ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, April 21, 2017

They should have sunk the ships

Not only would fewer people have drowned, but slavery would not have been reinstituted in northern Africa:
It is widely known that the U.S.-led NATO intervention to topple Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 resulted in a power vacuum that has allowed terror groups like ISIS to gain a foothold in the country.

Despite the destructive consequences of the 2011 invasion, the West is currently taking a similar trajectory with regard to Syria. Just as the Obama administration excoriated Gaddafi in 2011, highlighting his human rights abuses and insisting he must be removed from power to protect the Libyan people, the Trump administration is now pointing to the repressive policies of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and warning his regime will soon come to an end — all in the name of protecting Syrian civilians.

But as the U.S. and its allies fail to produce legal grounds for their recent air strike - let alone provide concrete evidence to back up their claims Assad was responsible for a deadly chemical attack last week - more hazards of invading foreign countries and removing their heads of state are emerging.

This week, new findings revealed another unintended consequence of “humanitarian intervention”: the growth of the human slave trade.

The Guardian reports that while “violence, extortion and slave labor” have been a reality for people trafficked through Libya in the past, the slave trade has recently expanded. Today, people are selling other human beings out in the open.

“The latest reports of ‘slave markets’ for migrants can be added to a long list of outrages [in Libya],” said Mohammed Abdiker, head of operation and emergencies for the International Office of Migration, an intergovernmental organization that promotes “humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all,” according to its website. “The situation is dire. The more IOM engages inside Libya, the more we learn that it is a vale of tears for all too many migrants.”
The Law of Unintended Consequences is always going to haunt the foolish and those unable to grasp that actions always have consequences. And the do-gooders and humanitarians need to be held accountable for the unintended consequences of their actions, particularly those that are predictable.

Those who proudly welcomed refugees are absolutely responsible for slavery now. They are not good and virtuous people, they are stupid and evil people and they need to be regarded as such. And it's a bit ironic that it was America's first black president who is chiefly responsible for spreading slavery around the world.

When the migrant flotilla began, I immediately said that the boats and ships carrying migrants should be sunk as soon as they enter international waters. For this, I was decried by more than a few, even on the Right, as a monster. Just remember, then, that all of you who took the "moral" position of not sinking the ships bear at least some responsibility for both the invasion of Europe and the reinstitution of slavery. Preventing the use of lethal violence in defense of national borders is akin to trying to stop doctors from cutting into human bodies with knives and lasers. Never mind that they're only doing so to remove cancerous tumors that will kill the patient.

Labels: ,

81 Comments:

Blogger Al From Bay Shore April 21, 2017 4:32 AM  

"And it's a bit ironic that it was America's first black president who is chiefly responsible for spreading slavery around the world."

And don't forget the fact that Black leftists continue to laud Obama. They will turn a blind eye to the emergent slave market in Libya as they have done with slavery in other non-Western nations while continuing to damn America for having practiced slavery in its past.

Blogger APL April 21, 2017 4:34 AM  

Let's not forget Clinton, who gloated over the bestial murder of Gadaffi; "We came, we saw, he died. "

But also, the NATO stooges, David Cameron, and the French fellow at the time - can't remember his name.

It's not as if Gadaffi didn't warn then what would happen.

https://sputniknews.com/world/201509171027135147-gaddafi-libya-refugees-exodus-arab-spring/

Blogger Jon Mollison April 21, 2017 4:38 AM  

Math is hard, mkay?

Blogger Jonathan Wales April 21, 2017 4:52 AM  

We will see gunships over the Med sooner or later.

Blogger Jonathan Wales April 21, 2017 4:52 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Koanic April 21, 2017 5:00 AM  

It would be a terrible waste to sink a ship full of slaves already packed for transport.

Oil prices being what they are.

Blogger Sillon Bono April 21, 2017 5:04 AM  

@VD

Your solution is too soft:

The boats should not be sink, they should be blown up with artillery shells.

Its the humane way.

Although I would content myself with this much better plan:

1) Having a bridge head in north Africa were we could deport immigrants at industrial scale levels. Picture a piece of land 5m solid concrete walld with heavy machine guns.

2) Anyone found in a ship at sea is picked up by the military, put in chains and send back to the bridge head base where they are just told to go after being stripped of all they have, specially documentation (burn all of it).

3) Any ship confiscated is sent to a scrapyard next to the bridge head base to be dismantled and disposed of in a junkyard.

