Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The War Room' started by meauneau, Sep 10, 2017.
Still didn't answer and still not surprised.
Mass-scale resettlement caused by violence that targets a specific ethnic/religious group is ethnic cleansing just so you know. And I don't see how this is related to the recent refugee crisis, its directly the result of actions by the government and military of Myanmar.
I don't understand why people are picking on Burma. What do you think happens if they let Islam expand. These guys start immigrating in the 1970s and now there is already a million of them. They will burn down the Buddhist Temples like they did in Afghanistan and start converting Buddhists with the sword.
Lol, at "let Islam in", the Rohingya have been there for generations and they just want citizenship in the country.
But I'm not surprised you're playing apologist for ethnic cleansing. You seem quite fond of mass death when its people you don't like such as Africans or Muslims.
These people have a home. It is called Bangladesh.
They don't just want citizenship. They want a separate state.
according to this 400 people have been killed.
That is not exactly a international issue especially most of those killed were militant waging war against Burma.
When muslims are victims you never hear that in the news. It's not even considered ethnic cleansing by the leader.
We only hear muslims are aggressors in Fox news and CNN. We are played by the media on a daily basis.
Im a Southern American, I know I'm being played by the media.
Random violence against Muslims in the area isn't exactly a recent phenomenon. The government and the military have discriminated against Muslims in the area for atleast 50 years if not more. To call it a "cleansing" or a "genocide" though, would require a more systematic form of mass murder. Recognized genocides have traditionally led to a significant part of a population being exterminated, but in this case, we are seeing an event more comparable to the migration of Southern blacks into the North in the United States, to seek a better life after being fed up with Southern segregation policies and random lynchings (which were done more so for the purpose of generating terror rather than actual "cleansing" or genocide).
The refugee crisis served as the igniting spark for third world populations to give preference to re-settling into new areas rather than solving problems locally, due to the support and encouragement given to the re-settlers by the globalist lobby. The opening of national borders has began a whole new era of human history, where crises are solved through migration. Previously this would not have been an option.
Funny how they've been living in Myanmar for generations though.
Your own link says the separatist movement lost momentum and support in the 50s and 60s. Here's what a more recently formed Rohingya political organization, the Arakan Rohingya National Organization, asks for
Lol at enforcing borders when they're expelling people from Myanmar to Bangladesh. But I get it, you enjoy the deaths of people you consider non-human like Muslims and Africans. You'd be elated if some natural disaster just wiped these people off the face of the earth.
You are wrong to think that I view Muslims as subhuman. I don't at all. I applaud them for having a culture that still is strong and vibrant. It is the West that is lost its way and is not longer willing to defend itself. All I am saying is that Burma should not be villfied because it is not ready to open its borders like the West is.
How is this different than when India and Pakistan split up. And that ended up being for the best right?
Ethnic cleansing doesn't necessarily require that the targets are killed if they're being displaced in mass numbers by violence. To be fair I'm not very well read on this conflict but the exodus of the Rohingya seems to have greatly increased in the aftermath of the military response in 2016. If its deliberately done to cause this exodus then its very much ethnic cleansing.
However, one problem is that government of Myanmar isn't really letting in UN observers and outside third parties to assess the situation. It could very well be that its not ethnic cleansing or genocide but some of the elements of those crimes seem to be present here and third parties are being prevented from investigating.
Even if its not genocide according to the dictionary definition(and personally I quite hate the politics of genocide but that's a discussion for another day) it definitely seems that the oppression of the Rohingya has intensified as of late and its something worth noting and doing something about.
No one is asking them to open their borders, its you asking Bangladesh to open its borders to these people who have lived in Myanmar for generations.
And I don't buy that you actually value the lives of anyone you consider the out-group, not with the contempt you've shown them. Like I said, you'd probably be elated if some natural disaster wiped them out just as you said you would be if Africans were wiped out by climate change. Yes I'm going to hold that comment against you for a while, deal with it cunt.
