SURVEY: Should Myanmar be forced to take back Rohingya?

[Orton Rd]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

Please advise the false 'sob stories' you're referring too. The problem for the Rohingya is they have been denied basic human rights, citizenship and so on for decades, even though they were a recognised ethnic group at time of Independence. Yes, in recent time there was a small Rohingya group who killed some Myanmar forces, but that action does not excuse forced removal of 700,000 people, murder of thousands of civilians, destruction of their homes and rape as a tool of war.

 

I find it interesting none of the usual posters never mention the decades long armed rebellion by other non Muslim ethnic groups in Myanmar, including Christians, with the Myanmar government forces response of murdering civilians and rape as a tool of war. plus very rarely being mentioned in the international press. Ever wondered why?

The lie that kicking out thousands of trouble makers equates to 'genocide' if they had been subjected to genocide there would have been hardly anyone left to get shot of. Ethnic cleansing is a sob story, ethnicity has nothing to do with it, it's religious cleansing of a minority religion that has caused nothing but trouble, in the long run it can only be good for the country.

[GalaxyMan]

18 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

Too many people fall for the sob stories about these people and ignore the crimes they commit, or put them down to provocation. The root of their problem is their religion which makes it difficult for them to integrate into other cultures. They only just got rid of them so why would they take them back and if they were treated so badly why would they go back?

Even if that is true, is it justification for genocide and/or ethnic cleansing?

[Opl]

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

Please advise the false 'sob stories' you're referring too. The problem for the Rohingya is they have been denied basic human rights, citizenship and so on for decades, even though they were a recognised ethnic group at time of Independence. Yes, in recent time there was a small Rohingya group who killed some Myanmar forces, but that action does not excuse forced removal of 700,000 people, murder of thousands of civilians, destruction of their homes and rape as a tool of war.

 

I find it interesting none of the usual posters never mention the decades long armed rebellion by other non Muslim ethnic groups in Myanmar, including Christians, with the Myanmar government forces response of murdering civilians and rape as a tool of war. plus very rarely being mentioned in the international press. Ever wondered why?

Simply because the OP is about the Rohingya and Myanmar, not about the Karen or other ethnic minorities living in Myanmar who also made the headlines during décades. Comparing exactions and merits of militants and the military is not the topic, human rights abuses in Myanmar is nothing new. The military  attack one particular group at a time. 

Edited November 19, 2018 by Opl

[Stargeezr]

Myanmar is a Buddhist country. The military chased the Rohinghas out. Another Muslim country could welcome them in, but it appears that there are no takers. Hey UN, why don't you use your influence and approach all the Muslim countries, maybe one of them will give up a piece of their desert for these people?

Geezer

[simple1]

4 hours ago, Opl said:

Simply because the OP is about the Rohingya and Myanmar, not about the Karen or other ethnic minorities living in Myanmar who also made the headlines during décades. Comparing exactions and merits of militants and the military is not the topic, human rights abuses in Myanmar is nothing new. The military  attack one particular group at a time. 

Strange you seem to be inferring the Myanmar military are not a component of the topic, when they are the forces, alongside other Buddhist (so called) groups, inflicting human rights abuses such as ethnic cleansing, rape as a tool for oppression etc etc of the Rohingya.

 

However, perhaps you missed the point raised in my post. Rare to see coverage of the ongoing oppression of the Karen etc, but plenty when Muslims are involved, always accompanied by extreme vilification, hatred etc etc from the usual posters as represented in this topic. Do you believe if the topic was in regards to the Karen, the lovelies expressing their vilification in this topic would be blaming the victims?

[Spidey]

6 hours ago, sanemax said:

Is it because everyone hates Muslims perchance ?

Not everyone. Only the short sighted racist bigots.

 

I hate Islamic Jihadists but, then again, so do most Moslems.

 

 

Edited November 19, 2018 by Spidey

[simple1]

7 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

The lie that kicking out thousands of trouble makers equates to 'genocide' if they had been subjected to genocide there would have been hardly anyone left to get shot of. Ethnic cleansing is a sob story, ethnicity has nothing to do with it, it's religious cleansing of a minority religion that has caused nothing but trouble, in the long run it can only be good for the country.

