UN scared of globalism collapse

[Texan]

If we try to clean up Mexico, the whole world will scream that we are invading Mexico and taking advantage of them. If they will give me my 3 friends back, I will make my government behave "better" towards Mexicans. Until then, I would build a big wall until they ask for help on our terms. Anything else is giving them our country. There are already millions of them that we are supporting.

Well, considering what has happened in the past with US trying to "clean up" places I think the rest of the world has a point, don't you, Tex?

However, Mexico is just one place "South of the Border". What are you suggesting should happen to say, el Salvador or Guatemala? How about that hell-hole, Panama? We've seen the consequences of US efforts to clean that place up, now haven't we?

What you need to do is take control of your Government and actually start treating people, "South of the Border" as human beings, rather than just a place to get cheap, illegal immigrants from, Tex. You know, the sort that sustain your agricultural sector? Or clean your houses or mind your kids...

Here's how it works. The US doesn't carry my personal water and I have no more say than the next American. South America and Mexico have seen more than their share of tin pot dictators since long before the US existed and we are not responsible for cleaning them up or accepting their trash. If you want us to be more isolationist you have my vote. Your suggestion that the US causes unrest all around us is a joke. Ha ha.

[brian ross]

If we try to clean up Mexico, the whole world will scream that we are invading Mexico and taking advantage of them. If they will give me my 3 friends back, I will make my government behave "better" towards Mexicans. Until then, I would build a big wall until they ask for help on our terms. Anything else is giving them our country. There are already millions of them that we are supporting.

Well, considering what has happened in the past with US trying to "clean up" places I think the rest of the world has a point, don't you, Tex?

However, Mexico is just one place "South of the Border". What are you suggesting should happen to say, el Salvador or Guatemala? How about that hell-hole, Panama? We've seen the consequences of US efforts to clean that place up, now haven't we?

What you need to do is take control of your Government and actually start treating people, "South of the Border" as human beings, rather than just a place to get cheap, illegal immigrants from, Tex. You know, the sort that sustain your agricultural sector? Or clean your houses or mind your kids...

Here's how it works. The US doesn't carry my personal water and I have no more say than the next American. South America and Mexico have seen more than their share of tin pot dictators since long before the US existed and we are not responsible for cleaning them up or accepting their trash. If you want us to be more isolationist you have my vote. Your suggestion that the US causes unrest all around us is a joke. Ha ha.

Oh, dear, another American who disowns his own government and refuses to accept responsibility for it's actions. Why am I not surprised? I think you need a re-education in simply civics, Tex. Perhaps if Bernie wins the next election that might be possible. I don't want the US to become isolationist, I want it to become more responsible. You can still use your vast war making capabilities but perhaps of instead of doing it for big businesses like United Fruit or Halliburton you do it for the local people? You know, the ones you don't want making a trek to your southern border? You need to give them a reason to stay in their own countries, rather than wanting to travel to yours.

I think we should leave this conversation here. I'll let you have the last word 'cause I know you want it but I don't think I'll bother replying to it. OK?

[Texan]

If we try to clean up Mexico, the whole world will scream that we are invading Mexico and taking advantage of them. If they will give me my 3 friends back, I will make my government behave "better" towards Mexicans. Until then, I would build a big wall until they ask for help on our terms. Anything else is giving them our country. There are already millions of them that we are supporting.

Well, considering what has happened in the past with US trying to "clean up" places I think the rest of the world has a point, don't you, Tex?

However, Mexico is just one place "South of the Border". What are you suggesting should happen to say, el Salvador or Guatemala? How about that hell-hole, Panama? We've seen the consequences of US efforts to clean that place up, now haven't we?

What you need to do is take control of your Government and actually start treating people, "South of the Border" as human beings, rather than just a place to get cheap, illegal immigrants from, Tex. You know, the sort that sustain your agricultural sector? Or clean your houses or mind your kids...

Here's how it works. The US doesn't carry my personal water and I have no more say than the next American. South America and Mexico have seen more than their share of tin pot dictators since long before the US existed and we are not responsible for cleaning them up or accepting their trash. If you want us to be more isolationist you have my vote. Your suggestion that the US causes unrest all around us is a joke. Ha ha.

