France election
- Thread starter Tiny Hands Trump
- Start date
This woman is garbage
France is going to be 'totally deadlocked,' National Rally leader Marine Le Pen says
France is going to be 'totally deadlocked,' National Rally leader Marine Le Pen says
Doesn't anybody at least worry about the quality of person that immigrates (or is granted refugee status) into a country?
1) You want to at least have a pretty good idea that the person wants to integrate themselves into the dominant culture.
2) You want to know that I they can integrate, and that they can contribute enough to society.
Some countries sort of make sure this happens by requiring the immigrant candidate at least have a varifiable skill set and or education.
You have to wonder how many people from certain regions of the world - say Afghanistan - can well integrate into modern western societies and economies.
I get the feeling the left is a bit naive - overly concerned about not being ”mean" - where some of these questions are concerned.
Basically ... Being overly optimistic about human nature. It's probably true that certain people are A) not ready culturally to integrate and B) not cognitively capable at performing at a high level in a western society.
I think you have to weed those people out.
Also: I find the position that this is needed for economic reasons to be a bit odd sense of most of them would tell you we don't need infinite economic growth, we don't need to worry about the birth rate... it's better for our environment if there is less of us anyway.
1) You want to at least have a pretty good idea that the person wants to integrate themselves into the dominant culture.
2) You want to know that I they can integrate, and that they can contribute enough to society.
Some countries sort of make sure this happens by requiring the immigrant candidate at least have a varifiable skill set and or education.
You have to wonder how many people from certain regions of the world - say Afghanistan - can well integrate into modern western societies and economies.
I get the feeling the left is a bit naive - overly concerned about not being ”mean" - where some of these questions are concerned.
Basically ... Being overly optimistic about human nature. It's probably true that certain people are A) not ready culturally to integrate and B) not cognitively capable at performing at a high level in a western society.
I think you have to weed those people out.
Also: I find the position that this is needed for economic reasons to be a bit odd sense of most of them would tell you we don't need infinite economic growth, we don't need to worry about the birth rate... it's better for our environment if there is less of us anyway.
There were no such requirements at Ellis Island.
France and other European nations weren’t built to be a melting pot
Last edited:
^^^^This guy voted for the guy below to get a Noble Peace prize and thinks 45 dropped more bombs lololol. This is a parody account and not to be taken seriously. Learn a little below(also notice how DemoKlans love them some Bush now as well? Odd)
The map that shows where Barack Obama dropped his 20,000 bombs
Outgoing US leader carries out 3,000 more strikes in 2016 than year beforewww.independent.co.uk
10x more than Bush
Bring those Trump facts to the table Comrade
That’s only drone strikes. In fact I dug deeper and the ONLY other way one can say Obama bombed more than Bush is if you take the needless and disastrous Iraq War that Bush got us into out of the equation. Trump then ramped up the bombing to unprecedented levels. Facts over your feelings.
And they’re all about to find out that standing armies are useless if the citizens themselves are unarmed.
Europe has fallen.
Because the Soviets realized we were serious, so they backed down instead of trying to run our illegal blockade of Cuba and starting WW3.
If the Soviets had ignored the blockade, tried to run it, do you think JFK was going to back down? During the deliberations he wondered if he'd be impeached for not invading!
They removed the missles because the US secretly promised to remove our missles from Turkey and publicly promised not to invade Cuba..
IF THESE RADICAL MARXIST BETA CUCK LIBS WANT SOMETHING FOR FREE, THEY CAN COME TO SOUTHERN CLAYTON COUNTY AND GET PUNCHED IN DA FACE BY DA HITMAN AT NO COST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BUT THAT MEANS THEY WOULD NEED TO LEAVE THE INTERSTATE BATHHOUSES AND STOP EATING ALL THAT SEMEN AND SOY AND LAB MEAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AFTER DA HITMAN PUNCHES SOME LOONY LIBTAHDS IN DA FACE, HE'LL WASH DOWN HIS ALPHA DAWG MASCULINITY WITH A COUPLE CANS OF ICE COLD SPRITE AND THEN BEND OVER HIS LADY AND PUT DAT AZZ IN A COMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The new PM is calling for 90% tax rate on people making 400k euros. I’m all for taxing the rich, but that rate is going to cause blowback
France's leftist coalition demands the right to form a government after fractured parliament vote
The leftist coalition that won the most seats in France's National Assembly in surprise results is now demanding the immediate right to form a government, even though no grouping won a majority of seats.
