About the Muslim refugees

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

No, you're definitely racist. Sorry to break it to ya.

[Gent♥]

Hurr durr durr

 

Uh, yeah, I'm gonna soak the warning point for this?

 

You're an absolute moron. Like, reading this shit is making me sad I share a continent with you.

[NOpainNOgain]

Uh, yeah, I'm gonna soak the warning point for this?

 

You're an absolute moron. Like, reading this shit is making me sad I share a continent with you.

 

At least iam not the only one that believes in this. Lots of people start waking up and understand the meaning of letting all those "peaceful" people inside their countries. It means life saving but it also means letting Islam taking over their countries. Like it or not its the truth. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdJ3wyvMO40

How can you watch this and tell me that Iam a moron? You find this peaceful ? 

How can you watch this freaking video and stay clam? I cant. I cry when i see this, I swear. 

[Professional Map Painter]

I guess Iraq was so big a fuck-up and Afghanistan such an unfinished job that nobody wants to actively find a solution to stop people from being forced to flee their homes for their lives. It would also help if things like this could be stopped, so that genuine refugees have more of a chance.

 

Uh, yeah, I'm gonna soak the warning point for this?

 

You're an absolute moron. Like, reading this shit is making me sad I share a continent with you.

You can't reason with BNP wannabes, just as you can't reason with Corbynites.

[Karam]

Sorry, but your estimation is 100% fallacious. Where did you get it from?

https://sites.google.com/site/islamicthreatsimplified/home/how-many-muslims-are-there-how-many-are-jihadis

 

Good lord, yes a random site to pick random number. Let me drop some knowledge on you,

 

Do you even KNOW the meaning of the word Jihad ? Nope. so let's see

 

There is more than one type of "jihad" for a muslim

 

- Jihad against yourself to not fall for sins

- Jihad against shaytan (the devil) and not falling to his bad desires

- Jihad against those who do bad stuff in the community "

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided." 16:125

any words about killing or forcing ? no

That is what i recall .. the last type of Jihad is against none muslims who invaded muslim countries or threatened to invade them or hurt muslims in one way or the other. In your dictionary it is called "self defense" in ours it is called Jihad. Jihad is NOT saying "ALLAHU AKBAR" and killing/bombing any thing in your way, that is what extremists do and what mainstream media wants you to believe and sadly enough, most believe it. 

[Hyperqube]

To sum it up, Europe is tired of all those emigrations.

So ... england is not TTT's country? well

 

I live in the country who has, per capita, most ISIS fighters

I live in a street with lots of muslims; despite being a 'typical' non-muslim, white european myself.

I got my family tree that traces back IIRC, like 12 generations, and as far as data is available - all locals.

 

And you know what the MOST annoying thing is that I had to suffer in my entire stay amongst these 'evil' people? Why my (muslim) neighbours had a baby when it cried at night, I had trouble sleeping.

 

 

And you know what, I WAS tired of that (just not in the way you mean).

 

Islam is not a peaceful religion, almost all of the terrorists are Muslims and Islam is the main reason why they do what they do, I haven't seen a Christian terrorist since Anders Behring Breivik, And i wouldn't call him an insane terrorist since he had some reasonable reasons for doing what he did there. Nothing will change my mind.

...

Iam not racist, iam honest.

yeah ... see ... that's why people call you a racist. (though perhaps bigot would be more accurate? I dunno)

 

You do realise that your claims are verifiable, right?

 

You say all almost all of the terrorists are Muslims …

- How about the 94% of the U.S. terrorists that aren’t ?

- How about the 99.6% of the European terrorists that aren’t ?

 

And ... oh boy ... Breivik? Really? The guy has had 2 independent psyc evals. One called him a paranoid schizo, while the other narcissistic personality disorder ... A.k.a. Breivik WAS an insane terrorist.

 

You wanna claim "he had some reasonable reasons" to dress up as policeman, go to a camp, ask the children to gather around, and then open fire, because he disagreed with their political points of view?

 

 

 

 

You're perhaps 'honest' in that you might think you're telling the truth ... but that's where it ends.

