* I’ve argued in the past that if I were running China’s foreign and military policy I’d load up several old cargo tankers with assorted Chinese, wait for a Labor/Greens government in Oz, and send them all here. All without official approval of course.
Have a media campaign with much hand wringing about not knowing where the tankers are departing from nor who is controlling it, saying the situation is out of control and you’re at a loss to stop it.
Have a few refugee lawyers in Oz on the payroll, probably not even necessary to do that, they do it pro bono as the Oz state federal govt pays them anyway, and assist them with media handouts to declare how evil China is and the hellhole these poor refugees are escaping.
It’d be just like the first fleets to Oz, except all from China.
It would not take long till Oz was overcome with Chinese and those stupid Defence White Papers we keep putting out wouldn’t be worth a tinker’s cuss. Furthermore, our entire media would praise this massive tide of Chinese refugees, Murdoch saying what a boon it is for our trade relations, Labor locking in their vote, and the Liberals cock a hoop about the rise in demand for property development.
I reckon Russia should do the same. Send them in from Chechnya and all their trouble spots. It’s a win-win for China and Russia. No need for war when they can simply invade us peacefully, furthermore, China at least gets to solve its overpopulation problem, and get the farming land and minerals it needs gratis.
* You are labouring under the false assumption that the left is motivated out of a misdirected sympathy whereas all evidence demonstrates that they are motivated out of a spite towards White Australia and an overwhelming hatred such that they want to see us overwhelmed.
Were they motivated out of sympathy then Sarah Hanson-Young would not have dismissed all the drownings under Labor as “Tragedies happen, accidents happen.” Contrast that attitude with her party now demanding we take 20,000 refugees from Syria over and above the annual refugee intake and hand over $150 million to be directed to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Were they motivated out of sympathy they would be banging the drum loudly about Irian Jaya and demanding an intervention on their behalf against Indonesia. Were they motivated out of sympathy they would demand that Christians be the target for refugee intake as it is the Christians who are being slaughtered by ISIS, but, they didn’t, they aren’t, and they won’t, because the point of the exercise is to spite us and overwhelm us with whatever it is we dislike. Where was Bill Shorten’s compassion before that photo of the drowned Muslim boy whose father took him from safety in Turkey to Europe all for the cause of his own dentistry? Now he demands we take 10,000 refugees over and above the already outrageously high intake and that we lay out $100 million for no apparent reason. Why 10,000? Why $100 million? Because it’s a round figure. Because it’s symbolic. It looks huge, it is huge, it wedges the Liberals. And that’s what counts. Were I running the Chinese cargo carrier fleet invasions I’d load up a few boats with Tibetans and Uighurs and deliberately hole them just outside Christmas Island so as to create a massive death toll and opportunity for the Labor/Greens to get on their soapbox denouncing us as racists and declaring the waves of boats an emergency where all rational thought must be thrown out the window and the tide of boats be taken in uncritically. Again, a two for the price of one solution. China gets to kill off its unwanted and use them as battering ram for invasion. And don’t be confused that the Liberals wouldn’t be just as bad. The sainted neocon Howard increased our immigration take to record levels under his watch, a level which continues to this day. Howard’s electorate of Bennelong has one of the highest populations of ethnic Chinese in Australia. Abbott himself, the staunch “shit happens”, so called alpha, has made speech after speech declaring that immigrants make the best Australians. Liberal members of parliament have their own electorates to service and ensure block votes, just as the likes of Laundy have their electorates to stuff full with Muslims. Only a crank would think that anything our politicians and media promote is driven from a genuine heart chock-full with sympathy and compassion; those concepts are cynical representations of themselves deliberately manipulated to make us feel ashamed, them righteous, and to drive a stake through the homogeneity of the nation. A mass Chinese exodus would be a godsend for them all.* Unless a people have an EXPLICIT consciousness about racial, national, historical, and cultural identity/heritage, they will fall under the sway of whatever happens to be fashionable and/or ‘correct’.
Europeans ARE European but dissuaded from having a proud European identity.
So, their main mindset is about being ‘anti-racist’, homo-worshiping, Holocaust-commemorating, feminist, globalist, etc. or whatever is taught in schools and disseminated by media.
That is not enough to preserve and sustain a people.
It is not enough to be European. One must think and feel European.
Likewise, it isn’t enough to be a wolf. One must feel wolfish to fight off the enemy.
A wolf that doesn’t feel wolfish has no reason to fight for its wolfishness.
* The Europeans, especially the Brits, have well-trained forces. I’d venture to say the British Army man for man is better trained than the US Army. If they wanted to repel the immivasion, it would be defeated instantly. But no one is coming to Europe with guns, jet fighters or tanks. The trouble is that modern, civilized Europeans, and Americans for that matter, cannot deal with someone who invades without weapons. If the Arabs were storming into Europe with AKMs, the Euros would have an easier time because there would be no moral dilemma.
If the Europeans had been spending 5% of GDP on their military forces for decades, they’d still have the same problem they do today. If they are not going to pull the trigger with the high-tech equipment they already have, they wouldn’t do it if they had a force the size of the US DoD. And even Uncle Sam, with his giant DoD, is unable to bring himself to use that force along our Southern Border.
It is not the size or lack of size of the US or NATO forces that is the problem. It is the will to use them. I think the people of Europe and the US should be asking what Madeleine Albright asked 16 plus years ago, “What’s the point of having this superb military that you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?”
* The EU is being organised as one country, which if you can get inside you can go where you like, hence is the problem. The countries of the EU that are the landfall countries can pass the buck by letting the migrants pass through. If for instance Italy could not get rid of these migrants because of the common European lack of border checks Italy would simply have dealt with the problem by rejecting their claim for asylum. Same day service.
Read Mearsheimer, Nato is for the purpose of controlling European nationalism. In the name of Western cilvilisation and values, the national defence forces will be called in to bomb any of their own people trying to organise militarily against the immigrant occupation. Raspail may be proved prescient about this too in due course. You can bet the German army would be happy to deal with any European aborigines who try to fight off the invasion.
