Europe submits voluntarily

[angelo]

You are absolutely right; when faced with a problem, seeking solutions is stupid. The important thing is to apportion BLAME.

Then Sweden should first of all make it harder for non refugees to enter as did Australia and even demand that the USA and UK deal with them.

No nation should try to emulate Australia's disgraceful and inhumane policies on migration.

Taking someone in is your choice. There are a lot of skilled Syrians also but it's worth finding out more about the background of anyone you take in and don't know. It's not about Nationality. You could take in a friend of a good friend who is Swedish but turns out to be drug dealer.

Sure. Being nice to people is risky; so we should all be as horrible as possible for our own protection

If a crime is committed the responsible party must be held responsible and make reparations.

Really? What reparations and responsibility are we going to enforce on Joe Stalin?

Sometimes the responsible party cannot be forced to do anything. That's no reason not to help their victims.

Australia advised that those who make the trip by boat illegally, “there is no way you will ever make Australia home”.
Nowadays if a boat is picked up they are sent to centres such as Papa New Guinea or Nauru. Anyone accepted as a refugee is offered places like Cambodia, Papa New Guinea or Nauru.

I know all about Australia's system. It is vile, and an embarrassment to our nation.

Just like anyone else, Australia has a points system. So both its emigration and immigration systems work.

That rather depends what you mean by 'work'. The Boer War concentration camps 'worked'; as long as you were not a Boer woman or child.

We take strangers into our houses at our own risk.

Countries are not houses. They are ALREADY full of strangers.

Or do you personally know all the citizens in your country? I doubt even in Liechtenstein that that is possible.

Since the war is ongoing and only started a short while ago, this would may be valid Of course hundreds of years later it would be invalid. Sweden can always provide one way tickets to the UK. The French did that (at least once) from Calais. If someone is illegal in the UK without papers, he isn’t jailed but let loose again.
For there are many sweatshops and high priced hovels (sheds with beds) provided for illegal workers where they are unlikely to be sue for illegal treatment.
Australia is simply applying a sensible immigration policy and in fact does genuine assist asylum seekers.

Points systems are pretty standard.

Just like a house we want to minmize the risks of who is coming in. Is the plumber a plumber or a rapist. ID would help and prior confirmation from the service office would minimize the risk.

Countries are NOT houses; They are not 'like' houses; and no 'sensible' policy includes concentration camps. None. Ever.

Have you been to these " concentration camps?" They're more like holiday resorts. Perhaps you have a better idea on stemming the invasion?

- - - Updated - - -

Right here is interesting reading whether one dismisses it as the right rantings or not.
http://unconstrainedanalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Strategic-Overview-Coughlin-010216.pdf

 

[bilby]

You are absolutely right; when faced with a problem, seeking solutions is stupid. The important thing is to apportion BLAME.

Then Sweden should first of all make it harder for non refugees to enter as did Australia and even demand that the USA and UK deal with them.

No nation should try to emulate Australia's disgraceful and inhumane policies on migration.

Taking someone in is your choice. There are a lot of skilled Syrians also but it's worth finding out more about the background of anyone you take in and don't know. It's not about Nationality. You could take in a friend of a good friend who is Swedish but turns out to be drug dealer.

Sure. Being nice to people is risky; so we should all be as horrible as possible for our own protection

If a crime is committed the responsible party must be held responsible and make reparations.

Really? What reparations and responsibility are we going to enforce on Joe Stalin?

Sometimes the responsible party cannot be forced to do anything. That's no reason not to help their victims.

Australia advised that those who make the trip by boat illegally, “there is no way you will ever make Australia home”.
Nowadays if a boat is picked up they are sent to centres such as Papa New Guinea or Nauru. Anyone accepted as a refugee is offered places like Cambodia, Papa New Guinea or Nauru.

I know all about Australia's system. It is vile, and an embarrassment to our nation.

Just like anyone else, Australia has a points system. So both its emigration and immigration systems work.

That rather depends what you mean by 'work'. The Boer War concentration camps 'worked'; as long as you were not a Boer woman or child.

We take strangers into our houses at our own risk.

Countries are not houses. They are ALREADY full of strangers.

Or do you personally know all the citizens in your country? I doubt even in Liechtenstein that that is possible.

Since the war is ongoing and only started a short while ago, this would may be valid Of course hundreds of years later it would be invalid. Sweden can always provide one way tickets to the UK. The French did that (at least once) from Calais. If someone is illegal in the UK without papers, he isn’t jailed but let loose again.
For there are many sweatshops and high priced hovels (sheds with beds) provided for illegal workers where they are unlikely to be sue for illegal treatment.
Australia is simply applying a sensible immigration policy and in fact does genuine assist asylum seekers.

