Maturin

It's been levelled at me a few times that I go whining to the mods but that is something I have never done. Fuck's sake, we have a new Woodworker. Why are you commenting on a thread that has nothing to do with you? 3) No stalking, harassing Let's see if that rule is enforced then. Why are you commenting on this necro thread, like you're desperate to rekindle something you think you may have lost last time? It definitely has something to do with the irrelevant juvenile bullshit you were posting on the Syrian thread - you're just out to wind me up, plain and simple. Good luck with that you sad little man. Not interested JoJoGunne. Pick a subject on "Worldwide Political Discussions", anything you like, start a new thread in this proper section and I'll show you just how thick, irrelevant and juvenile you are - again. Or, just reply to this thread with some personal bullshit and prove to everyone that the above is true without stepping out of your comfort zone of stupidity.

Well not really. Until the final paragraph I think I'm only stating what happened as well as a bit of comment with reference to interfering in states and the possibility of solving Kashmir before years of protracted hostility. It probably would have been much better if India had remained, as Gandhi supposedly wanted, one nation but I don't see how that could have been achieved without civil war.

That assessment doesn't really take into account the pressures within India and Britain that forced such a speedy resolution and the creation of the Muslim state of Pakistan. The nationalist movement within India had been gathering pace for most of that century, the British economy was ruined after WWII and was unable to afford not just its empire but also the policing of India whilst any multi-party succession talks (lasting years) happened. Violence was already breaking out, both between supporters of the Quit India campaign and between Hindus and Muslims themsleves. India was on the verge of civil war and the British knew that they no longer had the resources to manage it. Also, at what stage, once you've have granted independence, do you stop meddling in the now internal affairs of a former colony and a new state? Almost immediately India and Pakistan started contesting the area of Kashmir, a conflict that is probably the most hotly contested between the two right up to today. I think that if those two countries had sat down themselves and worked out that difference at the start, then pretty much all excuses for future conflicts would have been insignificant. Could or should Britain have demand a resolution to this in 1948? No. Britain after WWII had neither the influence, ability or the motivation to resolve a dispute between two independent neighbours. Whilst I'm not defending Mountbatten in the slightest, it is important to look at the whole picture, although extremely simplified in this post, to understand what happened. I think the decision made averted a civil war that would most likely have resulted in extensive ethnic cleansing by the victors, far exceeding the numbers killed in the subsequent India/Pakistan conflicts. It has of course resulted in the Pakistani state becoming a training ground and refuge for religious fundamentalists but it is hardly accurate to say that the creation of Pakistan is the only spur for the course that modern Pakistan has taken.

Are you telling us that even though your brother and sister are saying it's ok, that actually you don't want to sleep with them? Well, we can see the type of childhood that you've had to make you think that your posts are acceptable.

If it had been a Buddhist festival then they may well be forgiven for thinking it was karma that bit them in the ass for refusing to help their fellow Buddhists.

No one is fool enough to think that Camcaps will come up with a solution here, right? This is the first reasonably sensible thing you've posted to this thread. No one has mentioned half of the things you've finally mentioned above, because right from the get go this thread became about refuting the ridiculous notions that were advanced concerning refugees. I commend the fact that you've dragged yourself out of the school yard.

You have posted a video of 2 groups of Arabic looking people having a fight and you have spun it to show it as a warning about the Muslim influx into the EU. Do you or have you ever worked for Fox News? This unhelpful type of poorly researched and worded sensationalism brings nothing to the discussion on Syria, I'm sensing a definite pattern. You haven't taken Ozi's advice have you? I think that you think that posting nonsense, asking ridiculous questions (such as me pointing you to a post less than 4 pages back) and just the mere fact that you keep on doing it, is going to make me give up showing you for a fool because I will get frustrated by it. The UK, it appears, is not immune to the effects of its own citizens having a fight between themselves at the football.

That is of course well off the OP and I reference it for a bit of comic relief.

