Double Attack

To clear up the confusion regarding the bombing in Denmark.
The people who has been arrested had Swedish citizenship but were non-Swedish left wing radicals.

1) 23 years. Ran as a candidate for the 'left-party' (communists-lite) in local elections in 2014. Ran as a candidate for the communist party in local elections 2018. Latin-American ethnicity.
2) 22 years, Turkish-Bulgairan ethnicity.

Clearly this is a case of Sweden exporting its immigrant AND left wing terrorism to Denmark.

@Father_Svitjod Swedish citizenship means they are Swedish. Their ethnicity doesn't change that

@InDeathWeReturn Does the same logic apply to all countries in your opinion? Like getting a Chinese citizenship makes you Chinese and getting a Nigerian citizenship makes you Nigerian for example? Or is it just European countries? The reason I ask is because many people who’ve said what you’ve said don’t think that logic applies to said other countries, which means they have a double standard and are quite hypocritical. In my opinion, as long as what you said applies to every nation according to you, then there’s no problem with it, it’s just double standards that are stupid and it’s unfair to not hold all nations to the same standards.

@Scanian And... you found the guy who believes that country borders shouldn't exist.

@ShirBlackspots In a perfect world borders wouldn't NEED to exist. But the world is far from perfect so they are indeed needed. Don't try at put words in my mouth

@Scanian You make a point, but I think eventually it won't matter anymore with the low birthrates and high influx of immigrants. Also from the view point of immigration office it's not that different, I mean it's not like Danish customs can go ahead and say: "Yeah, you may have a Swedish passport, but you're not quite a real Swede so... we need to double check the risk factors." Which is what I think InDeathWeReturn was trying to say.

@Ethelwood Yes and no. OP said that they had a different ethnicity than Nordic, which doesn't really matter since they still could be born in the country. Even if they immigrated to the country they became legal citizens

@Scanian In my opinion? Yes. I know not everyone agrees but that is their fucking problem. One of my best friends was born in Romania and came to Denmark at the age of 7. He is Danish

Swedish National ≠ Swedish.
The first is a legal status, the second an ethnicity.

No need to get bent out of shape over it, neither is derogatory.

@InDeathWeReturn So everyone who moves to north America and gain a citizenship there becomes Cherokee?

@Father_Svitjod No. The become US citizens. They become Americans

@InDeathWeReturn Swedish people and Swedish citizens are not the same thing. If you say that they are, you are denying Swedes their ethnicity. Sort of the same thing as denying white people having culture, but even worse.

@stabcutdrink What I’m about to say isn’t exactly relevant to the discussion but I’d like to add it anyway because of the way many people use the term “white culture” as if it’s one thing. Of course white people have culture, but the term white culture itself isn’t logically right considering there are many different white ethnic groups and they all have their own culture. Greek, Italian, Scandinavian, Russian, English, German etc, are all considered white but their cultures are also very different in some ways despite them also having similarities. They are different enough to be deemed separate.

The same can be applied to any large group, for example there is no single Asian culture. China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Mongolia all have similarities, sure, but they are still not the same. I don’t know with 100% certainty but I’m guessing a lot of Koreans would be offended if someone said their culture is exactly the same as Japanese culture.

@Scanian China itself has many sub-cultures, with differences from each other at least as far as European countries, with the one exception that most of them have mutually intelligible written (but not spoken) languages, but even there the idioms and such are quite different. But even though that is the case, "Chinese Culture" is a common phrase to use. Moving outward, there are, indeed, certain cultural similarities amongst most of the East Asian countries, such that the phrase "Asian culture" is also sometimes employed as a shorthand to references those similarities as they contrast with other regional common cultural similarities. Similarly, "Latino culture" is a very common term referring to the commonalities between South and Central American countries' cultures. I don't think it is incorrect to use such terminology; it is definitely referring to a more general set of things than, for example, Sámi culture or Pitcairn culture, but not inherently incorrect.
Where one should be careful, though, is when comparing such cultures; the two cultures being compared should be roughly the same generalization level. It wouldn't make sense to compare "European culture" (or "white culture" or "Western culture", which all seemed to be used synonymously, which is probably incorrect) to "Congolese culture"; one is an entire continent (or more, depending on how it is interpreted) while the other is a single country.