Points systems are pretty standard.

Just like a house we want to minmize the risks of who is coming in. Is the plumber a plumber or a rapist. ID would help and prior confirmation from the service office would minimize the risk.

Countries are NOT houses; They are not 'like' houses; and no 'sensible' policy includes concentration camps. None. Ever.

Have you been to these " concentration camps?" They're more like holiday resorts. Perhaps you have a better idea on stemming the invasion?

Have you been there?

Would you like to live there? For a week? A month? A year? Indefinitely?

Holiday camp my arse.

And what fucking invasion? More people are in Australia without visas, and/or working without permits, who arrived by plane than are currently in immigration detention.

Shit, there are likely more UK passport holders arriving to work illegally in Byron Bay alone than there are boat people.

But they are OK, because they arrived by plane. Apparently.

Fuck that. Fuck you and your racist bullshit copied from moronic right wing radio and Internet shitholes.

Your country - your government - has put vulnerable people into concentration camps, and you are not just failing to act; you are cheering them on. Fuck that. Fuck off. Go and learn about what you are supporting. Go to fucking Nauru, or Manus, and take a look.

How DARE you describe those places as 'holiday camps'? How the FUCK would you know?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Have you been to these " concentration camps?" They're more like holiday resorts. Perhaps you have a better idea on stemming the invasion?

- - - Updated - - -

Right here is interesting reading whether one dismisses it as the right rantings or not.
http://unconstrainedanalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Strategic-Overview-Coughlin-010216.pdf

Yeah, a holiday resort where you're stuck for ages, there's nothing to do all day and there's no beach. To me that would be Hell on Earth.

BTW, your "Unconstrained" report on the War on Terror starts with a Bible quote. That's a hint that this report isn't even pretending to have an objective stance. I wonder in what way the report is unconstrained? Considering the Bible quote I'm guessing it's not letting itself be constrained by reality. I didn't read beyond the Bible quote. So I really can't comment on the content. The Bible quote put me off.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just thought I'd tell you a bit about what's happening in Sweden. Since the refugee crisis started racists (yes, these are racists) have been writing miles and miles of blogg posts on the fact that if we don't radically change our policies we're heading for a system collapse (systemkollaps). Basically the whole Swedish society going down the drain. The below is an example of one such racist blog. Google translate and so on.

http://www.friatider.se/wallstr-m-sverige-g-r-mot-systemkollaps

http://avpixlat.info/2015/07/07/asylsokande-fangelse-ar-battre/

It's hyperbolic extreme language. Apocalyptic. The choice of language has made many journalists and people in general react and are now making fun of it. Just using the word "system collapse" in Sweden is a joke. Whenever there's minor snag anybody somebody will say "system collapse" and everybody laughs.

The refugee crisis is expensive. Nobody has questioned that. But it's been a question of just moving some money around. The effects aren't actually noticeable. Nothing much has happened and won't happen. Sweden has dealt with it just fine and will keep dealing with it just fine. We had a wave of refugees after the Iraq war as well. They've adjusted just fine. So we know how this will pan out. It'll be fine.

 

[angelo]

You are absolutely right; when faced with a problem, seeking solutions is stupid. The important thing is to apportion BLAME.

Then Sweden should first of all make it harder for non refugees to enter as did Australia and even demand that the USA and UK deal with them.

No nation should try to emulate Australia's disgraceful and inhumane policies on migration.

Taking someone in is your choice. There are a lot of skilled Syrians also but it's worth finding out more about the background of anyone you take in and don't know. It's not about Nationality. You could take in a friend of a good friend who is Swedish but turns out to be drug dealer.

Sure. Being nice to people is risky; so we should all be as horrible as possible for our own protection

If a crime is committed the responsible party must be held responsible and make reparations.

Really? What reparations and responsibility are we going to enforce on Joe Stalin?

Sometimes the responsible party cannot be forced to do anything. That's no reason not to help their victims.

Australia advised that those who make the trip by boat illegally, “there is no way you will ever make Australia home”.
Nowadays if a boat is picked up they are sent to centres such as Papa New Guinea or Nauru. Anyone accepted as a refugee is offered places like Cambodia, Papa New Guinea or Nauru.

I know all about Australia's system. It is vile, and an embarrassment to our nation.

Just like anyone else, Australia has a points system. So both its emigration and immigration systems work.

That rather depends what you mean by 'work'. The Boer War concentration camps 'worked'; as long as you were not a Boer woman or child.

We take strangers into our houses at our own risk.

Countries are not houses. They are ALREADY full of strangers.

Or do you personally know all the citizens in your country? I doubt even in Liechtenstein that that is possible.