4) Any mutiny is either met with a shot to the head or a free helicopter ride.

5) Problematic immigrants already in Europe (90% of them) are sent to this base to be deported, regardless of their claimed origin, they are given a chance to return to their countries of origin, if they refuse, sent them to the base.

6) Those serving on the base receive a plus on their salary the more years of service there the higher the plus.

Blogger Superior hominid April 21, 2017 5:09 AM  

"When the migrant flotilla began, I immediately said that the boats and ships carrying migrants should be sunk as soon as they enter international waters."

I hope this is a sub-plot in Alt-Hero. With the migrants being turned into shark chum.

Blogger ghostfromplanetspook April 21, 2017 5:10 AM  

But you'd be sinking babies and pregnant women in those boats. They're behind the fighting age men if you squint hard enough...

Blogger Koanic April 21, 2017 5:14 AM  

But you'd be sinking babies and pregnant women in those boats.

Wonderful! Killing a few men from a polygamous society just saves them the trouble.

Anonymous Bz April 21, 2017 5:17 AM  

Mohammed Abdiker, head of operation and emergencies for the International Office of Migration, an intergovernmental organization that promotes “humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all"

Hm.

Blogger Feather Blade April 21, 2017 5:22 AM  

OTOH, since slavery is bad, (mmkay) it should be no trouble to convince Democrats to support efforts to cut off all trade and aid money to any nation that allows it.

Heh. Heh. Heh.

I crack me up.

Anonymous map April 21, 2017 5:42 AM  

OT:

This is completely worth listening to, especially the first 15 minutes.

http://conservativestream.com/recorded-shows/Savage_04-18-2017_WCB_FULL.mp3

Michael Savage comes out and says that American Empire is needed to protect Western Civilization. He comes out and says the Third World hates us and that we need to defend against it.

Anonymous RabidRatel April 21, 2017 5:43 AM  

For some people, this disaster was very much the "intended consequence"

Blogger JWM in SD April 21, 2017 5:46 AM  

Doesn't Spain already have that in Morocco ?

Blogger JWM in SD April 21, 2017 5:50 AM  

It is beginning to look like that doesn't it? Admittedly, I had been under the presumption that it was more coincidental opportunity but that was before I started seeing burkas in TX too.

Anonymous One Deplorable DT April 21, 2017 5:52 AM  

@13 - He comes out and says the Third World hates us and that we need to defend against it.

Gee...why would a Libyan, Iraqi, or Syrian ever hate us?

It must be because of our freedums!

Blogger peter blandings April 21, 2017 5:52 AM  

is there any doubt the same condition will emerge in syria if assad is disposed of? so why then is trump carrying on obama's policies there without skipping a beat. in fact he's escalating them; 59 cruise missiles. a hundred million dollars worth, blown to bits. but who's counting. it's only taxpayers' money, after all.

Anonymous Sensei April 21, 2017 5:57 AM  

Osgiliath and a thousand boats of orcs secretly crossing the Anduin is far away. Mordor is only a dark rumor. Right or Left, Hobbits worried about stray cows or at most a few dubious outsiders trickling in from Bree aren't going to understand, especially when all their news is from the Saruman Show.

Blogger ZhukovG April 21, 2017 6:15 AM  

@peter blandings: Why? I believe it is one of three possibilities:

1. Donald Trump always intended to do this. He is a fraud who lied to get elected with no intention of MAGA. I doubt this very seriously.

2. He is still working to MAGA, but has found he needs to be a bit more cunning about it. He is acting to neuter critics while building political capital for his America First policies. I consider this to be the most likely.

3. He has come to understand that even he cannot beat the 'Deep State'. That they will destroy him and his family. He believes he has no choice but to give in and act as they wish. This is possible, but I doubt it.

Anonymous Benjamin April 21, 2017 6:20 AM  

While I agree with the general thrust of your post Vox, I fail to see why we must go so far as to sink the boats. Returning the migrants to their own countries, or failing that to the North African country they used as a jumping point, would be just as effective a deterrent. Yes, somewhat more time and effort would be required, but it would save us from becoming murderers. Yes, murderers - because no matter how you try to spin such actions as ((((pragmatic)))), if you sink a boat full of migrants, you kill people for whom there is no actual *need* to be killed. And we are still a Christian, are we not Vox?

Blogger ZhukovG April 21, 2017 6:35 AM  

@ Benjamin: I believe he said, "Sink the boats", not machine gun people in the water.