@merpius well still, it seems rather a blurry business... For example latino culture should have a lot in common with spain or portugal, so should you include spain in the latino culture group or in the western culture group ?
And each country has its own ties with a lot of countries, for example a lot of african countries have big ties with either France or England (because they once were a part of their colonial empire and for better or worse that left huge marks on their own culture, in return France and England had lot of immigrants from those countries that also left their mark on their own culture). I'm not sure it is so easy to put cultural identity in boxes because all the boundaries are quite blurry and always evolving with people interracting with each other.
Also I feel this kind of generalization is widely used to refer to the "others", "the people that are not from here". For example "latino" is used in the USA to refer to the people that are coming from the american continent but are neither americans or canadians. What do they really have in common, except they speak a romane language and are mostly catholic christians ? I'm not sure...
I bet it's even worse for the "asian culture group", the "european culture group" or the "african culture group", what do an indonesian, a chinese, a japanese, a korean and an indian really have in common, except the fact that they are all a minority in european countries and it is more convenient to bag them into one big group of "people coming from the asian continent that have a very different culture from us" ?

My point is, sure, this kind of generalization exists and it is convenient to bag people into boxes, but I'm not so sure they mean anything but "those guys come from that part of the world".

@Isdaril Of course a more general grouping will be more general in what it refers to; latino countries are those that were former colonies of Spain in the Americas (sometimes it also includes Brazil, despite it being a former colony of Portugal); that results in certain commonalities; Spanish language, Catholic religion, certain leftover elements of Spanish culture, etc. But that doesn't mean that Mexican culture isn't different from Puerto Rican culture or Guatemalan culture; those are more specific. Even within those countries (or territory for Puerto Rico) culture isn't uniform; there are always subgroups until you get down to the smallest subgroup; the individual. As you get more specific you get greater commonalities and more specific details.
I'm not sure what, for example, Indians and Chinese have in common that they don't also share with other parts of the world, but, for example, there are certainly commonalities amongst the various East Asian cultures; even place like the Philippines, which was long a Spanish colony (and it shows), have certain cultural elements in common with Korean, China, Thailand, etc. It is largely down to the way culture spreads organically; people who live closer to each other and with fewer natural barriers will tend to have more similar cultures than those who are geographically distant or have major physical barriers (for example, the Himalayas that, essentially, separate south Asia from east Asia resulted in far less cultural intermixing than occurred between different parts of China that are more distant than China is from India).

@merpius Sure but then where do you draw the line ? For example we consider spanish to be part of the european culture. But in a lot of ways andalusians that live in southern spain are closer to algerians or moroccans than to let's say swedes or even french. But you would still bag them in your european culture group and bag the other ones in your islamic culture group though they are more close to each other than from multiple members of those two groups.

@stabcutdrink No. Their ethnicity is Nordic. There is a difference

@Father_Svitjod "...Latin-American ethnicity..." What's that?

@HHWinston There's a some 5 or 6 major ethnic groups in latin america. Natives from before and after the age of sail. Primarily Iberians and Amerindians, then some blacks. Finally, a few asians. Brazil in particular has several slavs, japanese and a few germanics too.

Iberians and Amerindians being the two big ones, talking generally about a latin-american will mean one of those two groups.

@Synapse I know, my question was ironic, actually. I think it's really ignorant to talk about "Latin American ethnicity" because, what is it? As you say there are many ethnic groups, there are Amerindian (what the world thinks Latin Americans are), mestizos, blacks, Asians, whites, and they are all Latin American.
I live in Argentina and it is a mostly a white country, like Uruguay and to a lesser extent southern Brazil and Chile. they are not latin american? They are and they are white. Latin American is not an ethnicity, it is a linguistic condition.
I laugh at the ignorant people who speak of "Latin American ethnicity"

@Father_Svitjod No such information has been released publically, and there is a publication ban on the case, meaning no serious news source would write about it if even if they knew. So you are likely getting those "news" from dubious sources.

@Carewolf while I agree that that information is likely from dubious sources it is fundamental iligal to even try to inact a publication ban in Sweden (except possibly in time of actuall war)

@Dun I think you are overinterpreting Swedish law. If what you say was true, then the EU privacy laws (both the recent ones and the really old ones) would be illegal in Sweden. And I seriously doubt that or we would have heard about it constantly.

This is privacy issue btw, not a censorship issue. Like all such privacy requests, it goes out the window as soon as there is something official on file (when he is found innocent or guilty) or if the public has an interest in the information beyond curiosity.

Well... considering my country has had 248 mass shootings with 979 people injured and 246 died (for a total of 1,325 victims) this year alone. I kind of think Sweden would be a lovely safe place to visit around now.