Since the war is ongoing and only started a short while ago, this would may be valid Of course hundreds of years later it would be invalid. Sweden can always provide one way tickets to the UK. The French did that (at least once) from Calais. If someone is illegal in the UK without papers, he isn’t jailed but let loose again.
For there are many sweatshops and high priced hovels (sheds with beds) provided for illegal workers where they are unlikely to be sue for illegal treatment.
Australia is simply applying a sensible immigration policy and in fact does genuine assist asylum seekers.

Points systems are pretty standard.

Just like a house we want to minmize the risks of who is coming in. Is the plumber a plumber or a rapist. ID would help and prior confirmation from the service office would minimize the risk.

Countries are NOT houses; They are not 'like' houses; and no 'sensible' policy includes concentration camps. None. Ever.

Have you been to these " concentration camps?" They're more like holiday resorts. Perhaps you have a better idea on stemming the invasion?

Have you been there?

Would you like to live there? For a week? A month? A year? Indefinitely?

Holiday camp my arse.

And what fucking invasion? More people are in Australia without visas, and/or working without permits, who arrived by plane than are currently in immigration detention.

Shit, there are likely more UK passport holders arriving to work illegally in Byron Bay alone than there are boat people.

But they are OK, because they arrived by plane. Apparently.

Fuck that. Fuck you and your racist bullshit copied from moronic right wing radio and Internet shitholes.

Your country - your government - has put vulnerable people into concentration camps, and you are not just failing to act; you are cheering them on. Fuck that. Fuck off. Go and learn about what you are supporting. Go to fucking Nauru, or Manus, and take a look.

How DARE you describe those places as 'holiday camps'? How the FUCK would you know?

Your Labor party agrees with the policy, at least to grab votes. What they'll do once in government is another matter.
Doubt they'll open the borders like Europe has though.

 

[whichphilosophy]

You are absolutely right; when faced with a problem, seeking solutions is stupid. The important thing is to apportion BLAME.

Then Sweden should first of all make it harder for non refugees to enter as did Australia and even demand that the USA and UK deal with them.

No nation should try to emulate Australia's disgraceful and inhumane policies on migration.

Taking someone in is your choice. There are a lot of skilled Syrians also but it's worth finding out more about the background of anyone you take in and don't know. It's not about Nationality. You could take in a friend of a good friend who is Swedish but turns out to be drug dealer.

Sure. Being nice to people is risky; so we should all be as horrible as possible for our own protection

If a crime is committed the responsible party must be held responsible and make reparations.

Really? What reparations and responsibility are we going to enforce on Joe Stalin?

Sometimes the responsible party cannot be forced to do anything. That's no reason not to help their victims.

Australia advised that those who make the trip by boat illegally, “there is no way you will ever make Australia home”.
Nowadays if a boat is picked up they are sent to centres such as Papa New Guinea or Nauru. Anyone accepted as a refugee is offered places like Cambodia, Papa New Guinea or Nauru.

I know all about Australia's system. It is vile, and an embarrassment to our nation.

Just like anyone else, Australia has a points system. So both its emigration and immigration systems work.

That rather depends what you mean by 'work'. The Boer War concentration camps 'worked'; as long as you were not a Boer woman or child.

We take strangers into our houses at our own risk.

Countries are not houses. They are ALREADY full of strangers.

Or do you personally know all the citizens in your country? I doubt even in Liechtenstein that that is possible.

Since the war is ongoing and only started a short while ago, this would may be valid Of course hundreds of years later it would be invalid. Sweden can always provide one way tickets to the UK. The French did that (at least once) from Calais. If someone is illegal in the UK without papers, he isn’t jailed but let loose again.
For there are many sweatshops and high priced hovels (sheds with beds) provided for illegal workers where they are unlikely to be sue for illegal treatment.
Australia is simply applying a sensible immigration policy and in fact does genuine assist asylum seekers.

Points systems are pretty standard.

Just like a house we want to minmize the risks of who is coming in. Is the plumber a plumber or a rapist. ID would help and prior confirmation from the service office would minimize the risk.

Countries are NOT houses; They are not 'like' houses; and no 'sensible' policy includes concentration camps. None. Ever.

Have you been to these " concentration camps?" They're more like holiday resorts. Perhaps you have a better idea on stemming the invasion?

Have you been there?

Would you like to live there? For a week? A month? A year? Indefinitely?

Holiday camp my arse.

And what fucking invasion? More people are in Australia without visas, and/or working without permits, who arrived by plane than are currently in immigration detention.

Shit, there are likely more UK passport holders arriving to work illegally in Byron Bay alone than there are boat people.

But they are OK, because they arrived by plane. Apparently.

Fuck that. Fuck you and your racist bullshit copied from moronic right wing radio and Internet shitholes.