It is customary to fire a warning shot across the bow. If the ship does not turn around, sink it. Pick up the survivors and deposit them on the coast of the country of embarkation.

I would go a step further. Brand each man of military age. Tell them if they get picked up again they will be immediately executed. If you find a man with the brand, shoot them in the head in front of the other survivors and toss the body overboard.

You should only have to kill a few people before the flood of invaders slows to a trickle.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable April 21, 2017 6:36 AM  

And we are still a Christian, are we not Vox?

God struck down Nadab and Abihu. He struck down Uzzah. He rewarded Phineas for spearing a couple having sex. There is real value in deterrence. You strike hard so you don't have to keep doing it over and over again.

So be "Christian" about it: announce the policy first, and sternly warn you're going to sink any boat entering international waters. From there, it's on their own heads.

Blogger Midnight Avenue J April 21, 2017 6:41 AM  

Well Benjamin you sink a few boats to send the message and you don't have to sink any others.

Blogger Koanic April 21, 2017 6:51 AM  

Let me count the number of times that Israelites showed any concern for the women and children of invaders, much less the military men.

One! When Jehovah struck the Syrian army blind, they were treated kindly and returned unharmed.

So before you start shooting, wave.

If they wave back, you're good to go.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable April 21, 2017 6:51 AM  

Furthermore, God struck down Ananias and Sapphira, as well as a number of Corinthians failing to "discern the body". That's just in the Church Age.

I suggest Europe would do well to be imitators of God in this respect.

Blogger Stilicho April 21, 2017 6:52 AM  

Obama the slaver is less ironic than you think. Both sides of his family have ties to slavery: his mother's family owned them while his father's family sold them. He was just carrying on an old family tradition...

Anonymous Blue Manticore April 21, 2017 6:55 AM  

The Law of Unintended Consequences is always going to haunt the foolish and those unable to grasp that actions always have consequences. And the do-gooders and humanitarians need to be held accountable for the unintended consequences of their actions, particularly those that are predictable.

Is the morality of an action to be decided on the basis of its consequences? Even those who accept this tend to restrict it to intended consequences.

Those who proudly welcomed refugees are absolutely responsible for slavery now. They are not good and virtuous people, they are stupid and evil people and they need to be regarded as such.

Although it doesn't mean the pro-refugee camp are necessarily good people the claim that they are morally as opposed to causally responsible for slavery is analogues to claiming the discoverers of bacterial culturing were responsible for all the horrors of biological warfare or that the creators of the aeroplane were for the bombing of Hiroshima.

Blogger Old Ez April 21, 2017 7:05 AM  

The Law of Unintended Consequences? :D That's a good one. This is the Oded Yinon plan being put into action. The outcome in Libya is exactly the outcome that it's planners wanted.

Blogger Desillusionerad April 21, 2017 7:13 AM  

Is the morality of an action to be decided on the basis of its consequences? Even those who accept this tend to restrict it to intended consequences.

No, Reasonably inferable consequences also count.
That toppling the current leader leads to a power vacuum resulting in chaos is assured.

Anonymous Lett Gou April 21, 2017 7:14 AM  

Well, this seems an opportune moment to suggest that we bomb the boats and feed the fish. Since shark populations appear to be crashing, this is good for the environment as well. It might even put a little colour back in those bleached coral reefs...

The Law of Unforseen Consequences, popularly known as Murphy's Law, will always bite you on the ass.

Blogger MrPaules April 21, 2017 7:16 AM  

When word gets back to the rest of Africa that migration is more likely to result in slavery than refugee status, the migration will stop. The humane thing to do is spread the word. The crisis will eventually take care of itself.

Anonymous Blue Manticore April 21, 2017 7:33 AM  

Desillusionerad wrote:Is the morality of an action to be decided on the basis of its consequences? Even those who accept this tend to restrict it to intended consequences.

No, Reasonably inferable consequences also count.

That toppling the current leader leads to a power vacuum resulting in chaos is assured.


With regards to those responsible for those military intervention policies the choice is between stupid or wicked...

Anonymous VFM #6306 April 21, 2017 7:39 AM  

At the very least, colleges could have paid Eric Clanton to stand on the dock and throw bike locks at the heads of the refugees.

After all, Muslim slave traders are natural conservatives...

Blogger F.D. Stephens April 21, 2017 7:40 AM  

"...actions always have consequences."