Obviously rape and mass murder of civilians by security forces and others is OK by you and some other forum members - so be it. You're justifying ethnic cleansing based upon their religion which is a crime against humanity. People making such proposals, IMO, should be prosecuted for hate speech. 

 

Moving along, based on your personal knowledge, what are the lies / misinformation in the UN report linked below? A brief extract...

 

The release of a report into the circumstances surrounding the mass exodus of more than 700,000 Rohingya people from Myanmar, beginning in mid-August last year – events previously described by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”.

The crimes committed include murder, rape, torture, sexual slavery, persecution and enslavement, according to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar.

 

https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/08/1017802

Edited November 19, 2018 by simple1

[simple1]

20 hours ago, Ulic said:

Snip <have never been recognized as citizens of Burma/Myanmar> SNIP

Burma achieved independence in 1948, at the time Rohingya were a recognised ethnic group, with citizenship, including political representation by Rohingya MPs.

 

"the most significant inflection point came in 1982 when Burma’s junta passed a law that identified eight ethnicities entitled to citizenship.* The Rohingya were not among them, though they had enjoyed equal rights since Burma became independent from British rule in 1948. Almost overnight, they were stripped of their citizenship."

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/09/rohingyas-burma/540513/

[Opl]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

Strange you seem to be inferring the Myanmar military are not a component of the topic, when they are the forces, alongside other Buddhist (so called) groups, inflicting human rights abuses such as ethnic cleansing, rape as a tool for oppression etc etc of the Rohingya.

 

However, perhaps you missed the point raised in my post. Rare to see coverage of the ongoing oppression of the Karen etc, but plenty when Muslims are involved, always accompanied by extreme vilification, hatred etc etc from the usual posters as represented in this topic. Do you believe if the topic was in regards to the Karen, the lovelies expressing their vilification in this topic would be blaming the victims?

-> " blaming the victims"?

To make a long story short…

After the displacement of 12,5 million people, two territories appeared in 1947: India, territory of Hindu populations and Pakistan, territory of Muslims.

Pakistan split in two when Bangladesh declared independence in 1971.
But the living conditions of Bengalis in an overpopulated country, of great poverty, have pushed Bengalis to immigrate.
So …Who is to blame? Bengalis whose power in place has not managed its development and demographics? Or Burmese unable to handle a massive, culturally different, illegal immigration seeking Burmese citizenship?

Muslims always present themselves as victims, because their countries are always underdeveloped and thus lose the wars they trigger,  .as in all the regions where Islam is at war (Philipines with the Moro front for 50 years), in Thailand with the Pattani, in China with the Ouigours, in Centra African Republic with Seleka in Palestine and in Kashmir against the jews ( Israel) and the Hindus)...Jihad being the "way to fight oppression" … something that resonates to western audience .. who heard about the Karen for décades but have never been confronted to their activists.. if you can see the difference: recent history has caused deep resentment.  

 

Edited November 19, 2018 by Opl

[Kiwiken]

On 11/18/2018 at 3:59 AM, Basil B said:

No, he should be evicted from the family home.

 

Likewise the land that the Rohingya once occupied should be annexed as an independent state protected by international peace keeping forces.

Or perhaps a third alternative is for the British to pay for their resettlement as they imported the majority of the Bengalis early in the 20th century to labour for them. They started the problem. It is theirs to fix

[Kiwiken]

On 11/18/2018 at 6:26 AM, joecoolfrog said:

May I politely ask how you came to this conclusion , you do realise that the Rohingya have been persecuted for some time.

They have been subjected to enforced ethnic cleansing , we are talking about organised mass rape , murder and expulsion.

This is genocide and to say they brought it on themselves is akin to saying the Holocaust was the fault of the jews.