@Mojo
The mass shootings, while tragic, aren't the real danger.
There have been around 17,000 murders in the U.S. this year, most of them gang on gang crime, with more than 51% occurring in 2% of the 3142 counties. Roughly 63 counties account for around 8670 murders.
Gang violence in areas with high crime rates is a far worse threat.

@LowKey Forgive the belated reply, I was looked through old posts and got a bit triggered, so I'll put this as politely as I can.
"The mass shootings, while tragic, aren't the real danger" I work in Newtown, CT, as in Sandy Hook Massacre. I was in Sandy Hook the day it happened and was with in spitting distance of the school. The whole neighborhood was on lock-down for hours, they had no idea how many shooters there were until later. Much later, I got to watch funeral after funeral of little children at the church across the street. So maybe statistically your correct, but I will never think mass shootings aren't the "real danger"

@Mojo Oh sure it's lovely, just dont go out after dark and you'll be fine

Make a LEGO wall and make Sweden pay for it. they are not sending their best.

@TimMogens #9820121 That works for Denmark, but what about Norway? I mean they have fish, but that's a lot more difficult to build a wall out of. And a wall of money would only have an adverse effect

@Zeust They have oil. They give it to Denmark for making Legos (though I believe they stopped using so much oil in their plastic) and have the Legos shipped for their wall and Sweden pays the transportation and construction of that Lego-wall as well.

@Velgar #9820189 Ah yes of course, it makes so much sense now that you say it!

Denmark has its own problems right now; the Manchurian Cantaloupe wants to buy Greenland!

Seriously. He does. Apparently it's been a thing for a while.

@katfairy i.. Why?

@khyrin Nobody really knows, but it is speculated that some of his oil industry friends have got hold of his ear and convinced him how profitable it would be due to all the oil and gas reserves in Greenland.

To be honest, I really don't want to know what goes on inside that garbage heap he uses for a brain.

@Tarmaque

Everybody knows the president likes playing golf. Some say he's especially fond of cheating with a club, a ball and a tee.

Anyway, when he learnt there was a humongous island along the coast of North America called Greenland... Yes... "GREEN" as in "golf green" he had to have it bought. (He'd rather not pay for what he buys.)

Soon he'll sell Greenland as America's northernmost 18 holes.

@Daru Well stated.

@Tarmaque
Meet you at the 8th hole ? :-)

@Tarmaque

Back in the day, the U.S. wanted to buy Greenland for national security reasons. I want to say it had something to do with putting early warning stations in Greenland to prevent the Russians from launching their nukes, but the U.S. already had early warning stations in Greenland, so I might be wrong.

@MandalMotors Actually, the US has an agreement with Denmark (who sort-of-but-not-quite owns Greenland) that they can have military bases there and pretty much do whatever they want indefinitely. There is one there now; Thule Air Base. Its raison d'etre is pretty much what you stated.

Fun fact: In the last couple of seasons of Happy Days Richie And Ralph Mouth join the Air Force and are stationed in Greenland. It was an easy way for the actors to leave the show without outright killing them off. (Ron Howard in particular was losing his hair and no longer looked young enough to play the character.)

@Tarmaque Yeah, the U.S. has lots of overseas bases in nations friendly enough to let us do it (and even not-so-friendly in the case of Guantanamo).

@Tarmaque I could see the purchase initially being planned to avoid issues with stability. Denmark could have decided to just toss the Americans out if the USSR had been able to tempt them to join their side. Trying to strong arm the purchase would probably have guaranteed them to be tossed, so it didn't need to be pursued seriously as the alliances gave them access.

However, nowadays Trump doesn't care much for the alliances, but he would still need the Greenland bases for early warning, so I imagine that is why the purchase is coming up again.

@ModerateCanadian The USSR tempting someone to join their side? I guess you mean pointing a rifle at your head and asking not so nicely? That's the best they were capable of.

@khyrin When the global warming that isn’t happening comes, it’ll be a great place for a new golf course and resort.

@khyrin Well, looks like shipping is gonna be going through the arctic, and once that starts happening it'll be a major route--shaves quite a bit of time off alternatives for a lot of things. Probably they want to control the shipping lanes. Sure, they already have Alaska (big mistake by Russia selling that to the yanks back in the day), but more is better.
Yes, probably oil and gas considerations are important too.