And "solutions" always create new problems.

Blogger CA3 April 21, 2017 7:44 AM  

Don't get yourself confused Vox. The west didn't open the door to a resurgence of slavery on the dark continent. Despite their best reports and numerous efforts to suppress and destroy it, it never left because there were too many powerful people on the continent profiting from the trade. If anything, it's been alive and well in Haiti as well, from what I've heard from members of that community.

While I don't follow news on mainstream, legacy, or controlled media and haven't in years, I suspect that the Libyan slave markets have likely been in operation since early 2012 after Muammar Gaddafi was brutally killed. Without him or his family in control, the various tribes and factions went about consolidating their regional power over the country. As we all know these sorts of groups depend on highly trained mercenaries as the core of their armies and most highly skilled men don't tend to work for free, regardless of what god they may pray to.

Around 2012, I remember seeing video footage of a lot of black Libyan men from the south of the country being held in detention/prisons in the north. The story being provided was that the rebels were trying to determine if the men had been apart of Gaddafi's mercenary army. I suspected at the time that the truth of the matter was that they were holding them to extort what, if any, money their families might have had left or to coerce them into joining their militias. From what I saw of the town/city these people had previously called home, it was utterly abandoned and burned out. Best guess is that when the rebels killed Gaddafi, old tribal/faction alignments took hold and the blacks, who had been protected under Gaddafi, found themselves both unprepared and under assault.

You want the migration to stop permanently? Stop US crop subsidies to farmers to grow surplus grain used to create food aid for third world countries. If they don't have free food, they won't have the energy to travel.

Anonymous Skyler the Weird April 21, 2017 8:04 AM  

The best way to end mass migration and Somali piracy with minimal loss of life is to sink all the boats while still in port. No Barbary Coast nor Red Sea nation is allowed to have sea going vessels. Create a version of the Spacing Guild to ship their products and sell them fish.

Blogger American Spartan April 21, 2017 8:07 AM  

Vox, what do you think should be done? Deportation to the "diversity" they claim to adore so much?

Or firing squads?

Do you think we will get the Fence funded?

I love your writing on immigration and Zionism,

Blogger tuberman April 21, 2017 8:08 AM  

OT.
That "Crime and Punishment" YouTube episode with Stefan, did that get done?

Blogger peter blandings April 21, 2017 8:13 AM  

@20 i believe your third possibility is the true situation. i believe he and his family have been threatened. why would he need to neuter is critics? he is the president; just ignore them. why would he need to build political capital? he just won the presidency. if you don't have all the capital you need after that, for at least 100 days, you're never going to have any. a lot of things are not making sense.

Blogger dc.sunsets April 21, 2017 8:20 AM  

Please, let 2017 be the final year of fashionable migrant invitation.

Let 2017 be the year we will remember as the point where pathological openness, pathological tolerance and pathological optimism finally tempered.

Please let 2017 be the inflection year, finally turning back the rising tide of Big Lies.

Please let 2017 be the year when those who surround us begin, en masse, to let REALITY carried by their optic nerves reach their consciousness.

Let this year be Peak Colleftistvism.

Anonymous Athor Pel April 21, 2017 8:21 AM  

"32. Blogger MrPaules April 21, 2017 7:16 AM
When word gets back to the rest of Africa that migration is more likely to result in slavery than refugee status, the migration will stop. ... "


Nope, it won't.

Ever seen a stupid person in a casino? Calculation of probability is not something they are good at.

Then there are those where slavery is a step up. Slaves are fed and housed and clothed.

You are using a first world lense on a third world situation.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 21, 2017 8:22 AM  

Since the Left is a woman the answer to this problem will be dumber than the answer to previous problem, not till her ego is crushed and a different strand of thought is offered will a woman change course.

I'll bet if you can inject the slavery issue into "mainstream" discourse then the answer will be invasion and armed escorts for the "refugees."

Blogger SteelPalm April 21, 2017 8:24 AM  

Not just in northern Africa. There was a great podcast Jared Taylor had on AmRen recently with a white fellow from South Africa who mentioned slavery a powerful black politician in South Africa bragging about how slavery exists there. Naturally, inflicted upon blacks by their fellow blacks.

They wear no shackles, but they are owned by a master. They work 364 days of the year except for one day where they get to drink as much milk and meat as they want.

Anonymous TS April 21, 2017 8:29 AM  

"They are stupid and evil people."