When you spread lies, hate & fear ... you shouldn't be surprized you're not taken seriously.

 

some of the Muslim children that grow up in the Europe countries join afterwards to ISIS and other terrorist organizations

And some muslims run away from ISIS. To ... for example ... Europe?

 

You belong to your countries.

...

Soon all Europe will be covered with Palestine flags and you will keep screaming Boycott Israel all over Europe

... oh boy ... look, really, thats ... uneducated  (to prevent myself of using profanity)

 

You DO realise, that the Isreal/palastine conflict is EXACTLY what you're aruging against right? That the area, like, 50 years ago almost completely muslim, but in that timespan, millions of jew immigrated into the region. That the palastinians are fighting, because - in a nutshell - it's their country they've been evicted from?

 

The MOMENT you argued that people belong in their own land - you're argued AGAINST Isreal.

If you truely beleive people belong in their own country ... where's your Palestine flag? why aren't you screaming Boycott Israel?

 

 

أشد الÙاقة عدم العقل

If they will keep going to Europe, I would prefer not traveling in Europe anymore

Yeah, see, did you know that globally, according to a PEW poll, 72% of muslims considers violent acts against civilians NEVER justifiable? You on the other hand say Breivik had reasonable reasons to gun down children in cold blood.

 

Sorry mate, but if I get to chose between some random muslim and you? Believe you me, it's an easy choice, and it ain't gonna be you ...

[0123847a;fsdaklf]

Are people on here actually arguing FOR Islam? What the shit guys?

[polar]

The forums bring together such an amazingly diverse group of people together of all ages, from all walks of life, and from so many different countries. Even though these forums aren't the best place for these kinds of discussions, as moderators we try our best to avoid censoring opinions because we believe that everyone here, with their own diverse, unique cultural background, can contribute, can discuss, can maybe open the minds of others. 

 

But let me put it bluntly. Racial or religious intolerance of any kind has no place here. If you have such rigid, parochial views, go find a forum with people who think like you do and live in your fantasy land there. Don't bother posting if you can't be bothered to engage productively in discussion. All such posts have been removed.

[77777777777777777777777777]

Good lord, yes a random site to pick random number. Let me drop some knowledge on you,

 

Do you even KNOW the meaning of the word Jihad ? Nope. so let's see

 

There is more than one type of "jihad" for a muslim

 

- Jihad against yourself to not fall for sins

- Jihad against shaytan (the devil) and not falling to his bad desires

- Jihad against those who do bad stuff in the community "

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided." 16:125

any words about killing or forcing ? no

That is what i recall .. the last type of Jihad is against none muslims who invaded muslim countries or threatened to invade them or hurt muslims in one way or the other. In your dictionary it is called "self defense" in ours it is called Jihad. Jihad is NOT saying "ALLAHU AKBAR" and killing/bombing any thing in your way, that is what extremists do and what mainstream media wants you to believe and sadly enough, most believe it. 

 

Hahaha, so not only is it fine for you to use a completely random number (your words) but when I do it (which I'm not) my statement is invalid, but you're also calling this website random? Have fun being in denial, I can't reason with you.

Saying "this is what the media wants you to see" works against most people, but I myself live in the middle of the radical islamist conflict. I get to live an awful life in terrible conditions because of it, my father's salary has been largely reduced because of it and how it has utterly destroyed the Syrian economy (still enough to sustain his family, but nowhere near what he should be earning). He has seen death countless times on his business trips to Syria, innocent students who believed in their country's future were butchered by the people you defend, the very same people the statistics I've linked you depict. Don't try to defend a people you know nothing of; you're offending us. By hiding behind the excuse "your link is random and has nothing to do with the discussion", you're being apathetic to the hundreds of thousands who live in distress, misery and constant anxiety of being blown off the face of Earth at virtually any given time. If you want to speak in the name of a majority, be prepared to give up the self-entitlement you make show of.

