Hypocrit EU builds Apartheid Wall

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wall
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the construction of walls and fences by the EU and their implications, particularly in relation to immigration and security. Participants explore the perceived hypocrisy of the EU's actions compared to their criticisms of Israel's security measures, as well as the broader context of border security in various countries.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express hope that the wall will effectively control immigration both in and out of the EU.
  • Others point out that similar walls and fences have existed in Britain and France for years, suggesting a precedent for such measures.
  • A viewpoint is presented that the EU is justified in building fences to manage illegal immigration and enhance security.
  • Concerns are raised about the perceived hypocrisy of the EU constructing walls while criticizing Israel's security fence.
  • Some argue that the EU's wall serves different purposes than Israel's, which is seen as exacerbating tensions in a conflict zone.
  • Participants discuss the legality of Israel's security fence and its implications for ethnic cleansing, with conflicting interpretations of what constitutes such actions.
  • There are assertions that the wall does not forcibly remove or relocate people, thus questioning the classification of it as ethnic cleansing.
  • Some participants challenge the emotional arguments surrounding the wall, advocating for a logical approach to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the EU's wall or the legality and morality of Israel's security measures. Multiple competing views remain regarding the definitions and consequences of such actions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about immigration, security, and international law that are not universally accepted. Participants reference historical and contemporary examples that may not be directly comparable.

kat
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39998
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let’s hope the wall does as well keeping people in as it does keeping people out.
 
For those whe don't know, Britain has had such walls, or fences, for years. As has France. They built them around the ends of the Chunnel.
 
AWESOME! Maybe now we can get the French to help us build a wall between Texas and Mexico...
 
The EU and especially Britain are entitled to build fences to keep out illegal immigrants, as it saves a lot of hassle. In this manner, one can more effectively monitor the people living in the countries. This helps with regard to crime and tax matters. The number of indians/ chinese/ pakistanis which enter the EU by way of these borders is huge. Only legal assylum seekers (non of which should come from these countries) should be allowed to enter. Similarly, I do not see what is wrong about monitoring the italian/ spanish coastline to try to halt african illegal immigrants.

To blast anyone caring about such immigration is very harmful.
 
So how did Israel's security fence violate international law? The EU is just reinforcing borders that are already there.

I lived in Detroit and there is one of the most active border crossing between the US and Canada, getting out of the US is easy.. getting in is a whole other story.
 
Monique said:
getting out of the US is easy.. getting in is a whole other story.

It is easy to get into the US as testified by the large numbers of mexicans in the south.
 
At official border crossings such as the one in Detroit. Even with a valid visa you get fired with a lot of questions before they let you in (and I'm not even a suspicious looking person :wink: or from a problematic country).
 
I do not like these EU fences, and this is pretty hypocritical, although the walls are for different purposes.
 
  • #10
For those who don't know, the USA has fences in various places along the border with Mexico, as WasteofO2 pointed out. The USA has men with guns patrolling points of access. You go through security checkpoints, and they have the face of Bush staring stupidly from posters all over the place, while the men with guns stand by just in case. Metal detectors, chemical sniffers, firearms, dogs, and all manner of deadly obstacles await any attempting to enter the USA though even a regular civilian airport.

Most countries have the same, and have had such for a very long time.
 
  • #11
Dissident Dan said:
I do not like these EU fences, and this is pretty hypocritical, although the walls are for different purposes.
Why is it hypocritical?
 
  • #12
Monique said:
Why is it hypocritical?

They decried Israel's wall and put up their own. The EU's wall probably does not have the same capacity to increase tensions in an already-tense area as Israel's wall does, though.
 
  • #13
If the EU built their wall outside of the EU then you might have a point. Israel's wall is not actually in Israel.
 
  • #14
Dissident Dan said:
They decried Israel's wall and put up their own. The EU's wall probably does not have the same capacity to increase tensions in an already-tense area as Israel's wall does, though.
No it's being put up to protect their heritage and their economy as opposed to protecting people from being murdered.
 
  • #15
So I'll ask again: how did Israel's security fence violate international law?
 
  • #16
http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idocket/imwp/imwpframe.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
Would the fence around my garden be a problem too?
 
  • #18
Monique said:
Would the fence around my garden be a problem too?

If you built in your neighbours garden, yes.
 
  • #19
Exactly :approve:
 
  • #20
Monique said:
So I'll ask again: how did Israel's security fence violate international law?

That bit about "ethnic cleansing"...
 
  • #21
Adam and his convuluted claims strike again.
 
  • #22
kat said:
Adam and his convuluted claims strike again.
As a Convolutionist, I'm offended. :biggrin: :biggrin:
 
  • #23
Lol, sorry!
 
  • #24
Baseless assertions again, Kat? Do you need me to provide you with definitions again? Very well.
The systematic elimination of an ethnic group or groups from a region or society, as by deportation, forced emigration, or genocide.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ethnic cleansing
The wall is a method of excluding Palestinians from an area. Thus, it is ethnic cleansing.
 
  • #25
So how did Israel's security fence violate international law? The EU is just reinforcing borders that are already there.

Israel has a responsibility to take care of the land and the people that it controls.
It is illegal and immoral to disregard that responsibility.

If Israel wishes to have an independent country then they must give up control and help Palestine become an independent country.

There will never be peace in the Holy Land until there is a change in attitude. Israel must give up the idea of an eye for an eye. Instead of destroying homes they should build houses and hospitals for the people of Palestine.

It is not difficult to see the end result if things do not change. The first or second country in the Middle East that gets nuclear weapons will use them on Israel.

That time is at most 10 to 20 years away.

It may even be less if you take note that we have no support for trying to stabilize the Middle East and prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

The people of the world have no view of what is taking place and are not supporting the US effort.
 
  • #26
The wall is a method of excluding Palestinians from an area. Thus, it is ethnic cleansing.

Funny, the wall does not: commit genocide, force emigration, or deport anyone.

It merely impedes passage from one side to the other: it is not capable of relocation, and therefore cannot eliminate an ethnic group from a region.



Israel has a responsibility to take care of the land and the people that it controls ...

Maybe if condemnations of Israel would be more convincing if they didn't pretend there is one side to every issue. *shrug*
 
  • #27
Hurkyl said:
Funny, the wall does not: commit genocide, force emigration, or deport anyone.

It merely impedes passage from one side to the other: it is not capable of relocation, and therefore cannot eliminate an ethnic group from a region.
Nor did Germany's bullets during WW2 commit ethnic cleansing, right? Think before typing, dude.
 
  • #28
Adam said:
Nor did Germany's bullets during WW2 commit ethnic cleansing, right? Think before typing, dude.

Nobody claimed german bullets were behind the ethnic cleansing... dude..
 
  • #29
Studentx, to put it simply, you just don't get it. Sit back and wait for the rubber ball.
 
  • #30
I got it, but your point was so flawed i had to hold the mirror. Yeah its not pretty is it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
7K
Replies
80
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
7K