@khyrin Why is the US interested in Greenland? Military Bases and Natural resources. The US wants a piece of the Pie when the North West Passage opens up and all that tasty natural gas and oil. Of course they won’t ever get to use any of it because when the permafrost melts all the methane trapped in the arctic will escape and the earth will quite literally jump from the frying pan into the fire.

Why does Trump want to buy Greenland? He doesn’t he just wants to distract people from what ever Jackass thing he’s doing now.

@katfairy Manchurian Cantaloupe!!!

There's an old SatW already about the US wanting Greenland. Canada does too. This isn't a new thing at all.

@katfairy Why would Denmark ever sell Greenland? Firstly, the massive abundance of natural resources under the ice isn't something we're unaware of, quite the opposite in fact.
Secondly, considering the current slightly confusing status of Greenland as a sovereign territory, even if Denmark did want to sell Greenland, i'm not sure if we could.
And thirdly, IIRC, Denmark sends 500 million USD to Greenland each year, which helps with their poverty issues, and also helps out on other social areas. And given the US' track record on helping poor and disadvantaged people, and especially natives, I'm not so sure the people actually living in Greenland would actually want to become American either.

The only ones who would gain from such a sale would the the US. And thankfully, Denmark isn't stupid enough to go through with such a deal.

@Arctureas Denmark may not want to sell, but that doesn't mean 'Murica doesn't want to buy. At least you can feel assured that Denmark is in Europe and not some random developing country that has rampant terrorism or an authoritarian regime for 'Murica to help with .

@katfairy : Now that would make a good comic.

@katfairy Greenalnd costs at least US$500M per year to maintain. We all know how the Manchurian Cantaloupe reacted on non-state Puerto Rico needing a bit of money after a huge hurricane and we all know the state of some of the former US colonies, like Philippines. Not something Greenland should look forward to!

I think that every country should have serious control of its borders.

@Liki It's a natural right/duty of a country one may even say, For the security and safety of the citizens. If the country doesn't respect it's border then how can those wanting to cross it do so?

@SirKibbz I mean, borders exist because people don't get along with eachother

@Liki Ireland and Northern Ireland have an open border. It's part of their peace agreement. One of the biggest snags in Brexit is that both sides want to keep it that way.

@Liki People don't get along with each other inside of countries either. For an example the Swedish democratcs I woould gladly put them on a small island and put a hard border with no visa access between me and them for the rest of eternity. They can enact their white superman utopia as well as they can, my guess is they will starve to death because generally speaking the "master race" is only good at taking credit for what more tolerant minds achieved.

@TheDungen That comment is half joke - half serious, so don't take it word-to-word :P

I haven't been in Sweden long enough to get to know domestic politics (nor do I care much about it, to be honest), so can't judge on anything other than what I see in my everyday life.

@Liki Except borders only ever stopped honest people anyway. Dishonest people have never cared much about them, they are at worst an inconvenience.

@TheDungen Sure, but how EU functions is bad in my opinion.
Because people in different countries have different views of the world, have different traditions, etc. immigration is seen differently.
And expecting that few EU countries who are bordering with non-EU countries are enough to control immigration, and through it population in all other EU countries is something that I say "good luck with that".
It might have functioned in the past, but times have changed.

I personally didn't have any problems moving to Sweden. Legally, ofc.

@TheDungen

Not if their decently manned and operated. They won't stop every criminal/terrorist or other unwanted person but they can stop some. As well as unwanted/dangerous materials, animals etc.

its like saying that since the police don't stop all crime and catch all criminals they might as well be scrapped. Borders can be ineffective, either because their poorly organised/funded etc or too bureaucratic but there's no problem with the general idea.

They do have alot of dangerous people in Swedenstan, neonazis is a relative small problem. Islamists, muslim gangs, rapists etc are a bigger problem.

@minimilk Actually piss off, you saying Muslims are a problem because of Islamic terrorist groups is the equivalent of saying Christians are a problem because of Christian terrorist groups. There are bad Muslims, yes, but that doesn't mean all of them are bad, Neo-Nazis, on the other hand, are all inbreed cunts that advocate for the genocide of Billions of humans.

@EnglishBloke yet you don't see suicide bombings from neo-nazies.

@daniboyi You do see mass shootings from them though

@EnglishBloke ahh yes. The few mass-shootings compared to the numerous amounts of attacks from islamic extremists that has been going on for years, many of them done by insiders who managed to trick past borders.
I totally see who is the bigger threat to the western society.

@EnglishBloke I guess some people just follow the Oranges and other wacko politicans lead and dont bother to check their facts. They see a picture and dont bother to check it from a different perspective ;).