Of course you ignore the fact that the Rohingya armed by the British in WW2 to fight the Japanese instead carried out wide spread massacres of Burmese in the Arrakan. But I guess to you that was old history. Much as the fact that the majority of the Bengalis were imported by the British Raj especially in the period 1900 - 1930's. They do not belong there. It is not their Land and they are a foreign blight on the Burmese. Bangladesh is there ancestral home

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed. 

[German farang]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

Burma achieved independence in 1948, at the time Rohingya were a recognised ethnic group, with citizenship, including political representation by Rohingya MPs.

 

"the most significant inflection point came in 1982 when Burma’s junta passed a law that identified eight ethnicities entitled to citizenship.* The Rohingya were not among them, though they had enjoyed equal rights since Burma became independent from British rule in 1948. Almost overnight, they were stripped of their citizenship."

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/09/rohingyas-burma/540513/

Yep. By a reason!

[simple1]

16 hours ago, German farang said:

Yep. By a reason!

So you admit it is a false propaganda Rohingya were never citizens of Myanmar - one step forward. BTW collective punishment of civilians by any government is a criminal act, in the case of the Myanmar government, Crimes Against Humanity.

[German farang]

6 minutes ago, simple1 said:

So you admit it is a false propaganda Rohingya were never citizens of Myanmar - one step forward. BTW collective punishment of civilians by any government is a criminal act, in the case of the Myanmar government, Crimes Against Humanity.

@ 1rst: I don't admit anything. 2nd: they belong to Bangladesh. 3rd:  violence & crime came from themselfs. 4th: it's a legit right of any govt to fight & deport such folks!

And at last but not least:  why don't you invit some of them for asylum into your own home??? ????????

Edited November 20, 2018 by German farang

[simple1]

18 hours ago, Opl said:

-> " blaming the victims"?

To make a long story short…

After the displacement of 12,5 million people, two territories appeared in 1947: India, territory of Hindu populations and Pakistan, territory of Muslims.

Pakistan split in two when Bangladesh declared independence in 1971.
But the living conditions of Bengalis in an overpopulated country, of great poverty, have pushed Bengalis to immigrate.
So …Who is to blame? Bengalis whose power in place has not managed its development and demographics? Or Burmese unable to handle a massive, culturally different, illegal immigration seeking Burmese citizenship?

Muslims always present themselves as victims, because their countries are always underdeveloped and thus lose the wars they trigger,  .as in all the regions where Islam is at war (Philipines with the Moro front for 50 years), in Thailand with the Pattani, in China with the Ouigours, in Centra African Republic with Seleka in Palestine and in Kashmir against the jews ( Israel) and the Hindus)...Jihad being the "way to fight oppression" … something that resonates to western audience .. who heard about the Karen for décades but have never been confronted to their activists.. if you can see the difference: recent history has caused deep resentment.  

 

So far as I know Salafi Islamism has had very minimal appearance in recent decades in Myanmar. Given you have some knowledge of conflict in Muslim populated areas you will no doubt comprehend a deep underlining causes were mainly created by the British and French colonial empires, plus of course you would know a Burmese king did conquer a Muslim kingdom and absorbed into today's Myanmar some years back. Muslims have been residing in Myanmar for hundreds of years. Whatever the pushback by Rohingya since WW11, none justifies decades of government organised extreme oppression for decades of the entire population and the recent killings, rapes and ethnic cleansing by Myanmar forces. IMO it is appalling members from western countries are actively supporting and cheering on War Crimes against civilians, talk about behaviour from the bottom of the barrel. Members linking to Buddhist ultra nationalists who were one on the main propaganda machine encouraging ethnic cleansing and murder - must be proud of themselves...

Edited November 20, 2018 by simple1

[Basil B]

The Rohingya people can be traced back to the 9th century in Rakhine state. and many more did arrive under British colonization  over 100 years ago but they contributed to the wealth of Burma which has now been squandered since Independence.

 

Maybe Rakhine state should be annexed by Bangladesh as the Rohingya people clearly have a birth right to the state.

 

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by Basil B

[MyFriend You]

On 11/18/2018 at 11:41 AM, macca3248 said:

Rohingya made a rod for their own backs ,now they are paying the price for their actions !