Stupid and evil producing the same results every time.

Blogger VD April 21, 2017 8:29 AM  

While I agree with the general thrust of your post Vox, I fail to see why we must go so far as to sink the boats. Returning the migrants to their own countries, or failing that to the North African country they used as a jumping point, would be just as effective a deterrent. Yes, somewhat more time and effort would be required, but it would save us from becoming murderers.

That's because you fail to see the obvious consequences of your refusal to act. Returning migrants is not a sufficient deterrent, because they simply try again.

It is not murder to kill those attempting to invade a country, particularly when they have been given fair warning that their invasion will be forcibly repelled.

Anonymous Jeff April 21, 2017 8:38 AM  

The good news for the USA is that illegals are escaping to Canada by the bus load. Literally, the bus and cab companies are running a human traffic ring:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcqHRsZJjcs&feature=share





Anonymous CarpeOro April 21, 2017 8:38 AM  

Reviewing the situation, I find myself becoming devoid of sympathy for the hordes trying to migrate from Africa and the Middle East to Europe. Unlike East European women getting caught up in the slave trade, they aren't looking for work - they are looking for hand outs. Seeing story after story ignored by the MSM at the behest of their masters but reaching us anyway through the internet, the anger grows for both those who look at the West as a endless sort of loot and for those who look to make serfs of the American Middle Class by destroying it.

Blogger Cail Corishev April 21, 2017 8:43 AM  

If sinking the boats of invaders is too mean, we could start by sinking the NGO ships that have been aiding and abetting them.

I fail to see why we must go so far as to sink the boats. Returning the migrants to their own countries, or failing that to the North African country they used as a jumping point, would be just as effective a deterrent.

You can't bluff with an obvious water gun.

If you tell the ships to turn around and they refuse, then what?

If you take out their engines and tow them home, and they just get on the next boat, then what?

If you take out their engines and start towing them, and they jump in the water and shout "My baby is drowning!" while media cameras film everything, then what?

If you load them onto your own boats and take them back to their continent and order them off, and they refuse to move, then what?

There's no clean, pretty solution, where you can just take people back and somehow they'll be convinced not to try again. They've been told there's an entire continent full of goodies just waiting for them to take it, and many of them have the additional motive of religious conquest. Giving them a ride home and a stern talking-to will only embolden them.

Anonymous badhairday April 21, 2017 8:45 AM  

I'd be interested to know who's building all those boats.

As to slavery, nobody cares. Its been alleged that you can now buy a 12 year old Syrian girl for about £120. Syrians lament this because Syrians are not usually for sale. (which implies that other middle eastern girls have been routinely for sale for years)

Virtue signallers care only about how signalling makes them feel. Its a drug. From their point of view more chaos means more things to virtue signal about.

Anonymous DissidentRight April 21, 2017 8:50 AM  

Just remember, then, that all of you who took the "moral" position of not sinking the ships bear at least some responsibility for both the invasion of Europe and the reinstitution of slavery.

I know and I do. And I have no doubt that at least some people I know, including my children/grandchildren will get killed as a result of tolerating the American analogy. The price of foolishness can be very high.

Blogger pnq8787 April 21, 2017 8:58 AM  

When the migrant crisis started I said to my brother that the solution was to take 1000 of the refugees in France or Germany and slaughter then publicly as a message to those still in Africa and the Middle East. Then give everyone else a fortnight to exit the country. The more time goes on, the more painful the solutions will be.

Blogger Robert Divinity April 21, 2017 9:00 AM  

Virtue signallers care only about how signalling makes them feel. Its a drug. From their point of view more chaos means more things to virtue signal about.

This, a thousand times. It's how those who strive to destroy the West and simultaneously profit from it manipulate indigenous populations.

The NGO's are blatantly operating as ferries from North Africa to Italy. It's obviously lucrative, both for the NGO's and the governments that avert their eyes.

Anonymous Marvin Boggs April 21, 2017 9:12 AM  

Some years ago, I was on vacation in Africa. A couple of expats there told me that the only way to deal with Africa was to isolate it for 100 years - no one, or thing, in or out for 100 years. After 100 years, check it out and see if things had been sorted out. If not, 100 more years. Sadly, I believe the expats were correct.

Anonymous David the minion April 21, 2017 9:21 AM  

Obama's family on his Kenyan father's side [if that man IS his father] were deeply involved in the slave trade. Muslims gotta muslim.