In that case cheerio then, thanks for your efforts. EDIT: Ozi's self-help advice from only a few posts previous to this one was excellent and I do recommend you follow it. Start again if you're unable to keep track. The thread is only 6 pages long - good luck with that.

OK fair enough. It think the world would become a much better place to live in if we outright rejected leaders that take their inspiration for foreign policy from 16th century philosophy. Indeed, no one ever says, "he's a Machiavellian operator," about a politician in order to praise them. Yet it seems that unscrupulousness, self-interest and the ability to lie well are the main traits to having a successful career in politics. I'd add to that - In the UK the willingness to have oral sex with a dead pig (necro-bestial-philia?) also seems to do wonders for one's political aspirations! It's uncorroborated at this stage but the PM hasn't denied it and if you know anything about the upper classes in the UK then you know that they're more than capable of this kind of thing. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/opinion/david-cameron-the-prime-minister-did-what-with-a-pigs-head.html

Godwin's "Law" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law#cite_note-Godwin94-2 Maturin's "Law" - As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a Ozi throwing his toys out of the pram and calling people fuckwits approaches 1.

Ah, so we've arrived at the "fuckwit" put down already? It's only been, what, 8 pages? How many times do you have to be told that your posts are becoming increasingly desperate and irrelevant. Here's the first time in this thread, I'll keep count for you if you like: Your posts are becoming increasingly desperate and irrelevant - #1 If you've given up reading my bullshit (UN reports, apolitical statistics, real world case studies) then why are you still addressing me directly? Do you see how irrelevant you have let yourself become? I've no need to personally insult you, I've discovered that refuting your fantasy statements with facts and rationalism winds you up more than schoolyard names (with redundant definitions), it's working wonders. You're right it's not about me, the OP is about the situation in Syria. You haven't posted anything that is useful, let alone verifiably true about the situation. That you do not know what the link is between Saudi Arabia and the 2003 invasion of Iraq (leading to the rise of ISIS later on), further demonstrates that you're completely unqualified to comment on this thread. At this very moment I think that you are literally thinking, "hang on, he's still saying that the Saudis created ISIS, time to call him a "fuckwit" and put this debate to bed." I've given you far too much benefit of the doubt Ozi. Simply for the fact that you chose to participate in this thread, I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you knew what you were talking about and had some relevant information that you could argue constructively. That hasn't been evident at all. I think you're embarrassing yourself and I also think that being seen as a credible commentator on global affairs is very important to you. I think I feel a little bit sorry for you because of this but not that much due to your sad attempts at insulting me - and also I didn't make you act like a twat, that's always a personal choice. A sound plan - you shouldn't have let yourself get to this stage anyway. Go back and start again, read the facts, that's all I've asked of you, why has that pissed you off so much?! EDIT: Now I've replied, I can see it's only 6 pages that it took for you to shed yourself of any credibility.

Spot on again BBsq69. This is the first, for CC, accurate exposition of how the Saudi's operate, yet their methods have been so obscured/supported by our governments and media that one person on here actually felt it is correct to defend the refugee policy of one of the most anti-human rights nations on the planet and another merely called them shrewd businessmen, who it would appear thinks they should be congratulated for using their wealth and influence to destroy effective opposition.

I'm not sure what game it is you're playing here but I'm not playing it. Unless the post with the facts and figures about the refugee crisis has been deleted, I'm not even going to check that has happened, then yep, this has definitely taken a turn for the juvenile. Essentially what I think is being demonstrated here is the teenager's tactic of lastworduppery. Knock yourselves out with that fellas, you'll win the last words, congrats! :nana:. I came here for intelligent debate of an intelligent open question. I haven't found that at all. So I'll refer you back to this post, which was very quick to locate, there has been nothing worthy of commenting on from you both for a while so I'll stop. Follow its advice, given in good faith, choose those killer last words and have a good day:

Pfffff Show me where I said that the Saudis were responsible, directly, for ISIS? You do know what the catalyst for the 2003 Iraqi invasion was right and what happened after, right? Two sentences and your mess of text is demolished. Jojogunne, you know exactly which post I'm referencing. Have you read any of it yet? If not, as I said, this seems pretty done.