@EnglishBloke In a sense that is fortunate. Mass shootings are generally not as deadly as bombings. The death tolls tend to be much higher when bombs are involved.

@EnglishBloke Hillarious that you as a Brit are saying that. You do know that parts of London, Bradford, Midlands, Blackburn etc you can't walk in to if you are a light skinned non muslim person. Media has written how Sharia law is on the rise in UK - including leftist medias such as BBC and CNN! The vast majority of rapes and especially gang rapes are commited by muslims.

Sure there are good muslims. But way to many of them are harrasing girls at the beach if they are sunbathing topless, stabbing innocent people in the night life, mugging, robbing, raping, gang raping etc. Muslims make up the vast majority of those criminals.

"Inbred cunts" Yes, marriage between cousins is quite common amongst muslims and preferably if the wife is just a child, as the quran allows this. Hell even their great profet married a child, Aisha was somewhere between 6 and 9 - depending on scripture.

@minimilk Well yes immigration will ensue problems if the immigrants aren't assimilated properly due to culture clashes and differences in lifestyle, but the way you phrase your comment makes it seem like you think that most of the mulims who move to Britain are bad people, which I'm sure isn't the case. Not to deny the crime increase in corrolation to immigration, that'd be unwise, without acknoledging a problem you can't solve it, but it's also important to note that brown people and black people (who make up the majority of muslims in the world) aren't inherently worse than anyone else, no, those people you're referring to have grown up in an enviroment where they learned that different things are okay to do than in the Western World.

My point is, with thorough integration and schooling of immigrants, there won't be a problem, crime isn't in their genes anymore than in ours, but it's something caused by enviomental factors. So, if you're going to mention a problem in such a manner then you should also have an idea for a solution or ask others for solutions.

@Scanian
But many of those who causes problems are not immigrants. They are 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation residents. They have had all the same education as you and I, yet they refuse live a western lifestyle and adher to western laws. For how many generations should we still accept this unwillingness to adjust to our laws and way of life? For how many generations should we watch our western way of life and culture crumble and slowly succumb to something and someone who despise us?
In the last 80 years we have fought against nazis and cummies who both threatened to overrun our freedoms, our culture, our society.

You know the expression "When in Rome, do as the Romans". If you go to a different country, then it is purely your own responsibility to adjust to that lifestyle. If you can't, then it is best to return home. So the solution your ask about is very simple and right at hand..... Go home.

@Scanian Black and Brown people aren't worse or better, but Islamic ideology is for sure worse. Really when people talk about Muslims they mostly mean Islamic ideology. It is pretty terrible, and to prove it's worse than Christianity I leave you with this:

Symbol of Christianity: Jesus
Symbol of Islam: Muhammad

Remember, each sees their prophet as the ideal form that God/Allah expects of his creations, and if you look up what each has said and done, you will see why the consequences of Islamic extremism is much more grave and prevalent than Christian extremism.

@minimilk That's *actual bollocks*. There's nowhere in Britain like that. It's insane to think there is.

@EnglishBloke Funny how leftists always completely fail to grasp probabilities and statistics. Firstly, there are about a thousand times more Muslims than Neo-Nazis, and the latter have essentially zero respect and people covering for them and are hated by everyone. Secondly, Muslims are about a hundred times more likely to commit antisocial acts of various kinds than non-Muslim Europeans, as evidenced by the fact that they account for a majority of rapes etc. when they're only 2% of the population. So shut up with your "but Christians and Neo-Nazis" junk.

@EnglishBloke :Minimilk didn't say "Muslims are a problem"; he referred to "Islamists" and "Muslim Gangs", both of which are specific subsections of the larger Muslim population, similar to the way Mafiosi are a subsection of the Italian population and Soccer Hooligans are a subsection of the British. Before getting all hot & bothered, reread to see if something actually says what you think it said.

@minimilk Well, in Germany we have everything. We have neonazis, antisemitism of varying flavor, people suffering from all kinds of post traumatic stress disorder, extremists, left and right and others, our own and a number of imported a*holes, you name it.
Perhaps we should indeed build a wall around our country, but I'm afraid it's too late to protect our neighbours :-)

Sweden?
Pff. Amateurs.

@minando There is a joke to be made here, I just know it.

@Scanian Thank the gods we are a pretty humorless bunch.

I’m just gonna go ahead and guess that Nazis isn’t what Norway and Denmark had in mind when making this decision.

Especially the Danish government.

@Scanian Actually it was. Neo-nazi terrorists

@Carewolf You're right, I didn't believe that was the case but you're right. Still, I have a memory of Danish politicians wanting to strengthen their border to Sweden because Sweden's immigration had led to crime and that crime could spread to Denmark, they said something with that message. The Danish politicians I've heard debate have always been as right wing as SD, so I thought that was the underlying reason for the decision to strengthen borders and that this event was more of an excuse to follow through with their plans for more border control than the true reason for it. However, Denmark has changed their government recently and those Danish politicians I mentioned belonged to Danske Folkeparti, they are a big party but not at the top of decisionmaking, something that I didn't think of.

@Scanian a couple of Neo-Nazi Swedes just bombed a state building

@InDeathWeReturn Why did they bomb that place?

@Scanian Don't know. Don't care. I tend not to get into the mind of terrorists

@InDeathWeReturn That's fine, but keep in mind that motives are important to know in order to prevent others from getting the same idea.

@InDeathWeReturn Wrong.
There were two guys involved:
1) 22 years, Turkish-Bulgairan ethnicity.
2) 23 years. Ran as a candidate for the 'left-party' (communists-lite) in local elections in 2014. Ran as a candidate for the communist party in local elections 2018. Latin-American ethnicity.
-Is this the face of Swedish Neo-Nazis?

@Father_Svitjod Fair enough. They changed the description from earlier. My bad

@Scanian Agree.

It's not neo-Nazis that Sweden has a problem with...

@Cris
Whatever you call them, Swedish white nationalists are a thing.

@niauropsaka The bombing in Denmark were done by non-Swedish left wing radicals.
A Turkish-Bulgairan immigrant and a Latin-American immigrant that ran as a candidate for the communist part in 2018
Clearly a case of Sweden exporting its huge problem with left wing terrorism to Denmark.

...I can smell the unoriginal 'Swedistan' and 'Rape capital' jokes all the way from here, and i dont know if thats a good thing or a bad thing

@HarpyDarpyDoo Tysfjord Municipality in Norway has some ridiculous stats for rape, like 20% of people were raped.
My source is "dude, trust me", but my dude who told me that is Norwegian

@HarpyDarpyDoo Trust me, it is a bad thing.

For the information, yes, I live in an idiotic country that has brought both refugees and the attackers under the same roof and yes, we supported the immigration and yes, our politicians are probably not the smartest in Europe, but bloody hell people, imagine how we feel reading comments on Swedistan and Rape Capital every single time our country is mentioned. It is getting quite old by now.

Can't we all agree, the world is already in bad shape *cough**cough* Trump *cough* populism *cough* the environment is collapsing around us

@Shitzadorina I like taking the piss out of Sweden, but come on. The only """Jokes""" about Sweden are either Swedistan, Rape Capital or Feminism. Like, are you so bankrupt on creativity that you can only beat multiple dead horses? We get it, we got immigration and left leaning politics and all that. Maybe you should get creative! Insult us on other things! We're waiting!

@HarpyDarpyDoo are surströmming and weak beer still valid subjects?

@Frikadeller anything is better, just p l e a s e

(thinks)
Hmm... Has anyone in my own government done a serious feasibility study on a possible border wall with the USA? There's already a lot of rivers; it wouldn't need to be the whole length...

@Hinoron and Mexico will pay for the wall

@Golightly
Unlikely, but I bet they'll get a chuckle out of it. :P

@Hinoron US illegal migrants are measured in hundreds of thousands or millions. Canada is what, 30k? Not very feasible I think.

@Steeeve
Not so much anymore. Border crossings are at an all-time low, according to Boarder Patrol's own data. Mexico's economy is much healthier, and population growth has slowed way down, so there's not much desperation to move to the US anymore.
I doubt you'll hear much about that in the news when the current administration is still trying to use fear to convince the US citizens that a boarder wall is anything but a monstrously expensive, counterproductive, extremely destructive, terrible idea.

As for Canada... we have seen some significant spikes in the last 2-3 years as Donald pushed through ever-more draconian enforcement of Illegal immigration laws. This results in people running FROM the USA to a safer place... not unlike during slavery when the Northern States threw black people under the bus, by passing laws that slaves who escaped the South would be captured in the North states and returned to their owners... They had to start running all the way to Canada, where slavery was already abolished, 100 years before USA would.
It's uncomfortably similar to what's happening now.