apnews.com
Hopefully France doesn’t get to far entangled in Penn’s communist philosophy/math before deciding there is a better alternative to isolation and self-destruction. You have to be round and functional to be a world leader. Hopefully, America is watching the news about to unfold in France and makes better decisions next Fall.
France's leftist coalition demands the right to form a government after fractured parliament vote
The leftist coalition that won the most seats in France's National Assembly in surprise results is now demanding the immediate right to form a government, even though no grouping won a majority of seats.
No they aren’t…….Germans are much more pragmatic than the French…..the French believe $$ grows on trees……Germans understand this is not so.
The French want taxes at 90%
Islam will change Europe to an unrecognizable place in my kids lifetime
The Soviets got what they wanted. They didn't stop because of a blockade. To the Soviets, JFK backed down. Win win all around.
You’re wrong on the timeline, and when reviewing the how and why in history the order of events matters:
On October 24, Khrushchev responded to Kennedy’s message with a statement that the U.S. “blockade” was an “act of aggression” and that Soviet ships bound for Cuba would be ordered to proceed. Nevertheless, during October 24 and 25, some ships turned back from the quarantine line; others were stopped by U.S. naval forces, but they contained no offensive weapons and so were allowed to proceed. Meanwhile, U.S. reconnaissance flights over Cuba indicated the Soviet missile sites were nearing operational readiness. With no apparent end to the crisis in sight, U.S. forces were placed at DEFCON 2—meaning war involving the Strategic Air Command was imminent. On October 26, Kennedy told his advisors it appeared that only a U.S. attack on Cuba would remove the missiles, but he insisted on giving the diplomatic channel a little more time. The crisis had reached a virtual stalemate.
That afternoon, however, the crisis took a dramatic turn. ABC News correspondent John Scali reported to the White House that he had been approached by a Soviet agent suggesting that an agreement could be reached in which the Soviets would remove their missiles from Cuba if the United States promised not to invade the island. While White House staff scrambled to assess the validity of this “back channel” offer, Khrushchev sent Kennedy a message the evening of October 26, which meant it was sent in the middle of the night Moscow time.
The ships turned around two days before the deal was proffered.
These are historical facts.
Ships turned around October 24.
The Turkey deal was offered October 26.
If instead of turning around October 24 the Soviets ran the blockade we’d have a shooting war before the Turkish deal was on the table.
The ****ing horror! How can we allow these monsters to live among us! Something must be done!
You can believe what you want. I'm simply saying that in other parts of the world, it is viewed differently. Generally speaking, both nations had angles and things spiraled out of control and neither side wanted to die on principle.
Do you have ANY source stating that Soviet vessels did not turn away from the blockade on October 24th and 25th?
Or are you just ‘believing what you want’?
No, I've taught at some Ukrainian universities and know what they think and teach.
I suggest not only reading US sources.
As an example, the Germans could have squashed the Brits at Dunkirk and chose not to.
General McAuliff at Bastogne actually said, "Aw Nuts, what are we going to do now?", not Nuts!...at least not originally.
History is rarely quite as advertised. We can go on and on. The US dropped the BOMB to save US lives. The real reason was to prevent Japan North and scar the Soviets.
The US fought a lot of Ukrainians at Normandy.
The Soviets had pushed back Germany hundreds of miles and recaptured Kyiv in Nov 44 way ahead of Normandy.
Gulf of Tonkin.
The Hungarian uprising fighting started when groups murdered the families of Officers.
The Brits secretly were working with the Soviets behind the back of the US. and so on
Jimmy Carter actually started the US on the path of a rapid deployment military...Not Reagan.
Similar threads