Oh, dear, another American who disowns his own government and refuses to accept responsibility for it's actions. Why am I not surprised? I think you need a re-education in simply civics, Tex. Perhaps if Bernie wins the next election that might be possible. I don't want the US to become isolationist, I want it to become more responsible. You can still use your vast war making capabilities but perhaps of instead of doing it for big businesses like United Fruit or Halliburton you do it for the local people? You know, the ones you don't want making a trek to your southern border? You need to give them a reason to stay in their own countries, rather than wanting to travel to yours.

I think we should leave this conversation here. I'll let you have the last word 'cause I know you want it but I don't think I'll bother replying to it. OK?

OK. Have fun electing Bernie.

[The4thEstate]

4E! Long time no see. Good to see your posts again

Thanks, Reebster! The feeling is mutual.

In our western "first world" countries, we have a lot of citizens who are homeless and impoverished. In my view, we should be putting our respective countries first, before we worry about the rest of the world, and opening the door refugees. When a horde of refugees comes into the country, the resources that governments have are spread thinly. This lessens the chance of our own people receiving help.

I couldn't agree more. Just as a good parent observes the rule of "Family First," putting one's own children and household security ahead of giving homeless people a place to sleep, a responsible national leader should always look after his own country's poorest citizens before providing free housing, food, education and medical care to other nations' needy.

I once attended an "indigenous mental health course" for my job two years ago. I have... let's say, unconventional opinions about the Aboriginals. At least on the political stage. The lecturer was a bit of a racist and kept crapping on about Aboriginal oppression and the like, and how bad whites are. Myself and three other people were the only whites in the room. But anyway, a young Aboriginal fellow raised a very good point which I cannot help but agree with.

"Why is it that the Government falls over themselves sending funds to other countries and accepting refugees, yet our communities in the desert get shut down and we can't even get access to fresh water."

Why indeed? I'm sure he received no satisfactory answer.

Even the Aboriginals, our nation's first people, dip out in favour of foreign invaders and refugees!

In a nutshell, I believe a nation is responsible for itself before anybody else. I don't even agree with sending funds to third world countries. What help did Australia get from anywhere else amidst the bushfire crisis?

Of course, our American allies came to help. Yet America continuously gets shunned by leftwingers. Funny that.

Glad to see us lending a hand to our friends across the pond.

As for lefties pooh-poohing such gestures, I'm come to realize that they're caught up in the romance of identity politics and the glorification of victimhood. So it never matters what America does, because every morality play needs a villain, and it's just too easy to assign the role to the world's most successful nation.

[Nom De Plume]

So, we should just turn our backs on the Asylum Seekers who need a place of refuge, Tex? How kind of you. We aren't inviting anybody in (despite what our present Government may believe and what the Tories here state) to "exploit us". We expect them to pull their weight and make a living here, as refugees fleeing their old countries for their new.

I'm saying the choice is yours to make. If you want to vet refugees or demand that they not weigh down your economy, that's your right. If you want to give your country to the rest of the world, that's your right as well.

Under the UN Convention of Refugees, you aren't allowed to "vet" anybody before they make a claim for Asylum, Tex.

And that, in a nutshell, is why globalism is collapsing all over the world.

The globalists believe Third World hordes have a right to cross sovereign borders, live for free on taxpayer-funded services, and move into stable, civilized neighborhoods -- regardless of their true motives, their ability to assimilate into the existing culture, and their effect on the local residents ... who generally don't even get a vote in the matter.

Does anybody think the average German would have supported taking in more than a million Muslims with largely unchecked backgrounds? And of course, the Merkels of the world feign shock when these "asylum seekers" assault women and girls on New Year's Eve and drive trucks through Christmas markets. Gee, who'd have guessed that members of a violent, exploitative, misogynistic culture would want to continue being violent, exploitative and misogynistic?

Ah, well ... fittingly, the globalists and their bureaucratic institutions are imploding from their own arrogance and stupidity. Their open-door immigration policies were their undoing, because nothing is more precious to the average working man and woman than home and family.

As for successful Western nations' obligation toward refugees: We have none. We may help them in their own countries if we so choose. But a national leader's first responsibility is to the safety and prosperity of his own citizens, just as a parent's first responsibility is to the safety and prosperity of his/her own family.

And if refugees want freedom, they can start their own revolution. We did.

4E! Long time no see. Good to see your posts again

In our western "first world" countries, we have a lot of citizens who are homeless and impoverished. In my view, we should be putting our respective countries first, before we worry about the rest of the world, and opening the door refugees. When a horde of refugees comes into the country, the resources that governments have are spread thinly. This lessens the chance of our own people receiving help.