Cheers, for the balance. I was starting to wonder if the people saying it wasn't potentially provoked were correct.
There's always more to a story than meets the eye.
They did not "start immigrating in the 1970s" . They have been there centuries earlier. Some of or most of them appear to have been brought to Burma during British colonialism but some were there a lot earlier.
From Britain's Telegraph aka Torygraph because the paper is center-right and viewed as espousing conservative viewpoints.
" Neither country will give them citizenship even though their families’ roots in modern-day Rakhine, once called Arakan, can be traced back to the Eighth Century. "
You are regurgitating this issue as an Islam vs. Buddhism dynamic when the reason for the conflict is primarily racial and only secondarily religious.
One can say the same thing about Korean Americans, Vietnamese Americans, Laotian Americans, Filipino Americans , Burmese Americans - that they can all return to Korea, Vietnam,Laos, Phillipines , Myanmar.
That's not true, Muslims were the victims of violence in Syria and Iraq and that got a lot of coverage. Muslims were also the victims in attacks within the West that got coverage.
The problem is Myanmar does not appear strategically relevant to anyone so it doesn't seem like any country gains from intervening in a forceful manner. Erdogan and some Gulf sheikhs are sending aid, probably to boost their prestige among Muslims, but even they seem unwilling to do much more than that.
It sucks but the reality is that if you are a minority like the Rohingya being persecuted, you have to convince the countries strong enough to do something about it that there is something in it for them.
Lol @ balance. Yeah, accusations of rape justify ethnic cleansing and systemic oppression
But your admiration of them is coming from the Alt-Right / White supremacist POV that respects the enemy for not being Cucked by liberalism and multiculturalism. And before you protest, yes I know you are a Hapa (half Vietnamese half White).
I have occassionally seen them (far righties) express admiration for Muslims for not having the Muslim equivalent of 'white guilt' , for being culturally chauvinistic and being intolerant of other cultures. The far right also express the same admiration for Israel for being tribal and selfish. They (the far right) wish gentile Whites would think and act in the same manner.
These people have been there for centures. Burma did not open their borders as part of some contemporary open borders movement. From North Eastern India, Nepal and the lands east towards Burma, you get the transition zone where South Asians give way to East Asians. There are Tibeto-Burman peoples and East Asian looking Nepalis in India ; mixing and migration has been going on for a very long time. And if you go back thousands of years, Austro-Asiatic speakers from South East Asia moved into South Asia and mixed with indegenous South Asians.
It ended up with ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Hindu and Christian population of Pakistan, such that their numbers in Pakistan now are a tiny insignificant %. During partion Muslims also fled India to Pakistan but it is Pakistan that has succeeded in killing and driving out the Hindus and Christians while India has nearly as many Muslisms as Pakistan. So I don't know how one can say it has been for the best. Best for Muslims maybee. Christians and Hindus in Pakistan are still being genocided and hounded. Only like a day or 2 ago Muslim kids beat to death a Christian boy in a Pakistani school.
You are very incorrect in stating that Burma isn't very strategicly important. It has the potential to devastate Singapores economy and become a world leader as a deep water shipping port. The amount of speculative investing that has been happening seems to be not well known internationally yet but it will if the ports approved.
I've noticed a trend with a lot of your posts over the last 6-12 months I've been bored enough to waste time on sherdog. You like to put words into others mouths by insinuation and attack in a similar manner to shut down opposition or an conflicting alternative viewpoint. Show me where I said that? If I have something to say I will, I'd appreciate if you don't try and put words in my mouth or tell me how/what to think. I thanked him for posting a link which gave balance to the thread and was done contrary to the vocal left which has dominated this thread since old mate got banned.
When a minority riots in a western country posters such as yourself like to say shit like "I don't condone the violence but...."
I'm reading this thread to make up my own mind not to parrot any idiots thoughts. I'll do so by listening to both sides and make as informed choice as I can.
The UN says this is a "textbook case of ethnic cleansing".
I'll give you that you beat me up this thread but I'll get you in the next one.