Comments by "Golag Is watching you" (@golagiswatchingyou2966) on "Into Europe" channel.

  1. the main problem I'm seeing with the issue of refugees and migration in general is that it's unsustainable, regardless on who takes care of them or who houses them, the reality is that people will keep coming due to climate change, due to wars (sometimes caused by the USA, France, UK or internal conflicts) and Europe being closest to these danger zones (Africa, the Middle east, Central Asia) it will remain a major issue that neither side can realy solve. No migration side is wrong not for not wanting migrants but for not realising just how difficult it is to house and maintain such amount of people who either just want to survive or want to get ahead in life (we all do, that's what humans do), however the open migration side is also wrong because of the problems and costs it brings with it to western nations as well as spark the flames of resentment and nationalism which is not good for a European level solution which is what's actually needed. I would then propose a different solution, one that is unpopular and will set a new geopolitical reality that some of it's big players aren't welcoming of, EU Military peacekeeping missions, what this would mean is the creation of a legitimate EU level military force, to be placed or engage near the entry points of migration flows and outside of EU countries like Morroco, Turkey, Tunnisia, Libya, so on where they would be tasked with maintaining order, help screen refugees and host refugee camps where they can then be transported to host nations or be able to integrate into the local societies, economies or develop skills needed later in life to rebuild their country of origin if possible. the reason why this solution is unlikely to be taken is that the EU does not have the power or right to use such a military force, that it would be a more federated EU type of solution and that it would project an image of neo-collonialism to the rest of the world, as well as agitate certain geopolitical players by seeing a modern EU wide military force near their borders potentially but untill such a long term solution if implemented this will continue to be an issue and it's going to become much, much worse compared to 2015, as we move into the 2030s and 2040s, better to get to work with it now for when it's needed than the scramble later when shit inevitably hits the fan.
    82
  2. 32
  3. 30
  4. 15
  5. 14
  6. 14
  7. 14
  8. 12
  9. 11
  10. 10
  11. 9
  12. 9
  13. 8
  14. 7
  15. 7
  16. 6
  17. 6
  18. 6
  19. 6
  20. 6
  21. 5
  22. 5
  23. 5
  24. 4
  25.  @Janoip  I think she is still one of the worst leaders of Germany, no real long term vision for people to believe in, basicaly abandoned the youth of Germany and enforcing policies that will have long term ripple effects that will tear apart the german society and position in the world. The next leaders of Germany will be mostly busy trying to fix the mess she left behind, with new crisis in the near future, few will be able to do much of anything. She in many ways mirrors Tony Blair in enforcing policies that will effect and ruine the country she was suppose to govern, Germany did not even meet their co2 reduction quota's, phased out nuclear energy, I expect a lot of political instability and dread in the german society as they deal with how things were left. Her only saving grace is that she could have been much worse. Now it's easy to just look down on her mistakes and what she could have done better but how about this point that few people bring up, why has she not attempted to push for basic liberal rights? Why has she empowered the authoritarians? Antagonized the nationalists, divided the country, done away with clean forms of energy in favor of mob rule and gas pipelines with another authoritarian state called Russia? Why do all this if she is a liberal and focused on western values? She barely has any, all Merkel realy seemed to care about is power and her actions made major problems worse. I could go on but it's just sad to see this woman be seen as some model politician, while I would describe her more as cunning, cold and calculating, without vision or long term plans. The AFD might have some bad policies here and there but I rather give them a shot compared to Merkel, it's sad to see what Germany has become, esspecialy remembering the optimism of the early 2000s, making way for the sad state of Europe today.
    4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32.  @lynn4062  yes, I do know, you don't, that's the problem. What happened was that European powers left due to the USA withholding funds from the Marshall plan if they did not abandon their colonies, many of these colonies fell into dictatorships, local warlords or turned to communism, the borders drawn by the Europeans and then local leaders taking them over left a very unstable situation, many of the investments into the colonial economy vanished and were not maintained by the local leaders. You have to understand how much these places benefited by western rule for a long time compared to the state they were in before, you also have to take into account if the colonial economy was settler based or exploitative based, the Congo is a good example of the later while south africa is a good example of the former. Western powers did very little to fuck up the situation and in fact allowed massive population growth due to improved farming and connection with the rest of the world, Zimbabwe used to be the breadbasket of Africa before communist Mugabe came into power, the only two things the western powers did that was very bad was 1. Leave and 2. Kept the borders as they were instead of dividing the lands to local leaders based on ethnic, language and vital resources lines. Though regardless the situation was bound to decline and stagnate due to the vastness of Africa itself, the massive populations there and the lack of modern nation states and institutions there, why this myth then of the west becoming rich due to colonialism? Because it's easy and takes responsability away from the natives and blames the west, even though the west was already rich before the scramble for africa, did not make up a big part of their economies and after decolonisation the western powers thrived economically while the former colonies stagnated. Whatifalthist has some video's on the subject if your interested.
    3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2