Blogger MrPaules April 21, 2017 9:32 AM  

The Barbary pirates under the nominal control of the Ottomans established a lucrative system for ransoming slaves. Update the system and apply market principles today. Invite bleeding hearts to contribute into a fund for the emancipation of captive Africans. Slavery will increase as the value of slaves goes up. Repatriated Africans will eventually spread the word to their home countries. And all the while the very people whose good intentions caused the problem will pay for the solution. Win-win-win.

Anonymous Grayman April 21, 2017 9:51 AM  

Benjamin wrote:While I agree with the general thrust of your post Vox, I fail to see why we must go so far as to sink the boats. Returning the migrants to their own countries, or failing that to the North African country they used as a jumping point, would be just as effective a deterrent. Yes, somewhat more time and effort would be required, but it would save us from becoming murderers. Yes, murderers - because no matter how you try to spin such actions as ((((pragmatic)))), if you sink a boat full of migrants, you kill people for whom there is no actual *need* to be killed. And we are still a Christian, are we not Vox?

No, there are few other choices. What nation is going to accept all of the people back? Pakistan and other nations are refusing to accept back their own people when it is well documented those people are from that nation. In large part there is no way to fully document or verify where the people are from by the time they are attempting to enter Europe.
Since you cannot verify where they came from and no nation is going to willingly let you dump 10’s of thousands of hungry unskilled mouths on their doorstep, you would have to form a military beach-head in Libya or Syria and then ship these people there by force promptly kicking them out the front gate under threat of force.
All that does is destabilize that nation/region and could actually exacerbate the flow of invading immigrants. At this point you would have to start a basic beach head operation and widely announce that any ships attempting to enter European waters within clearance will be sunk on site. Fair warning would have been given. At that point any deaths are the responsibility of those who tried to cross.

There is no way to stop the flow without the threat of and proven willingness to use force.

Blogger DrAndroSF April 21, 2017 10:04 AM  

The same strategy and tactics should have been used years ago to defend our southern border

Anonymous AM April 21, 2017 10:14 AM  

@28 BlueManticore

Use your head, man. There's nothing worse than a moral critic whose moral reasoning is superficial. The morality of an action is judged partly by the quality of the act, per se, and then by the intent of the actor. But part of the intent behind the act, will involve whether one intended to do it well, with due diligence, or not. Where somebody should know better, failure to act prudently incurs a responsibility for the bad effects of a misdeed, even if the strict moral guilt is only for the malice of imprudence.

As an example: Bob is a moron who added a second story onto his house without proper support in the architecture below. He loads it up with very heavy stuff, and invites his extended family over to celebrate the renovations. During the party, the upper floor collapses and kills his wife, kids, parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. He survives because he wss pissing in the petunias out back. At his next confession, Bob is obliged to confess negligence, lack of charity, impiety, rash judgment,etc., even if he does not have to confess murder per se. In my old examination of conscience manual, it includes such items as: leaving firearms or poisons lying out where children may easily abuse them; leaving alcohol out knowing a family member struggles with drunkenness, etc. The point: yes, even if the subjective guilt for the malice of an unintended consequence caanot be imputed to feckless people, still they are guilty of sins of imprudence, impudence, despite, etc., and incur legal and moral responsibility for evil consequences when there is an expectation that they should know better, care more, etc.

Blogger Vikki Wilson April 21, 2017 10:21 AM  

Those serious about stopping the boats may find the effective Australian policy of interest: it has now worked twice (after open borders was reinstituted by leftist governments)
Blowing migrants out of the water may give some people a sense of satisfaction but is a policy doomed to failure by its unnecessary murderousness. An effective and humane substitute for killing people was used: intercepted migrants were transferred to unsinkable sealed lifeboats and towed back to home port waters.
Further factors in the policy’s success:
- The steely resolve of the Minister for Immigration braving incessant open border left/media hate campaigning.
- The strong support of Prime Minister and public opinion.
- Military involvement at the operational level
- Limited press information delivered after events.
- Internment of boat-people off coast avoiding the jurisdiction of open border judiciary
- ( similar to Guantanamo)
- No prospect of those attaining refugee status obtaining resettlement in Australia.
- When PNG was offered as a safe resettlement country, many migrants elected to fly home. 
- A manageable humanitarian quota of certified refugees is taken by Australia from camps.