[F CHARLIE]

Hiding behind a mathematically negligible figure is easy, but 375 million people is a large amount of individuals lol

On a side note, I highly suggest you come live where I live to see the amounts of sheer radical islamism, oppression of minorities and literally anything that isn't muslim, internal terrorism and literally countries falling apart because of radical islamism. Lebanon was torn to pieces because of radical islamism and currently has no president virtually because of radical islamist parties, its people live in shitty conditions and very few hours of electricity access, garbage-like educational system, streets are filled with trash and there is no organization cleaning it all because of the tumor radical islamism has created with its bigot-like ideology and thirst for power.

 

It's easy to say there are very little terrorists in Europe and say "it's only 4%", but taking a deeper look at the origins of said terrorism which is affecting people on a multi-national scale is another thing. Again, one doesn't need to blow themselves up to be a part of radical islamism which is a perpetual threat, equal if not superior to actual terrorism in 1st world countries perpetrated by muslims

The origin of the problems in the middle east stem from Europe and how it created these countries post ww1. Until thats dealt with there will be conflict.

 

 

If it was up to me i would stop all those Muslims going inside Europe countries. Too many of them already in Europe, enough of them. If they will keep allowing all those refugees going inside Europe, Europe will completely change. I dont care if they lived all their life there, its not their country and their grandpas not the one that built it. Just like the Jews don't belong to those countries but to Israel, so are the Muslims. I live in Israel myself and i feel completely wrong when many Jews still live in Europe and USA. But on the other hand they are not doing that much trouble as Muslims does there, you can see by yourself the difference. By the way iam not a Jew, I am being completely honest and not talking like this cause i live in Israel. I am just disgusted by all of them taking over Europe.

 

Europe has always been changing and made up of mixed populations. Engllish people are a combination of Romans, celts, anglosaxons (which are germans), and various scandinavian peoples. Germans are a soup of scandinavians, slavs, celts. Scandinavian blood can be found in all european ethnicities and in north africa. Remember, the vandals that sacked rome and created what is today Algeria and part of Libya originally came from scandinavia. Nobody is actually sure where Hungarians came from. The ethnicities that go back the furthest are the greeks, Italians, Irish, Scots, Scandinavians and Russians.

 

Furthermore, Germany wants a bunch of these refugees.

 

Above, I already addressed the origins of conflict in the middle and the wests role in it. You can't wash your hands of it and send them to thier death. Abuse of power always has a price to be paid.

[77777777777777777777777777]

The origin of the problems in the middle east stem from Europe and how it created these countries post ww1. Until thats dealt with there will be conflict.

 

 

Europe has always been changing and made up of mixed populations. Engllish people are a combination of Romans, celts, anglosaxons (which are germans), and various scandinavian peoples. Germans are a soup of scandinavians, slavs, celts. Scandinavian blood can be found in all european ethnicities and in north africa. Remember, the vandals that sacked rome and created what is today Algeria and part of Libya originally came from scandinavia. Nobody is actually sure where Hungarians came from. The ethnicities that go back the furthest are the greeks, Italians, Irish, Scots, Scandinavians and Russians.

 

Furthermore, Germany wants a bunch of these refugees.

 

Above, I already addressed the origins of conflict in the middle and the wests role in it. You can't wash your hands of it and send them to thier death. Abuse of power always has a price to be paid.

 

Here's a small FYI: most of middle-eastern countries were under Ottoman control before and during ww1, even after that they were under a pseudo-democracy lead by European countries. (England backing out of their deal with Muslim leaders, the English were supposed to grant full control of the Middle-East to prominent Muslim figures at the time, France ruling over Lebanon and Syria using violence and the military as means of shutting their people up, then stalling independence by over 20 years, emptying middle-eastern countries of their natural resources, etc etc)

 

I fail to see what the matter we're discussing has to do with contemporary emigration. What happened over 100 years ago stays in history books and has very little to do with current problems in middle-eastern countries, you have to be kidding yourself to be believing Syria's crisis is caused by how unjust England and France were to it over 80 years ago. The only predominant problem that survived the course of time was the question of who Palestine belongs to.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

You think history has no bearing whatsoever on the present? That's an extremely odd view. Saying it's caused by that and only that would of course be silly, but saying it has no relevance at all is equally silly.

