I agree it's done so we need to deal with the problem. But to continue military action on people who are intent on killing other muslims is stupid. As you say it gives them justification for killing.

I do disagree with you that it will blow itself out. What do you base that evidence on?

Also refugees are meant to register in the first safe countries they land in, then return when the fighting is over. Clearly not the case.

As for giving them a future, that's what we tried in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and look what happened. Even in Egypt, there's been little change.

Another big problem is Africa where millions of people have the Western dream.
The Geneva Refugee Convention is great and worked in some cases.
But not anymore, the world has changed in the 65 years it exists.
In Holland there are more and more people that want to change that Geneve Refugee contract and adjust it to modern times.
And NO, it is not just Geert Wiilders, but also left orientated parties.
The Geneva Contract also was specified for a specific problem in a specific timeframe (refugees before 1951) in certain countries, so you could a little expect what would come.
It was never was ment for every global problem, that came later (and looks like it is failing now).
So it doesn't work anymore, stop it and make a new plan.
A lot of European countries already gave the finger to the Geneva Refugee Convention

Luckily Curacao (Dutch Carribean) didn't sign the Geneva Refugee Convention>
Now they can sent the people of Venezuela back (80 kilomters from Venezuela)
Can you imagine Curacao had to take all people.... they will be bancrupt in a month.
Just like Europe can't (and don't want) to have all migrants.
The wall that is build already stops a lot of them, so that works.

Ofcourse refugees won't return home when they are settled and than go back to help their own country.
The idea that they come here and later come back is just false. Holland thought also the emigrants in the '60 and '70 would return (most didn't)
The older ones wait at least till they get their pension and take that money with them while most never will pay for the social system.
Holland has made new rules, if you have your pensions in a country that is cheaper, you get less money for pension to prevent too much money flowing out.
It is even so that 'refugees' from Eritrea having holidays in their home country and than return back to Holland.
kick them out, they are taking places for people that are in danger.

I just saw a documentary about that (NOT made bij Geert Wilders). It shows that if we sent them back immediatly (when they are not in danger, like 80% of the refugees) they won't come. You see that in Australia, people who arrive there illegal with a boat, won't get a visa. When some European countries build a wall, there where less 'refugees'. So making it more difficult for them from coming helps. When people from save countries know they won't even get it to a refugee camp, they won't come.

probably because most if not all terrorist attacks, the ones that have you concerned, are made by LEGAL immigrants.

read that over a couple times in your head, let it sink in a little.

My objection to migration isn't based on terrorism. It's based on the effect it has on the working classes. UK wage stagnation.

Then there's the direct effect of house prices and rents, then the problems with Healthcare, education, crime, etc. At a time when more services are needed, the government has less money to supply them.

read that over a couple times in your head, let it sink in a little.

https://scontent.falc1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...31&oe=5A2BD4DC

need we say more :2 cents:

People don't think critically nowadays, no one thinks beyond what is shown to them, and when media makes a bad rep of Donald, you just get more people who don't look into any of his policies and judge based off what they read.