 

Agree, that and the they 'migrated' illegally from Bangladesh over the past few decades, Burma just got tired of them and forced them out........."Force Burma to take them back"???   No Foreign Govt entity has the right to force another country to do anything...........it will be interesting to see how this plays out.   BTW I still call it Burma, because virtually every one I meet from there calls it Burma.  and the Int'l community still refers the airport as RGN  (Rangoon)

[Opl]

9 hours ago, simple1 said:

So far as I know Salafi Islamism has had very minimal appearance in recent decades in Myanmar. Given you have some knowledge of conflict in Muslim populated areas you will no doubt comprehend a deep underlining causes were mainly created by the British and French colonial empires, plus of course you would know a Burmese king did conquer a Muslim kingdom and absorbed into today's Myanmar some years back. Muslims have been residing in Myanmar for hundreds of years. Whatever the pushback by Rohingya since WW11, none justifies decades of government organised extreme oppression for decades of the entire population and the recent killings, rapes and ethnic cleansing by Myanmar forces. IMO it is appalling members from western countries are actively supporting and cheering on War Crimes against civilians, talk about behaviour from the bottom of the barrel. Members linking to Buddhist ultra nationalists who were one on the main propaganda machine encouraging ethnic cleansing and murder - must be proud of themselves...

-> "Buddhist ultra nationalists"

The real change regarding the Rohingya issue in Myanmar takes place in the 2010s, thanks to the unexpected political transition following the gradual withdrawal of the army from politics.

By leaving a great moral vacuum and identity void, the withdrawal of the army finally led to the affirmation of Buddhist nationalist groups promoting a simplistic idea that "to be Burmese is to be Buddhist ( 90% of the population) ". Moreover, Myanmar's opening to the world during the 2010s (access to the Internet, foreign consumer goods, etc.) came to question and challenge the Burmese identity in this open and connected world. 

The Muslim minority in Myanmar ( 4% of the population)  is also  the victim of the instrumentalization of radical Islamism, which spread throughout the Muslim world from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, mainly. (Bengalis living in Buddhist Arakan requested the attachment of part of the territory of Arakan to East Pakistan - former Bangladesh -  and an armed mujahideen movement  emerged to support this claim, but it failed quickly.)

In this context, some Buddhist monastic communities played a major role in exciting nationalism and supremacism and delivering a very violent xenophobic and Islamophobic discourse in response to the growing Islamist intolerance in Bangladesh too. 

In addition, for the predominant ethnie, the Bamar , buddhists,  (who conquered Arakan, today with a population of  buddhists of a different ethnie)  and count for 70% of the burmese population, not only the Rohingya are Bengali Muslim, but also of darker skin 

Edited November 20, 2018 by Opl

[Prissana Pescud]

On 11/18/2018 at 10:59 AM, Basil B said:

No, he should be evicted from the family home.

 

Likewise the land that the Rohingya once occupied should be annexed as an independent state protected by international peace keeping forces.

My limited understanding is that it was improbable that the explosion in Rohingya population in Burma was due to natural birthrates. More like infiltration from Bangladesh. And who can blame them? But some were islamic extremists who bought with them the dogma that we expect from Islamists. After a series of attacks on Burmese targets, the Burmese military responded, treating all Muslims living in this mostly Muslim state as unwanted Bangladeshis. A total over reaction. Murder and mayhem from Buddhists when we expect this only from Islamists. There is no solution to this unless all religions and philosophies start to respect each other and live within the established rule of law. 

I doubt that will ever happen. So more murder and mayhem while a toothless and incompetent UN fusses and wrings its hands.

Meanwhile the Islamists are no longer targeting Myanmar targete, they have all been driven out. 

[geisha]

I would choose 

voluntary return under international supervision.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎11‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 4:59 PM, Basil B said:

No, he should be evicted from the family home.

 

Likewise the land that the Rohingya once occupied should be annexed as an independent state protected by international peace keeping forces.