 

You guys seem to want everything to be black or white, and it's not. It's complex, with multiple causes and multiple issues at play.

[Professional Map Painter]

Here's a small FYI: most of middle-eastern countries were under Ottoman control before and during ww1, even after that they were under a pseudo-democracy lead by European countries. (England backing out of their deal with Muslim leaders, the English were supposed to grant full control of the Middle-East to prominent Muslim figures at the time, France ruling over Lebanon and Syria using violence and the military as means of shutting their people up, then stalling independence by over 20 years, emptying middle-eastern countries of their natural resources, etc etc)

 

I fail to see what the matter we're discussing has to do with contemporary emigration. What happened over 100 years ago stays in history books and has very little to do with current problems in middle-eastern countries, you have to be kidding yourself to be believing Syria's crisis is caused by how unjust England and France were to it over 80 years ago. The only predominant problem that survived the course of time was the question of who Palestine belongs to.

The Ottomans themselves were far from tolerant (despite claiming to be) of other minorities/religions. I wonder if they would have accepted a swarm of European refugees (not that this should affect our decision). And yet their founder was a Turkic nomad who fled the Mongol invasion.

 

Europe has always been changing and made up of mixed populations. Engllish people are a combination of Romans, celts, anglosaxons (which are germans), and various scandinavian peoples. Germans are a soup of scandinavians, slavs, celts. Scandinavian blood can be found in all european ethnicities and in north africa. Remember, the vandals that sacked rome and created what is today Algeria and part of Libya originally came from scandinavia. Nobody is actually sure where Hungarians came from. The ethnicities that go back the furthest are the greeks, Italians, Irish, Scots, Scandinavians and Russians.

 

 

iirc the Hungarians are descended from Magyar nomads who crossed the Carpathian mountains and settled in what was Pannonia (ruled by the Avar Khanate). The founder of the Kievan Rus (Perm was more of a Slavic state at the time) was actually a Norseman, and the traces of Norse culture can be found in places as far away as Sicily, Istanbul, Kiev and Anatolia. The Greeks (and Carthage) also spread their culture far and wide - Marseilles was founded by Greek colonists, as were several places in Spain (Cartagena for example), Italy (Syracuse, Tarentum) and Alexander's conquests (the Greeks in Bactria survived for centuries). The origins of Western Europe itself are largely Germanic - tribes such as the Goths, Anglo-Saxons, Jutes and Lombards all integrated with local cultures to form various states. However, the method(s) in which the majority of European cultures (and there are thousands of them) either migrated or established themselves would no longer be legal today. The concept of immigration has changed, and anyway, the reverse can sometimes happen - the Mongol rulers of the Ilkhanate were largely integrated into the local culture, as were the previous nomad rulers (Seljuk Turks).

[77777777777777777777777777]

You think history has no bearing whatsoever on the present? That's an extremely odd view. Saying it's caused by that and only that would of course be silly, but saying it has no relevance at all is equally silly.

 

You guys seem to want everything to be black or white, and it's not. It's complex, with multiple causes and multiple issues at play.

 

I'm not, don't put words in my mouth. I'm saying that what happened over a century ago is NOT the main reason as to today's problems. The burden of proof relies on the claimant, if you're going to tell me post-WWI abuse by european countries causes today's problems, at least back it up instead of calling my perspective "silly". I don't need someone who has 0 arguments and is apparently utterly ignorant of what happened 100 years ago to falsely criticize my reasoning, please come back with more than that.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

I didn't put words in your mouth, I asked you a question. Why are you so hostile? Historical context plays a role in virtually every present-day issue, how could it possibly not? The scale of that role is arguable, but my only point was that dismissing it as completely irrelevant is bizarre. If you're not doing that, then what's the problem?

[77777777777777777777777777]

I didn't put words in your mouth, I asked you a question. Why are you so hostile? Historical context plays a role in virtually every present-day issue, how could it possibly not? The scale of that role is arguable, but my only point was that dismissing it as completely irrelevant is bizarre. If you're not doing that, then what's the problem?