Check out the "space capsule" lifeboats that washed up on Indonesian beaches. Apologies for eccentric formatting. :P

Blogger peter blandings April 21, 2017 10:31 AM  

Its been alleged that you can now buy a 12 year old Syrian girl for about £120.
what's the shipping on that? and do they take american express?

Anonymous Avalanche April 21, 2017 10:37 AM  

@4 We will see gunships over the Med sooner or later."

Please, God, make it sooner!

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky April 21, 2017 10:45 AM  

First, sink the "humanitarian" vessels. They are human traffickers by any other name.

Anonymous Avalanche April 21, 2017 10:48 AM  

@49 "If sinking the boats of invaders is too mean, we could start by sinking the NGO ships that have been aiding and abetting them."

Instead of sinking the NGO boats, shanghai the crews and drop them off in their intended pick-up zones, AFTER removing all their paperwork and phones. If they care so much about the rapefugees, let them JOIN them! Then, tow the boats (if actually sea worthy) to be either refitted and sold to ACTUAL Europeans -- or give 'em to the shipbreakers.

Anonymous Bobby Farr April 21, 2017 11:40 AM  

Migrants are simply the invaders of old coming to rape and pillage. The only difference is that they now come unarmed in the expectation that the natives will willingly collect and hand over the loot or that local warlords (e.g. Merkel) will use force to collect a generous tribute. A violent response to invaders is as justified now as it was then.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey April 21, 2017 11:45 AM  

@APL

"the French fellow at the time - can't remember his name."

(((Sarkozy)))

Anonymous BBGKB April 21, 2017 12:05 PM  

Gen BLackjack Pershing knew how to handle the 3rd world

Today, people are selling other human beings out in the open.

There has never been a year that selling slaves in Africa was not out in the open unless it was raining.

Gee...why would a Libyan, Iraqi, or Syrian ever hate us?

Same reason the jews hate Boy Scouts, not only are they anti corruption but Scouts celebrate being Freiers. http://articles.latimes.com/1997/jul/25/news/mn-16208

When word gets back to the rest of Africa that migration is more likely to result in slavery than refugee status, the migration will stop

Some DieVerse Cities have tried to outlaw any new payday loan offices, because they know explaining math is useless.

As to slavery, nobody cares. Its been alleged that you can now buy a 12 year old Syrian girl for about £120

Someone tell Fred Reed, maybe moving to Syria will uncuck him.

Stop US crop subsidies to farmers to grow surplus grain used to create food aid for third world countries. If they don't have free food, they won't have the energy to travel

This is why I stop at saying stop sending food/medicine to the 3rd world, so people don't see it threatens a sacred cow. But there are hungry people in the US, seeing a long line of white women at a food pantry was a wake up call.

Invite bleeding hearts to contribute into a fund for the emancipation of captive Africans.

I sometimes toss out the names of charities that buy slaves to set them free, in full knowledge that they will likely be slaves again within the next week. "I am collecting for feed the nigglets to make more niglets" "Sorry I give to the charity that buys slaves in Africa to set them free"

In my old examination of conscience manual, it includes such items as: leaving firearms or poisons lying out where children may easily abuse them

What if you have no children but leave a poisoned bottle of booze out in the open when you go on vacation?

Blogger Sagramore April 21, 2017 12:52 PM  

@47 That's because CANADA is a fake boat in the City yacht club and the Third Safe Country agreement only applies in actual ports. Refugees simply take to the woods. Vermont to Quebec is a good route for francophones I hear.

(As an aside, they closed the Calais camp just in time. It's only a short swim to Guernsey.)

Anonymous Grayman April 21, 2017 12:53 PM  

peter blandings wrote: Its been alleged that you can now buy a 12 year old Syrian girl for about £120.

what's the shipping on that? and do they take american express?


Is there an Amazon link? Do they offer Drone delivery?

Blogger Robert What? April 21, 2017 1:01 PM  

If Israel want "regime change" in Syria (and let's be honest: that is what it is all about), let them do it, and not connive some gullible American President to do it for them. Israel would rather have a multitude of little tribal areas fighting amongst each other than a stable, powerful Arab state. There is absolutely no benefit to the US in deposing Assad.

Anonymous badhairday April 21, 2017 3:48 PM  

@ 69. Grayman

Surface mail only.
Make sure you check the 'with life-jacket' option unless you like your deliveries pre Podestered.