I find it remarkable that the slightest tardiness in my phrasing (missing think) immediately gets me called a liar, the guy that's only been referencing facts - yet, the guy who said whatever it was; Muslims ate my local butcher and stole my niece's Christmas, the Muslims are pissing on my ego as I type this etc etc*, no one bats an eyelid to that! I even generously agreed to give him the benefit of the doubt! LOL* We can leave this here as it's going nowhere. I never thought for a moment that any of you would take the time to see the argument from the other side or to read any of the evidence I posted. Again, I tell you it would do you all a favour to at least consider what you're opponents are talking about, read the evidence, instead of just writing them off under whatever the first lazy pejorative is that springs to mind - as you have seen a person with a grasp of both sides of the argument and evidence on his side is pretty unassailable. It also wouldn't hurt you to step outside the closed ideology echo-chamber of Camcaps and do what I've just done, but for your "team". Find some site full of those monstrous socialists and try to argue your case when everyone is against you - I guarantee that it will make you better people!!!! :D Thank you Comrades* *I'll leave out the(") that we've agreed will signify irony/satire

Sure thing, I'll take what you said on board, thanks for the advice: I think you simply don't want different people messing up the status quo. I think that the above quote shows that you think you're better than them. I know and have proved (whether you choose to read that proof or not) that your protestations and opinions are groundless, that they are not based upon evidence and this leads me to think that you haven't thought about your opinions to a standard necessary to back them up with a convincing counter-argument. You are of course free to think and say what you like. Whilst I respect your right to an opinion, I don't think I have to respect the content of the fact-free opinions that you think are sustaining this discussion. Don't you think?

Looks like I'm getting the hang of this quoting business, huh. You can’t pass any of the above off as reasoned and informed points of view. You simply don't want different people messing up the status quo. This is what shows that you think you're better than them. Well done indeed for being better than refugees, who have only the clothes on their backs - oh and smartphones seeing as Syria was a reasonably prosperous country before it went tits up. I commend you for stating an opinion and confusing that with the truth! "LOL"

So we go right back to the beginning. You see how circular you sound? In that case, what makes you so much better than them? It's certainly not the moral lowground you've bunkered yourself under. Defending Saudi Arabia, heard it all now!!

Read them or not. I don't take you seriously anyway, and if you don't read them then I'll have verifiable justification that your comments are not worthy of discussion. It's a lose-lose for you Ozi and you've done it to yourself. See you on the "I hwate Maturine" thread I guess...

Please do post more pictures of children that have been recruited into ISIS - they are children so it can hardly be deemed that they have a choice in the matter. Care to explain why you chose to use the picture as a reply to my information that the Saudis could deal with the refugee crisis at a stroke? Resize your illuminating pictures so they fit the effing page however. It's now a scroll mess after the second post,

Totally agree BBsq69. Especially regarding the Saudis. People here are so desperate to look for bad guys, this regime is pretty much the catalyst for everything, yet they don't mention them. Right wing media, serving defence contractors, oil companies and the like, do not provide this information to right wing disciples however because they don’t want to harm the lucrative relationship with the Saudi "Royal" family. So nothing is ever done or mentioned at international level or on Faux News regarding their crimes. Back to the refugee crisis. There is a place called Mina, in Saudi Arabia. It is a global place of pilgrimage for some Muslim festival or other. 4 million Muslims descend on this place for 4 days a year, do their religious shit then fuck off home again. There are thousands upon thousands of air-conditioned tents with plumbed water supplies and excellent facilities standing empty for 361 days a year. Right now there is space for 4 MILLION Syrian refugees, to live in relative luxury compared to what they are facing now, yet the Saudis have taken ZERO refugees, in a country that shares their culture and language this is reprehensible. Non of our right wings friends on this board even knew such a place existed, because their glorious leaders and duplicitous mouth pieces do not want to upset the Saudis so you won't find that mentioned on Faux News. Article On Mina, Saudi Arabia - Entertainment Piece Not Connected to the Crisis http://www.amusingplanet.com/2014/08/mina-city-of-tents.html I don't know the political leanings of this outlet, however a Google search will show you other sources http://www.globalresearch.ca/saudi-arabia-takes-zero-refugees-despite-having-100000-tents-able-to-house-3-million-people/5475650