 

Sorry if I did offend you, I got the impression you were implying that's what I was saying. I do agree with you in saying there are still problems originating from post ww1 management, including xenophobia and close-mindedness. I can see these being a reason to commit terrorist acts, but there is nothing that points that ISIS, or organizations of the like exist and are active because of these very same problems. I'm not completely dismissing it, all I'm saying is that it has very little to do with today's problems. It doesn't mean it has absolutely nothing to do. A lot of people who live in Middle-East are french educated and bear no harsh feelings to modern-day France and England. There are, furthermore, bigger issues radical islamists worry about than what happened such a long time ago. Other, better excuses to shed rivers of blood than to accuse France, England and their collaborators of great treason.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

Sorry if I did offend you, I got the impression you were implying that's what I was saying. I do agree with you in saying there are still problems originating from post ww1 management, including xenophobia and close-mindedness. I can see these being a reason to commit terrorist acts, but there is nothing that points that ISIS, or organizations of the like exist and are active because of these very same problems. I'm not completely dismissing it, all I'm saying is that it has very little to do with today's problems. It doesn't mean it has absolutely nothing to do. A lot of people who live in Middle-East are french educated and bear no harsh feelings to modern-day France and England. There are, furthermore, bigger issues radical islamists worry about than what happened such a long time ago. Other, better excuses to shed rivers of blood than to accuse France, England and their collaborators of great treason.

 

I'm not in any way saying present-day conflicts are directly caused by historical issues, rather that history sets the stage for what comes after it.

 

I don't have the time to go into this in depth, but simply put... The main reason for the presence of so many militarist regimes in mid-east countries was a tendency towards nationalism as a reaction to colonialism, complicated by the fact that the lines artificially drawn did not split people along cultural lines but almost at random. To pretend that this has no bearing on the current state of the region is... silly. An individual person may not directly view this as the reason they embrace radical islam, but the political and cultural backdrop they were raised in almost certainly contributes to their views of the west. How could it not?

[77777777777777777777777777]

I'm not in any way saying present-day conflicts are directly caused by historical issues, rather that history sets the stage for what comes after it.

 

I don't have the time to go into this in depth, but simply put... The main reason for the presence of so many militarist regimes in mid-east countries was a tendency towards nationalism as a reaction to colonialism, complicated by the fact that the lines artificially drawn did not split people along cultural lines but almost at random. To pretend that this has no bearing on the current state of the region is... silly. An individual person may not directly view this as the reason they embrace radical islam, but the political and cultural backdrop they were raised in almost certainly contributes to their views of the west. How could it not?

 

You'd be right if there were, again, no other problems that have appeared over the course of time. Lebanon went through a 15 years long civil war that left the country in pieces, Syria was brought to its knees by the very same nationalism you speak of, Saudi Arabia is going through a crisis of its own, the whole part of this world is caught up constant, continuous conflict. When hundreds of Syrians kill and get killed every day, it is not in the name of liberation from the allies, or in the name of any post-ww1 problem you and that other guy are mentioning. Another thing that goes against your reasoning is the accumulation of conflicts over the past 80 years in both of Syria, Lebanon, hell even Palestine and the areas surrounding them and these very nations turning to war zones. The fire Europe had started was turned off long before they even started, Lebanon got its independence around the end of WW2 and was still related in a way or another to France (French stayed the second official language for a long time, and it still is), Syria got it even before that. You can't say these problems are of any non-negligible effect on the current conflicts, because they happened before Middle-Eastern countries were even nations of their own, rather when they were nothing but colonies on rich soil.

 

Go read Syrian news; the root of the conflict is a political one which has absolutely nothing to do with post-ww1 problems. Syria had already made peace with its transgressors by the time it became a nation. Going with your reasoning, one could say the US and Russia had recent minor conflicts because of the Soviet Union back in the day. Things were very different back then.