I once attended an "indigenous mental health course" for my job two years ago. I have... let's say, unconventional opinions about the Aboriginals. At least on the political stage. The lecturer was a bit of a racist and kept crapping on about Aboriginal oppression and the like, and how bad whites are. Myself and three other people were the only whites in the room. But anyway, a young Aboriginal fellow raised a very good point which I cannot help but agree with.

"Why is it that the Government falls over themselves sending funds to other countries and accepting refugees, yet our communities in the desert get shut down and we can't even get access to fresh water."

Even the Aboriginals, our nation's first people, dip out in favour of foreign invaders and refugees!

In a nutshell, I believe a nation is responsible for itself before anybody else. I don't even agree with sending funds to third world countries. What help did Australia get from anywhere else amidst the bushfire crisis?

Of course, our American allies came to help. Yet America continuously gets shunned by leftwingers. Funny that.

Do you realize how socialist you sound... Essentially, you want to deny international Humanitarian funding then use that cash cow in order to spoon feed services to the poor Australians! BR would be delighted!

[The4thEstate]

If we try to clean up Mexico, the whole world will scream that we are invading Mexico and taking advantage of them. If they will give me my 3 friends back, I will make my government behave "better" towards Mexicans. Until then, I would build a big wall until they ask for help on our terms. Anything else is giving them our country. There are already millions of them that we are supporting.

Well, considering what has happened in the past with US trying to "clean up" places I think the rest of the world has a point, don't you, Tex?

However, Mexico is just one place "South of the Border". What are you suggesting should happen to say, el Salvador or Guatemala? How about that hell-hole, Panama? We've seen the consequences of US efforts to clean that place up, now haven't we?

What you need to do is take control of your Government and actually start treating people, "South of the Border" as human beings, rather than just a place to get cheap, illegal immigrants from, Tex. You know, the sort that sustain your agricultural sector? Or clean your houses or mind your kids...

Here's how it works. The US doesn't carry my personal water and I have no more say than the next American. South America and Mexico have seen more than their share of tin pot dictators since long before the US existed and we are not responsible for cleaning them up or accepting their trash. If you want us to be more isolationist you have my vote. Your suggestion that the US causes unrest all around us is a joke. Ha ha.

Oh, dear, another American who disowns his own government and refuses to accept responsibility for it's actions. Why am I not surprised? I think you need a re-education in simply civics, Tex. Perhaps if Bernie wins the next election that might be possible. I don't want the US to become isolationist, I want it to become more responsible. You can still use your vast war making capabilities but perhaps of instead of doing it for big businesses like United Fruit or Halliburton you do it for the local people? You know, the ones you don't want making a trek to your southern border? You need to give them a reason to stay in their own countries, rather than wanting to travel to yours.

I think we should leave this conversation here. I'll let you have the last word 'cause I know you want it but I don't think I'll bother replying to it. OK?

Oh dear, Brian exemplifies the classic quandary of the old school lefty who, rather than adjusting to changing realities, continues to dust off his outdated morality play script and continue to read from it. That's because pride is a harsh slavemaster, and no self-respecting left-winger would ever praise Trump, lest he be banished from the cool kids' lunch table at Socialist Tech High School.

But in the end, it doesn't matter what lefties like Brian think of Trump and America in general. The laugh's on them when they continue to rubber-stamp him as an imperialist, interventionist president when in fact, he's a disruptor whose policies fly in the face of the military-industrial complex. That's why the establishment of both political parties despises him -- because as the Mafia would say, he's"bad for business."

Tonight's State of the Union address only underscores the fact that Trump is less of a nation meddler than any president in recent memory: Not that I ever expect Brian to swallow his pride long enough to acknowledge it:

Here's an excerpt from Trump's speech:

As we defend American lives, we are working to end America’s wars in the Middle East.

In Afghanistan, the determination and valor of our warfighters has allowed us to make tremendous progress, and peace talks are underway. I am not looking to kill hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan, many of them innocent. It is also not our function to serve other nations as a law enforcement agency. These are warfighters, the best in the world, and they either want to fight to win or not fight at all. We are working to finally end America’s longest war and bring our troops back home!

Gee, what a warmonger!