OK, sorry I've been away from the debate for 24 hours, I'm sure I've that been missed, huh. I've been finding links to give you information about the refugee crisis. My only criteria for selecting what to include is that the source should be as apolitical as possible. That means no looney-left newspapers and media outlets from my side of the argument and no right-leaning double-think outlets of the same. Now, do I think any of you will read any of these sources, making the effort I've gone to pointless? Well, I'll be generous and say I'm not sure about that. It depends on whether this thread and the people in it deem themselves to be having intelligent conversation or whether this is just place for certain folks to hang out and congratulate each other on their ignorance. There's only one caveat - studies and reports were conducted when they were conducted, in all cases I've searched for the most recent - in this instance it is the height of ignorance to dismiss a non-partisan report on refugee numbers, impact, issues or any other of Ozi's arbitrary rules, because the current crisis and refugee numbers is an order of magnitude above levels that any report has dealt with, at any time, ever. So if you don't agree with the finding of study from 8 years ago, find a later one to disprove it, if you aspire to be taken seriously. Facts and Figures About Refugee Numbers - United Nations http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html Actual Numbers of Muslims in Europe http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/15/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/ Growth of Muslim Populations - Particularly Europe http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/the-future-of-the-global-muslim-population/ False Link Between Immigration and Crime http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/does_immigration_increase_crime Turkish Report Showing That In A Country With Almost 4 Million Refugees (and many more immigrants), Crime Rate Is Negligible http://www.turkeyagenda.com/crime-rate-among-syrian-refugees-remain-way-lower-than-expected-1199.html UN Report Into Right Wing Media Agenda Setting and Misinformation Regarding Refugees http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtrights/81/81we83.htm Now, [Puts on Dirty Harry Voice] please try and spin any of the above to suit the agenda the media you consume has you repeating, go ahead, make my day... ;) And finally: Article 26 - Freedom of Movement Each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence and to move freely within its territory subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances. Refugees are just as free to move around in Europe as any other legal person. In fact, they are more free to move around Europe than a non-refugee American tourist who has lost his passport and visa. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/StatusOfRefugees.aspx

And on that bombshell... Ozi this time, kills another thread. I'll ignore you from here on out and your pathetic attempts to goad me into a reaction that discusses anything other than the issue. I have not insulted you, somebody disagreeing with you, although it is obviously hurting your feelings, is not insult. Start a thread on, "Why I hate Maturin 'coz he hurts my fweelings all of the twime. I wish he wouldn't challenge the fantasy ideas I have," or some other bollocks, as you're obviously struggling with this particular topic. All I asked you to do was to prove the fantastical assertions that you're making, do that and salvage a bit of credibility for yourself man. I'm not going to read things for you. If there is something in this article, quote it and link it here. Easy-peasy. Plus - this article is from 2009 apparently! God damn you! It insults me that you expect me to read an article that is out of date, doesn't include current data, current trends or current issues (even though my report did). You simply pick and choose when you will follow your own arbitrary rules etc, etc, more personal bullshit, yawn.

Ha. Where is it again that I am lying? Please directly quote any lies contained in what I've written - and I'll show you where you have made an error. I did say that I'll give you the benefit of the doubt regarding your personal experience in Australia, also that that experience, if true, does not relate to a continent on the other side of the world, so why have you mentioned it again as though that is relevant to this thread?! You can call me stupid until the cows come home. it doesn't change the fact that I'm not making fantastical claims that require me to make personal insults in order to distract from the fact that I can't back them up.