 

Last but not least, your whole line of reasoning towards me lies on the simple principle that post-ww1 conflicts have a minor effect in today's conflicts, regardless of the context of said conflicts or of their nature. I am sorry, but as long as you ignore the current problems Middle-East is going through and blindly say "well, obviously post-ww1 conflicts has something to do with today's problems", your reasoning doesn't stand because it is, no offense intended, ignorant of today's circumstances. Come in Lebanon and ask anyone if they think the mess they are in today is because of France back in the day, the only positive answer you'll get will be from igoted old hags who are on the verge of dying of old age. The media has a firm grasp on a lot of middle-easterners, but there is literally no point in reviving the fire France and England started. And, again, there are much, much better motives to start a war than this, regardless of whether the accusation of France and England is minor or major.

[Hyperqube]

He has seen death countless times on his business trips to Syria, innocent students who believed in their country's future were butchered by the people you defend, the very same people the statistics I've linked you depict.

 

Don't try to defend a people you know nothing of; you're offending us.

 

Cortana ... these "innocent students" ... would they be like the ones fleeing from ISIS into europe.

You see, nobody's defending the killers here - we're defending those exact same students who would be grouped with with their killers, simply because they both worship God, and believe Mohammed to be His prophet.

 

Hiding behind a mathematically negligible figure is easy, but 375 million people is a large amount of individuals lol

  

You're doing the opposite: hiding behind large numbers. Here's the problem though: your source talks about 

 

Surveys have shown that an average of 25% of the Islamic population supports or condone some form of violent jihad.  And these are just the ones who admit to it.

 

25% of 1.5 billion = "only" 375 million (375,000,000)

 

 

So 375 million support or condone some form of violent Jihad ? on a global scale ? yes "violent" ... but not only "support or condone"  (which is quite easy) but something as vague as "some form" ? Just let it sink in for a second, while you consider that after 9/11 three out of four americans was in favor of militairy strikes against the terrorists even if it included many civilians? well, congratulations

 

75% of 300 million americans = "only" 225 million (225,000,000) that's in one country

... and that's still with 'many civilians'. How many americans would support or condone some sort of violent action in defense of their country? practically all 300 million of them?

 

Magic with big numbers is easy. But it doesn't change the fact that 1 out of 4 people (a) "supporting or condoning"  (b ) "some form" of violence for their cause, is not a lot of people.

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry for you that you live in an area where radical islam is a problem ... but like a snowball doesn't disprove global warming, your personal situation doesn't neccecairly reflect the larger picture.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

 

<snip>

 

I am not saying it's in the name of that, nor am I saying it's the only relevant factor or even the most important one, simply that it is a factor.

 

You're ignoring the part where I tried to explain to you that this is not a conscious factor in the mind of any individual, but rather a contributive factor to the climate in the region in general. It is context, not causation, I am not saying anything more than that, nor am I ignoring other more recent and obvious factors.

[77777777777777777777777777]

 

Cortana ... these "innocent students" ... would they be like the ones fleeing from ISIS into europe.

You see, nobody's defending the killers here - we're defending those exact same students who would be grouped with with their killers, simply because they both worship God, and believe Mohammed to be His prophet.

 

  

You're doing the opposite: hiding behind large numbers. Here's the problem though: your source talks about 

 

Surveys have shown that an average of 25% of the Islamic population supports or condone some form of violent jihad.  And these are just the ones who admit to it.

 

25% of 1.5 billion = "only" 375 million (375,000,000)

 

So 375 million support or condone some form of violent Jihad ? on a global scale ? yes "violent" ... but not only "support or condone"  (which is quite easy) but something as vague as "some form" ? Just let it sink in for a second, while you consider that after 9/11 three out of four americans was in favor of militairy strikes against the terrorists even if it included many civilians? well, congratulations

 

75% of 300 million americans = "only" 225 million (225,000,000) that's in one country

... and that's still with 'many civilians'. How many americans would support or condone some sort of violent action in defense of their country? practically all 300 million of them?

 

Magic with big numbers is easy. But it doesn't change the fact that 1 out of 4 people (a) "supporting or condoning"  ( "some form" of violence for their cause, is not a lot of people.