While that is an idea that has merit, who is going to pay for the military force that will have to be there forever, and who will the unfortunates be that have to be the force? Not a posting that would encourage anyone to join up. Perhaps they could train the Rohinga to be the security force protecting themselves, but someone would still have to pay, and it ain't them.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Prissana Pescud said:

while a toothless and incompetent UN fusses and wrings its hands.

True words indeed. A noble idea destroyed by politics and corruption.

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Basil B said:

The Rohingya people can be traced back to the 9th century in Rakhine state. and many more did arrive under British colonization  over 100 years ago but they contributed to the wealth of Burma which has now been squandered since Independence.

 

Maybe Rakhine state should be annexed by Bangladesh as the Rohingya people clearly have a birth right to the state.

 

 

Sooooo, you want a war there, or do you imagine the Burmese will just meekly hand it over?

By that logic, the US should be handed back to the Native Americans due to their "birth right".

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, you want a war there, or do you imagine the Burmese will just meekly hand it over?

By that logic, the US should be handed back to the Native Americans due to their "birth right".

Not exactly, the native Americans should not be evicted from their lands, nor should none native Americans who have been living in America for generations... 

[simple1]

10 hours ago, Opl said:

-> "Buddhist ultra nationalists" <SNIP>

 

Seems you are unaware of the likes of Group 969.

[ExpatOilWorker]

On 11/18/2018 at 7:49 PM, Small Joke said:

Where is the love, the love, the love?

 

Plenty people here seem to all but explicitly say that they wish their own governments would do the same with their minorities.

 

They have this belief that "these people" will infiltrate and overrun them, from within.

 

We know there have been countless open invasions, but, can anybody give an historical precedent for invasion by stealth? 

 

I'm expecting, of course, a deafening silence from the architect of that fantasy.????

 

 

In one way you can argue that the Muslim majority in Malaysia are fearful that the Chinese/Indian minority might one day take over control of the country.

[Prissana Pescud]

11 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

 

In one way you can argue that the Muslim majority in Malaysia are fearful that the Chinese/Indian minority might one day take over control of the country.

As is Fiji and Sri Lanka with formerly Tamil Indians. Introduced by the British because the location was good for crops the British wanted but the locals would not work. There are numerous countries in Africa in which civil wars are fought, based upon an ingress of people from neighbouring countries. One such country right now fighting a war of attrition. Central African Republic. Others are Kenya and Nigeria where Muslim radicals have invaded by stealth and now cause trouble. Chad, the list is long

[simple1]

12 hours ago, Prissana Pescud said:

As is Fiji and Sri Lanka with formerly Tamil Indians. Introduced by the British because the location was good for crops the British wanted but the locals would not work. There are numerous countries in Africa in which civil wars are fought, based upon an ingress of people from neighbouring countries. One such country right now fighting a war of attrition. Central African Republic. Others are Kenya and Nigeria where Muslim radicals have invaded by stealth and now cause trouble. Chad, the list is long

If you're going to make claims at least try for a degree of accuracy. As an example in the Central African Republic Christian militants have forced out or massacred much of the Muslim population (claimed equivalence to the Bosnian genocide). Kenya is mostly an ethnic conflict, but with radical Islamist attacks by Al Shabab out of Somalia. Nigeria Islamist violence is committed by Boko Haram, who also have a presence in some bordering countries, primarily in the Northern Muslim half of Nigeria. who as per usual also kill other Muslims who don't adhere to their Salafi ideology. It is claimed the Nigerian government, which is extremely corrupt, are not helping with resolution of the conflict by abusing & killing Muslim civilians; a deep mistake with counter- terrorism operations replicated elsewhere in the world.

 

 

[Odysseus123]

Ah..you mean that they should be forced to look after their own population?

 

Just ask the Serbs-Nothing like a bit of ethnic cleansing to expose the the fundamental dim-wittedness of a culture.

 

And the Serbs were  stupendously dim-witted...as  were the Germans, of course.

 

Ethnic cleansing is best listed under "The dumb as they come." category.