Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SARMAN who wrote (803698)	8/26/2014 12:03:07 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 1579940

Hi SARMAN; Re: "What Bruce and others here on this thread fear the most will materialize. At some point, the balance will tip demographically! "; This can happen in small regions; I don't doubt that Israel could end up in trouble. But for the US or UK certainly not. (1) Most Moslems who move to western countries become westernized. Sure some of them join ISIS but the majority do not. (2) Religion in the west gets attenuated. I remember talking to a guy who came to the US from Poland as a result of the Solidarity thing. He was imagining that his children would be speaking Polish (which is realistic if he does it at home) and that their children would also, etc. Well what actually happens is that a lot of their children end up marrying people of another ethnic group and when you decide on how to raise them, the language and culture of the locals wins out. It's not just Moslems that this happens to, it famously happens to the Jews. (3) Fertility rates in Moslem countries are lower now than fertility rates in Christian countries were 100 years ago, and Moslem fertility rates are falling. It's the demographic transition and it is universal. Here's an article for you: Well, the only major religion left out of the demographic transition was Islam until the 1980s. At least until the late 70s, the total fertility rates were quite high—6 per woman. But as a religious group, fertility started declining in predominately Muslim countries then. So the role of religion in determining family size has largely disappeared...The only exceptions where fertility hasn't declined much in predominately Muslim countries are Somalia, Afghanistan, and Yemen. prb.org Note that Somalia, Afghanistan and Yemen are a tiny percentage of the Moslem world. (4) Right now there are 2.1 billion Christians and 1.6 billion Moslems. With a present difference in growth rates of around 0.5% per year it will be about 54 years before equality is reached, LOL. But that's world-wide. The Christian countries will largely remain Christian. And by 54 years from now, the Moslems will have completed the demographic / fertility transition. Re: "That was history and will not happen today!"; The last war ended in August 1945. At that time, every single major country, on all sides of the war, operated concentration camps. The same went on during the 1st world war. And yet you think that it cannot happen today. No. In wartime, war measures are taken. This has always been the way it's been. Peacetime always make the western countries look peaceful. Don't believe it. Sometimes foreigners get the impression that the western democracies are peaceful places that never abridge the freedom of the people living there. To the extent that this is ever true, it is only true during peacetime. During wartime the US President has emergency powers and can do whatever he likes. This is not in the constitution (except that President is given control over the military) but it is a fact of US history. Re: " They might infiltrate in the F-UK-US and create havoc to local population. "; True "havoc" (i.e. havoc on the order of what happens in a major war) has never been created by any terrorists in any major country on this planet ever. Why do you think it's suddenly going to start happening in the future? You're dreaming. Stuff that makes the news, fireworks on the order of what goes on in Israel? Yeah sure that can happen. But note that so far, Israel is still doing just fine. And the US, unlike Israel, is a world power that doesn't have to worry about the effects of doing nasty things. Real war, like love, is never having to say you're sorry. What's gone on so far is quite mild. If it ever got out of hand the western countries would simply put aliens and those inclined towards military action against it, into concentration camps. It's been done before in every recent major war by every major country. The future will certainly be no exception. And when they do it, they will say it's for the detainees own good, to protect them during the emergency, LOL. I recall that the Nazis said exactly the same thing about their concentration camps (which camps didn't get completely nasty until Germany ran out of food when the Anglo Saxons cut off their food imports by blockade). Here's the most recent (2009) US law authorizing the construction of suitable camps in the US, on military installations (which are guarded of course): In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations. *(b) Purpose of national emergency centers*The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure— (1) To provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families* dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;* ... govtrack.us -- Carl

To: SARMAN who wrote (803698)	8/27/2014 6:28:17 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 1579940

Hi SARMAN; Re: "That [concentration camps for aliens] was history and will not happen today!"; Maybe you're right. Maybe the US is treating people better than it used to. For example, the US treats enemy prisoners a lot kinder and gentler than we used to. In the bad old days, we frequently gave captured enemy prisoners "parole". This meant that they were free, but promised to not fight against the US again. This was unimaginably cruel, to let them run free where they could easily be hurt! They had to feed themselves sometimes instead of starve to death in our prisons! Look at how roughly prisoners were treated before we learned modern methods: Revolutionary War and War of 1812 (around 1776 to 1815) Three other aspects were different from those normally seen in modern warfare. The first is that letters were permitted and sometimes even encouraged. Prisoners could buy or exchange for food and clothing, including any money sent by their families. The second was the use of 'Parole' by both sides. This would allow prisoners some freedom, in exchange for their promise not to resume the war. The last is that prisoners were encouraged to enlist in the army of the other side. en.wikipedia.org Civil War (1861 to 1865) Lacking means for dealing with large numbers of captured troops early in the American Civil War, the Union and Confederate governments both relied on the traditional European system of parole and exchange of prisoners. A prisoner who was on parole promised not to fight again until his name was "exchanged" for a similar man on the other side. Then both of them could rejoin their units. While awaiting exchange, prisoners were briefly confined to permanent camps. en.wikipedia.org Of course making a man promise not to fight is unimaginably cruel. This practice was halted in the 20th century when we began making large prisoner of war camps. And nowadays we're much kinder to our prisoners. Our lawyers probably wouldn't allow us to use parole. Instead we give them a modern innovation we call "waterboard". This allows them to speak freely and share their innermost thoughts with us. And we don't let them languish in prison now. We organize games and entertainment. For example, we strip them naked and make them climb on top of each other! Lots of fun and such good exercise! We would never have done something so nice back in the cruel old days. Medical treatment for prisoners is much better now than it was in the past. Now our prisons come with batteries so we can provide shock treatment to the prisoners that need it. We find this works best on their genitals. Who would want to suffer under bad old methods like "parole"? Back during the old days, it was traditional for the commander of a naval vessel to surrender his ship by giving up his sword. Since they were unimaginably cruel back then, the victor frequently refused the sword and let the commander keep it. This was considered "honor!" Psychologically, that's pure torture, to be allowed a sword while you're a prisoner. It would be the last thing you'd want to see. Now we understand psychology much better so we force our prisoners to masturbate each other. So maybe you're right! Maybe the US is becoming kinder and gentler just like (our) historians say! Maybe we wouldn't use the concentration camps we're building to house enemy aliens who have sworn to destroy our country! Instead we'll just let them walk around free so they can destroy things and kill people. -- Carl