 

 

 

I'm sorry for you that you live in an area where radical islam is a problem ... but like a snowball doesn't disprove global warming, your personal situation doesn't neccecairly reflect the larger picture.

 

Starting with the bottom of your post; while my personal situation doesn't necessarily reflect the larger picture, news sites and literally dozens of death reports and casualties every day don't lie. I strongly suggest you read up on the current socio-economical and politic states of countries surrounding ISIS.

 

Secondly, your argument of Americans that would be supporting retaliation, while interesting, is off-topic; one is based off religious concepts, a culture equal to one of a trashcan and an overall corrupt way of living expanding over the course of decades, the other is based off a single act of terrorism originating from the former. Do you see the difference?

 

Last, but not least, I'm not saying or implying anyone here's defending murderers. I believe everyone here has good intentions to an extent, including AfricanDrugLord who wants nothing more than prosperity and peace for European countries. However, many if not most of observations here are issued out of ignorance.

 

 

I am not saying it's in the name of that, nor am I saying it's the only relevant factor or even the most important one, simply that it is a factor.

 

You're ignoring the part where I tried to explain to you that this is not a conscious factor in the mind of any individual, but rather a contributive factor to the climate in the region in general. It is context, not causation, I am not saying anything more than that, nor am I ignoring other more recent and obvious factors.

 

This factor's importance is so small in today's conflicts, it's negligible.

It's not contributive at all when it happened literally a hundred years ago and there are much bigger issues at hand than forever hating on old dead nations. It's utterly out of context when you're not taking into consideration the actual factors for the development of middle-eastern countries into warzones and instead looking at middle-east as a nation allegedly affected by dead issues first.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

This factor's importance is so small in today's conflicts, it's negligible.

It's not contributive at all when it happened literally a hundred years ago and there are much bigger issues at hand than forever hating on old dead nations. It's utterly out of context when you're not taking into consideration the actual factors for the development of middle-eastern countries into warzones and instead looking at middle-east as a nation allegedly affected by dead issues first.

 

You're completely missing the point. It's not out of context, it is the context.

[77777777777777777777777777]

 

You're completely missing the point. It's not out of context, it is the context.

 

It's not, you're still focusing on that negligible factor, ignoring 3/4 of my former posts' content and the current, actual reasons for the current conflicts. Suit yourself, there is nothing left for me to say.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

It's not, you're still focusing on that negligible factor, ignoring 3/4 of my former posts' content and the current, actual reasons for the current conflicts. Suit yourself, there is nothing left for me to say.

 

I'm not ignoring their content, I'm not addressing the other reasons because I agree so there's nothing to add on that. You're the one missing my point and talking about something different.

[NOpainNOgain]

I hear so much bullshit here, all i hear is some lame excuses why you deserve to get inside those countries. 

I know 1 thing, when you get your residence there, most of Muslims just go riot there. Iam not saying all of them, but many of them does, and some even grow up get educated there and then betray everyone they know and join terror organizations. Almost all of the famous terror organizations we know now-days are Muslims, the most famous probably will be ISIS, Al Qaeda and the amazing Hamas that wants to destroy Israel, those monkeys think they will have better life if they will kill Zionists and destroy Israel. pathetic monkeys, all i have to say.

Anyway, Europe does not allow those Refugees, or should i say Muslims, get inside their countries, is because they cant trust them at all. they have no respect to the country they live in, they protest in a strange country that does not belong to them, they rape woman because those horny bastards cannot get laid until they get married, so they just rape woman in the streets, they tell people what to do and how to live their life( Jews does this as well fyi, they always tell me not to eat pork or eating kosher meat) and the worst-> they make so many children you can shit your pants. With the birth rate of Muslims, it will nearly impossible walking in a street without seeing a Muslim walking. Once again, I believe Islam is what destroys this world, nothing good comes out of it, they alwais claim Islam is a peaceful religion and not all of the Muslim are terrorists, but i know this is a bullshit and deep inside they all hate us. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y28zkxUtUs

These are not the people i wish to live with, iam sorry. I have no mercy for those bastards. Europe needs to wake up, before its too late.