Anonymous Benjamin April 21, 2017 4:48 PM  

VD wrote:That's because you fail to see the obvious consequences of your refusal to act. Returning migrants is not a sufficient deterrent, because they simply try again.

Really? It seems to work fine for Australia (see comment sixty). If the migrants know that their efforts have a 100% chance of failure, why would they try in the first place? Maybe you've become intellectually lazy recently from only having to deal with inane leftists, but if you make an assertion, you have to back it up.

There are plenty of potential solutions to the refugee crisis which don't involve mass murder. I assume you're smart enough to realise that, but your position on the issue does not speak well of your character or your intelligence. Imagine you were the captain of a gunboat who has encountered a boatload of migrants. Would your first course of action honestly be to blast them out of the water? If so, I can only conclude that you either have no morality or no intelligence. Or would you decide differently? In which case I can only conclude that you don't mean what you say, and were only engaged in dick-measuring and badass-signaling.

Remember Vox, our home is not of this world. Important as it is to defend the West, our moral decisions ultimately matter more.

VD wrote:It is not murder to kill those attempting to invade a country, particularly when they have been given fair warning that their invasion will be forcibly repelled.

Yes, they are invaders. But do you understand the principles of proportionate and necessary force? Do you understand 4GW? Using drones and ground-to-air missiles against goad herders with rifles makes them heroes. Sinking a tub full of unarmed migrants with a gunboat will make them martyrs. Never use more force than you need to defeat an enemy. If you took your own advice, you would lose the moral aspect of the war for the West in a stroke.

Blogger Rez Zircon April 21, 2017 6:21 PM  

Look on the bright side... it's that many fewer migrants making it to Europe.

Blogger Vikki Wilson April 21, 2017 7:28 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger tz April 21, 2017 9:34 PM  

Interesting. Ludwig von Mises noted Diversity + Proximity = War though didn't put it in quite those terms.

(from Lew Rockwell condemning open borders)

Mises goes further, however, and argues that even an end to interventionism will not resolve the conflict of nationalities. Almost alone among classical liberals of his era and modern libertarians, Mises clearly recognizes that laissez-faire capitalism and free trade are necessary but not sufficient to ensure peace among different groups of individuals forced to live under a unified political system who voluntarily and naturally self-identify as different peoples or nations on the basis of language, shared customs and traditions, religion, heritage or any other objective factor that is subjectively meaningful to them. As Mises states

[quoting Mises:]

All these disadvantages [experienced by minorities] are felt to be very oppressive even in a state with a liberal constitution in which the activity of the government is restricted to the protection of the life and property of the citizens. But they become quite intolerable in an interventionist or socialist state.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 21, 2017 10:14 PM  

tz wrote:Mises clearly recognizes that laissez-faire capitalism and free trade are necessary but not sufficient to ensure peace among different groups of individuals
Simply false. Neither is needed. In most cases, they are actually enervating factors.
Separation is what is needed.

Blogger DonReynolds April 21, 2017 10:21 PM  

Excuse me.....Maybe I had my television on the wrong channel, but I seem to remember that Donald Trump was elected president of the United States (not Syria) and his role in this rotten world is to protect Americans (not Syrians). Maybe something has changed or I missed a news cycle. Ya hafta keep up with these things here lately. For that I keep a spiral notebook and ink pen....circling the campaign promises that are kept and scribbling out the ones that are completely reversed...."due to changing circumstances" or Ivanka or whatever.

Blogger Tom Kratman April 22, 2017 12:04 PM  

The thing people miss, or refuse to see, is that you really won't have to sink many ships, or maybe more than one, you really won't have to auction off as slaves many illegals, maybe only a few (who can be liberated and kicked over the border), before the flow simply stops dead.

Anonymous AM April 22, 2017 2:21 PM  

What if you have no children but leave a poisoned bottle of booze out in the open when you go on vacation?

If the only people who would be in your home during vacation are trespassers, more power to you; you have the natural right to kill them, so, they get what they deserve.

Anonymous AM April 22, 2017 2:23 PM  

What if you have no children but leave a poisoned bottle of booze out in the open when you go on vacation?

If the only people who would be in your home during vacation are trespassers, more power to you; you have the natural right to kill them, so, they get what they deserve.

Anonymous Clay April 22, 2017 9:03 PM  

Umm..the US can't be sinking ships in the Med, full of "civilians".

It just won't work on the World Stage.

Led the Med countries take care of that, and consider that their "hemisphere".

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts