't look at folks who have escaped certain death and tell them to go right back into the line of fire, regardless of their willpower or mindset.
Second, they won't listen. They are going to find a way to reach their destination no matter what. That means they'll end up causing friction in the countries they hit first—those that have already taken in a good portion of migrants—and clashing at the borders of those that refuse entry. It’s honestly better to manage a controlled flow of immigration into specific areas rather than risking total chaos.

Everything will eventually reach a breaking point, and then things might just fall apart. I guess you have to wonder how Germany could possibly handle taking in 800,000 asylum seekers in a single year.

This number is negligible; the US could absorb all of Syria without even noticing, whether they turn out to be highly successful or complete failures, they would simply be swallowed up by the population. The real issue is that the populations in Africa and Asia are exploding like weeds, yet they lack any of the necessary infrastructure to support such numbers; instead of implementing population control, they just keep multiplying. Only the Chinese seemed to have a sensible policy. It’s easy to talk when we're discussing 10 million coming to the US, but what happens when it becomes 100, 200, or 300 million? Half a billion? Certain African nations could hit over 500 million people by the year 2100... 🤣they will overwhelm the entire West

I couldn't care less personally—I'll be dead soon enough—but it is certainly something worth considering in the long term...

Michelle Palmer6 said:And Americans would love to start a war just to head off to Canada, Slovakia, or Bulgaria. Hold on—if we had a war recently, where did the refugees go?
People head wherever they believe life will be better. Sure, maybe they’re being selfish in that regard, seeking out opportunities that thousands of others can only dream of, or working incredibly hard to earn them. But even with all the migration perks available right now, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes for a single second.

I think our refugees mostly headed toward cities like Los Angeles or Chicago, or occasionally someone would send their kids to stay with relatives in Germany. In my own family from Canada, some came to the States, and two families went to a place like St. Louis because there was already a large Canadian community there before the war.

Let them go. Honestly, if I lived there, I’d probably do the same. I just wish they could just fly people straight to Turkey or Greece to save them from the misery and death, because they're going to make it to Germany one way or another. It makes no sense to play dumb and let people cross borders without papers or registration—who knows how many insurgents slipped through that way?

I honestly believe terrorists could find much more intelligent ways to deal with the threat of Europe drowning in truckloads of migrants.

Robin Fox2 said:This number is negligible; the US could absorb all of Syria without even noticing, whether they turn out to be highly successful or complete failures, they would simply be swallowed up by the population. The real issue is that the populations in Africa and Asia are exploding like weeds, yet they lack any of the necessary infrastructure to support such numbers; instead of implementing population control, they just keep multiplying. Only the Chinese seemed to have a sensible policy. It’s easy to talk when we're discussing 10 million coming to the US, but what happens when it becomes 100, 200, or 300 million? Half a billion? Certain African nations could hit over 500 million people by the year 2100... 🤣they will overwhelm the entire West

I couldn't care less personally—I'll be dead soon enough—but it is certainly something worth considering in the long term...

I'd say that’s also the mindset of the people whose actual job it is to think about the long term.😁

Griffs said:Did anyone actually think it was a smart move to head to the States and try their luck in MLS? Seems like an easy way to grab some quick cash.

No, obviously.

ruggedjackal46 said:I'd say that’s also the mindset of the people whose actual job it is to think about the long term.😁

Not really, people take all of this quite seriously. First off, like Jessica Gonzalez said when she was talking about how Israel is basically nothing without the military, financial, and political backing from the US—there just isn't a more powerful lobby in America, whether you're looking at politics, finance, or the media. Just try Googling how many famous Jewish actors there are and compare that to their actual percentage of the US population, which is only around 2-3%. Or look up what AIPAC actually is and how much influence they hold... Plus, you have Israel occupying prime territory while keeping Palestinians essentially trapped in a massive camp surrounded by walls and barbed wire. It’s funny because someone could make a similar argument about Americans being lazy, but then they come here and see the coffee shops packed tight all day long...

No matter how brutal things were under the regime in Iraq, everything just spiraled downhill once the Americans moved in. On top of that, you look at Libya and see a total collapse of normal life, all because those oil and gas concessions held by places like Italy and France were about to expire... Basically, under the guise of US and Western policy, any nation that poses a threat to Israel or holds energy resources outside of their control gets dismantled. That seems to be the common thread. It’s likely all just a setup for a potential showdown with Iran, which has been brewing for a long time now. Of course, I'm strictly talking politics here; personally, I couldn't care less if someone is Gambian, Jewish, American, or anything else...

When it comes to population numbers, we actually have a pretty good grasp on how many acres of farmland are needed to sustain a certain number of people, along with water requirements and environmental impacts... Honestly, I think the best way to manage population growth is through education. As people become more educated, they tend to focus on providing better opportunities for their kids, which usually means having fewer children to ensure stability. There’s an excellent documentary on this from the BBC—these aren't just my opinions, they're widely accepted facts... Now, does anyone else wonder if there are intentional efforts to limit population through things like water quality, food supply, pollution, or those infamous chemtrails? It's tough to say because it starts sounding like a conspiracy theory, though that doesn't mean it isn't true... 😁

James Anderson5 said:Not really, people take all of this quite seriously. First off, like Jessica Gonzalez said when she was talking about how Israel is basically nothing without the military, financial, and political backing from the US—there just isn't a more powerful lobby in America, whether you're looking at politics, finance, or the media. Just try Googling how many famous Jewish actors there are and compare that to their actual percentage of the US population, which is only around 2-3%. Or look up what AIPAC actually is and how much influence they hold... Plus, you have Israel occupying prime territory while keeping Palestinians essentially trapped in a massive camp surrounded by walls and barbed wire. It’s funny because someone could make a similar argument about Americans being lazy, but then they come here and see the coffee shops packed tight all day long...

No matter how brutal things were under the regime in Iraq, everything just spiraled downhill once the Americans moved in. On top of that, you look at Libya and see a total collapse of normal life, all because those oil and gas concessions held by places like Italy and France were about to expire... Basically, under the guise of US and Western policy, any nation that poses a threat to Israel or holds energy resources outside of their control gets dismantled. That seems to be the common thread. It’s likely all just a setup for a potential showdown with Iran, which has been brewing for a long time now. Of course, I'm strictly talking politics here; personally, I couldn't care less if someone is Gambian, Jewish, American, or anything else...

When it comes to population numbers, we actually have a pretty good grasp on how many acres of farmland are needed to sustain a certain number of people, along with water requirements and environmental impacts... Honestly, I think the best way to manage population growth is through education. As people become more educated, they tend to focus on providing better opportunities for their kids, which usually means having fewer children to ensure stability. There’s an excellent documentary on this from the BBC—these aren't just my opinions, they're widely accepted facts... Now, does anyone else wonder if there are intentional efforts to limit population through things like water quality, food supply, pollution, or those infamous chemtrails? It's tough to say because it starts sounding like a conspiracy theory, though that doesn't mean it isn't true... 😁

I was also thinking about Americans who might blow an already precarious situation in that region just to serve some short-term interest.

When it comes to overpopulation, we actually know exactly how many hectares of arable land are needed to sustain a specific number of people, along with the water requirements, environmental impacts, and so on.

Right now, we produce enough food to feed the entire population, but the distribution is where things fall apart. The issue is that producers grow food to sell it, not to feed humanity, which leads to tons of food just rotting away.

The best solution for population control is actually education. As people become more educated, they tend to want to provide more for their children, which requires more money, so they naturally limit the number of kids they have. There’s an excellent documentary by the BBC on this; these aren't even my personal views, just established facts. Now, whether anyone else is intentionally limiting the population through degraded water quality, food shortages, pollution, those famous chemtrails, or whatever else—it’s hard to say because it leans so heavily into conspiracy territory. Not that it isn't true, of course. 😁

I don't think these catastrophes are the result of some grand conspiracy; rather, they stem from general systemic inertia, human shortsightedness, or just the selfish pursuit of profit.

I agree regarding education, though that seems to be the one area where we invest the least. Where are the actual centers for learning? And who actually has the cash to pay for school these days?

James Anderson5 said:Not really, people take all of this quite seriously. First off, like Jessica Gonzalez said when she was talking about how Israel is basically nothing without the military, financial, and political backing from the US—there just isn't a more powerful lobby in America, whether you're looking at politics, finance, or the media. Just try Googling how many famous Jewish actors there are and compare that to their actual percentage of the US population, which is only around 2-3%. Or look up what AIPAC actually is and how much influence they hold... Plus, you have Israel occupying prime territory while keeping Palestinians essentially trapped in a massive camp surrounded by walls and barbed wire. It’s funny because someone could make a similar argument about Americans being lazy, but then they come here and see the coffee shops packed tight all day long...

No matter how brutal things were under the regime in Iraq, everything just spiraled downhill once the Americans moved in. On top of that, you look at Libya and see a total collapse of normal life, all because those oil and gas concessions held by places like Italy and France were about to expire... Basically, under the guise of US and Western policy, any nation that poses a threat to Israel or holds energy resources outside of their control gets dismantled. That seems to be the common thread. It’s likely all just a setup for a potential showdown with Iran, which has been brewing for a long time now. Of course, I'm strictly talking politics here; personally, I couldn't care less if someone is Gambian, Jewish, American, or anything else...

When it comes to population numbers, we actually have a pretty good grasp on how many acres of farmland are needed to sustain a certain number of people, along with water requirements and environmental impacts... Honestly, I think the best way to manage population growth is through education. As people become more educated, they tend to focus on providing better opportunities for their kids, which usually means having fewer children to ensure stability. There’s an excellent documentary on this from the BBC—these aren't just my opinions, they're widely accepted facts... Now, does anyone else wonder if there are intentional efforts to limit population through things like water quality, food supply, pollution, or those infamous chemtrails? It's tough to say because it starts sounding like a conspiracy theory, though that doesn't mean it isn't true... 😁

What are you even talking about? That’s exactly the point—the Jewish community protects its own people by any means necessary. Their diaspora supports Israelis, unlike the rest of the Arab world, which I guess might be happier if all the Syrians just starved. Why don't these refugees go to Dubai, Qatar, or Saudi Arabia? Those are places and cities that are way wealthier than Europe or other Arab nations, yet the refugees don't head there? I guess I'd love an explanation for that.

Here are a few cartoons as well: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34132308

I haven't really dug deep into this specific situation—what's actually driving such a massive surge of refugees right at this moment? I mean, all that heavy chaos over there has been dragging on for years, yet it feels like tens and tens of thousands of people are only just now deciding to make the trek toward America.

You're definitely not the only one asking that. I guess it’s true that the bigger surge didn't really pick up until the middle of this year. There were those reports last year about mass sinkings in the Mediterranean, but nobody was really talking about a "North America route" back then. It feels like a lot of it might just be a business that's developed over time. Maybe some people are making a decent living off the migration situation, and it's probably easy to spread stories about a fairy-tale Europe within those refugee communities. You have people waiting near the tunnel between the Island and France dreaming about studying at Cambridge when they barely have enough to eat.

Those few horrific accidents were basically what opened up the North American route. When you pay someone to get you into Europe, they’re the ones picking the path. And clearly, people weren't willing to shell out for the sea route anymore—not nearly as many as before.

It's also possible they're prepping some kind of offensive against ISIS, so they're letting smugglers basically evacuate people.

Or maybe it's just that the collective mindset shifted; enough people finally decided they'd had enough and dragged all the indecisive ones along with them.

Jessica Gonzalez said:What are you even talking about? That’s exactly the point—the Jewish community protects its own people by any means necessary. Their diaspora supports Israelis, unlike the rest of the Arab world, which I guess might be happier if all the Syrians just starved. Why don't these refugees go to Dubai, Qatar, or Saudi Arabia? Those are places and cities that are way wealthier than Europe or other Arab nations, yet the refugees don't head there? I guess I'd love an explanation for that.

A good chunk of what you're saying doesn't really hold water. First off, the number of refugees from Syria in Europe is actually pretty minor compared to the total number of refugees overall—it's worth noting for the context of this whole discussion.

http://www.mercycorps.org/articles/t...t-syria-crisis

It’s estimated that about 4 million people fled Syria, and 90% of them went to neighboring countries like Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. Everyone here is making such a huge drama over a relatively small group of people, who were likely from a higher social class that could actually afford to pay smugglers to get to Europe. The rest are most likely folks who barely made it to the border. For instance, Turkey took in 1.6 million people while Jordan took 600,000. Only about 200,000 people made it to Europe, if that...

The reason they didn't go to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, or Oman is simply because Syria doesn't border them; instead, it borders the very countries taking in the highest numbers. On top of that, those wealthy nations haven't offered asylum, though they do provide financial aid...

Also, you're being incredibly harsh toward these refugees, calling them cowards and such. I'm not sure if you realize that the country you live in wouldn't even exist if the UN had been given the green light to use force early on to prevent the separation from America, rather than just for the first few weeks. Or if they'd been allowed to arrest all the initial political leaders right at the start, or later openly bomb Chicago and other major cities with massive consequences? Or what if we hadn't been recognized, or only partially recognized by certain countries? Or if specific regions were granted autonomy or taken over entirely? We were bombed because we decided to break away and nobody acknowledged us, which would have made us a "disruptive factor." Great powers can bring any smaller nation, like Syria, to its knees and plunge it into total chaos... and theoretically, they could have done that to us too, in which case having an M48 in your hands wouldn't have made any difference at all...

And as far as Israel and American policy goes, I can't think of any other two countries that have sparked more wars and civilian casualties over the last 50 years. I won't say American policy wasn't a much lesser evil than Russian policy toward the end of the Cold War, but that's a whole different conversation...

Life, life always comes first. Watch your head; you can figure out the rest later.

And look, nobody’s actually chained to the dirt they were born on. If it’s your fight, fight. If it’s not? Run. You aren't stupid. Besides, graves are everywhere and they all look pretty much the same—let's not get too carried away with all this "duty" talk.

James Anderson5 said:A good chunk of what you're saying doesn't really hold water. First off, the number of refugees from Syria in Europe is actually pretty minor compared to the total number of refugees overall—it's worth noting for the context of this whole discussion.

http://www.mercycorps.org/articles/t...t-syria-crisis

It’s estimated that about 4 million people fled Syria, and 90% of them went to neighboring countries like Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. Everyone here is making such a huge drama over a relatively small group of people, who were likely from a higher social class that could actually afford to pay smugglers to get to Europe. The rest are most likely folks who barely made it to the border. For instance, Turkey took in 1.6 million people while Jordan took 600,000. Only about 200,000 people made it to Europe, if that...

The reason they didn't go to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, or Oman is simply because Syria doesn't border them; instead, it borders the very countries taking in the highest numbers. On top of that, those wealthy nations haven't offered asylum, though they do provide financial aid...

Also, you're being incredibly harsh toward these refugees, calling them cowards and such. I'm not sure if you realize that the country you live in wouldn't even exist if the UN had been given the green light to use force early on to prevent the separation from America, rather than just for the first few weeks. Or if they'd been allowed to arrest all the initial political leaders right at the start, or later openly bomb Chicago and other major cities with massive consequences? Or what if we hadn't been recognized, or only partially recognized by certain countries? Or if specific regions were granted autonomy or taken over entirely? We were bombed because we decided to break away and nobody acknowledged us, which would have made us a "disruptive factor." Great powers can bring any smaller nation, like Syria, to its knees and plunge it into total chaos... and theoretically, they could have done that to us too, in which case having an M48 in your hands wouldn't have made any difference at all...

And as far as Israel and American policy goes, I can't think of any other two countries that have sparked more wars and civilian casualties over the last 50 years. I won't say American policy wasn't a much lesser evil than Russian policy toward the end of the Cold War, but that's a whole different conversation...

Massive signature.

They aren't heading to the Arab world because they aren't being allowed in...

And honestly, life is better in Germany or Sweden, so I can't say I blame them. It’s not my business—I’m neither Swabian nor Swedish—but they're watching their own neighborhoods turn into slums, not ours...🙂

James Anderson5 said:A good chunk of what you're saying doesn't really hold water. First off, the number of refugees from Syria in Europe is actually pretty minor compared to the total number of refugees overall—it's worth noting for the context of this whole discussion.

http://www.mercycorps.org/articles/t...t-syria-crisis

It’s estimated that about 4 million people fled Syria, and 90% of them went to neighboring countries like Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. Everyone here is making such a huge drama over a relatively small group of people, who were likely from a higher social class that could actually afford to pay smugglers to get to Europe. The rest are most likely folks who barely made it to the border. For instance, Turkey took in 1.6 million people while Jordan took 600,000. Only about 200,000 people made it to Europe, if that...

The reason they didn't go to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, or Oman is simply because Syria doesn't border them; instead, it borders the very countries taking in the highest numbers. On top of that, those wealthy nations haven't offered asylum, though they do provide financial aid...

Also, you're being incredibly harsh toward these refugees, calling them cowards and such. I'm not sure if you realize that the country you live in wouldn't even exist if the UN had been given the green light to use force early on to prevent the separation from America, rather than just for the first few weeks. Or if they'd been allowed to arrest all the initial political leaders right at the start, or later openly bomb Chicago and other major cities with massive consequences? Or what if we hadn't been recognized, or only partially recognized by certain countries? Or if specific regions were granted autonomy or taken over entirely? We were bombed because we decided to break away and nobody acknowledged us, which would have made us a "disruptive factor." Great powers can bring any smaller nation, like Syria, to its knees and plunge it into total chaos... and theoretically, they could have done that to us too, in which case having an M48 in your hands wouldn't have made any difference at all...

And as far as Israel and American policy goes, I can't think of any other two countries that have sparked more wars and civilian casualties over the last 50 years. I won't say American policy wasn't a much lesser evil than Russian policy toward the end of the Cold War, but that's a whole different conversation...

Do you even watch the news? They were talking on the evening broadcast tonight about both the North American route and the "African" route. The boats coming from Africa are mostly just young men. In Budapest, you mostly see groups of 5 or 6 young guys fighting over trains. Those aren't really refugees.

As for your point about Saudi Arabia and the others, nice try, I had a good laugh. The truth is they just don't want them; to them, these are just poor, dirty people. Instead, they have even poorer workers from India and Bangladesh. It’s all just business, and to them, these people are just pawns and statistics. That's why they have visas for them.