[The Reboot]

I'm saying the choice is yours to make. If you want to vet refugees or demand that they not weigh down your economy, that's your right. If you want to give your country to the rest of the world, that's your right as well.

Under the UN Convention of Refugees, you aren't allowed to "vet" anybody before they make a claim for Asylum, Tex.

And that, in a nutshell, is why globalism is collapsing all over the world.

The globalists believe Third World hordes have a right to cross sovereign borders, live for free on taxpayer-funded services, and move into stable, civilized neighborhoods -- regardless of their true motives, their ability to assimilate into the existing culture, and their effect on the local residents ... who generally don't even get a vote in the matter.

Does anybody think the average German would have supported taking in more than a million Muslims with largely unchecked backgrounds? And of course, the Merkels of the world feign shock when these "asylum seekers" assault women and girls on New Year's Eve and drive trucks through Christmas markets. Gee, who'd have guessed that members of a violent, exploitative, misogynistic culture would want to continue being violent, exploitative and misogynistic?

Ah, well ... fittingly, the globalists and their bureaucratic institutions are imploding from their own arrogance and stupidity. Their open-door immigration policies were their undoing, because nothing is more precious to the average working man and woman than home and family.

As for successful Western nations' obligation toward refugees: We have none. We may help them in their own countries if we so choose. But a national leader's first responsibility is to the safety and prosperity of his own citizens, just as a parent's first responsibility is to the safety and prosperity of his/her own family.

And if refugees want freedom, they can start their own revolution. We did.

4E! Long time no see. Good to see your posts again

In our western "first world" countries, we have a lot of citizens who are homeless and impoverished. In my view, we should be putting our respective countries first, before we worry about the rest of the world, and opening the door refugees. When a horde of refugees comes into the country, the resources that governments have are spread thinly. This lessens the chance of our own people receiving help.

I once attended an "indigenous mental health course" for my job two years ago. I have... let's say, unconventional opinions about the Aboriginals. At least on the political stage. The lecturer was a bit of a racist and kept crapping on about Aboriginal oppression and the like, and how bad whites are. Myself and three other people were the only whites in the room. But anyway, a young Aboriginal fellow raised a very good point which I cannot help but agree with.

"Why is it that the Government falls over themselves sending funds to other countries and accepting refugees, yet our communities in the desert get shut down and we can't even get access to fresh water."

Even the Aboriginals, our nation's first people, dip out in favour of foreign invaders and refugees!

In a nutshell, I believe a nation is responsible for itself before anybody else. I don't even agree with sending funds to third world countries. What help did Australia get from anywhere else amidst the bushfire crisis?

Of course, our American allies came to help. Yet America continuously gets shunned by leftwingers. Funny that.

Do you realize how socialist you sound... Essentially, you want to deny international Humanitarian funding then use that cash cow in order to spoon feed services to the poor Australians! BR would be delighted!

You can label me with anything you like. It's cute that you think I care, Nom. And no... the charlatan would not be delighted. He's been making a dick of himself for the past couple of days, in this thread, demanding that Americans help the refugees and for some reason, blames Texan for his nation's government's actions and being a disrespectful little racist bigot towards the Yanks.

[The Reboot]

But in the end, it doesn't matter what lefties like Brian think of Trump and America in general.

No, it doesn't. It's always amused me that people from other countries on the "Hate America" bandwagon sit there and type up excremental diatribes on what a nation that is not their own, should and shouldn't do. I've been cringing so hard at his "exchange" with Texan that I just about lost my teeth.

[The4thEstate]

But in the end, it doesn't matter what lefties like Brian think of Trump and America in general.

No, it doesn't. It's always amused me that people from other countries on the "Hate America" bandwagon sit there and type up excremental diatribes on what a nation that is not their own, should and shouldn't do. I've been cringing so hard at his "exchange" with Texan that I just about lost my teeth.

Ah, don't worry about that. As Americans, we're used to getting bad-mouthed by the squeaky little voices of the world's Liliputians.

[Nom De Plume]

You can label me with anything you like. It's cute that you think I care, Nom. And no... the charlatan would not be delighted. He's been making a dick of himself for the past couple of days, in this thread, demanding that Americans help the refugees and for some reason, blames Texan for his nation's government's actions and being a disrespectful little racist bigot towards the Yanks.

Then why are you offering up socialist solutions? What right-winger does that?