Your country - your government - has put vulnerable people into concentration camps, and you are not just failing to act; you are cheering them on. Fuck that. Fuck off. Go and learn about what you are supporting. Go to fucking Nauru, or Manus, and take a look.

How DARE you describe those places as 'holiday camps'? How the FUCK would you know?

I think you are also referring to people who came to Australia legally but are overstayers or as you said work illegally.

It seems that the Australian government is aware of this and while it has been deporting an increasing number. However for those who have no criminal record and have been in the country a long time and are part of the community options for staying seems to be on the agenda as per the reference below.

http://www.australianmigrations.com...stralias-growing-number-of-visa-over-stayers/

Unless it is pure propaganda it seems the Australian government is not simply doing nothing on this and indications are that it has been somewhat active in resolving this issue.

I’m sure the camps are not modelled upon the biblical concept of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon but they are probably a lot better than some of the migrants are used to. Clearly Mauro and Nauro cannot be compared to the Bahamas since these are processing centres paid for by the Australian government.

As for the detention? There have been some incidents but are these isolated or the norm? Are the migrants fed well and have basic facilities for washing and perhaps some activities to keep them occupied.
I am sure majority opinion in Australia nor the government intends anything inhumane but why should it open the floodgates for anyone who wants to escape economic problems (vs asylum seekers). Asia and Africa are simply too large to absorb.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Just thought I'd tell you a bit about what's happening in Sweden. Since the refugee crisis started racists (yes, these are racists) have been writing miles and miles of blogg posts on the fact that if we don't radically change our policies we're heading for a system collapse (systemkollaps). Basically the whole Swedish society going down the drain. The below is an example of one such racist blog. Google translate and so on.

http://www.friatider.se/wallstr-m-sverige-g-r-mot-systemkollaps

http://avpixlat.info/2015/07/07/asylsokande-fangelse-ar-battre/

The question is whether it is expensive or simply not affordable. Whose going to keep paying for high amounts coming in though I understand this has reduced recently in the face of tougher border checks.

It's hyperbolic extreme language. Apocalyptic. The choice of language has made many journalists and people in general react and are now making fun of it. Just using the word "system collapse" in Sweden is a joke. Whenever there's minor snag anybody somebody will say "system collapse" and everybody laughs.

The refugee crisis is expensive. Nobody has questioned that. But it's been a question of just moving some money around. The effects aren't actually noticeable. Nothing much has happened and won't happen. Sweden has dealt with it just fine and will keep dealing with it just fine. We had a wave of refugees after the Iraq war as well. They've adjusted just fine. So we know how this will pan out. It'll be fine.

The question is not whether it is expensive but whether such a high level is affordable. The volume as I understand has been reduced arising out of stricter ID checks for people entering the country.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just thought I'd tell you a bit about what's happening in Sweden. Since the refugee crisis started racists (yes, these are racists) have been writing miles and miles of blogg posts on the fact that if we don't radically change our policies we're heading for a system collapse (systemkollaps). Basically the whole Swedish society going down the drain. The below is an example of one such racist blog. Google translate and so on.

http://www.friatider.se/wallstr-m-sverige-g-r-mot-systemkollaps

http://avpixlat.info/2015/07/07/asylsokande-fangelse-ar-battre/

The question is whether it is expensive or simply not affordable. Whose going to keep paying for high amounts coming in though I understand this has reduced recently in the face of tougher border checks.

It's hyperbolic extreme language. Apocalyptic. The choice of language has made many journalists and people in general react and are now making fun of it. Just using the word "system collapse" in Sweden is a joke. Whenever there's minor snag anybody somebody will say "system collapse" and everybody laughs.

The refugee crisis is expensive. Nobody has questioned that. But it's been a question of just moving some money around. The effects aren't actually noticeable. Nothing much has happened and won't happen. Sweden has dealt with it just fine and will keep dealing with it just fine. We had a wave of refugees after the Iraq war as well. They've adjusted just fine. So we know how this will pan out. It'll be fine.

The question is not whether it is expensive but whether such a high level is affordable. The volume as I understand has been reduced arising out of stricter ID checks for people entering the country.

It's affordable. We could have ten times as many. It would still be affordable. Look... Sweden is a rich country nowadays. Reducing the volume has only to do with some sort of general hysteria. Here's a good article on the mood of Sweden. Just use Google translate to read.

http://www.dn.se/sthlm/mote-om-ensamkommande-flyktingar-sparade-ur/

Ordinary people's reaction is so out of proportion. People just take it for granted that a refugee asylum will lead to violence and rape and so on, even though there's nothing in the statistics to show it is happening.

Another reason is fairness. Swedes doesn't think that the rest of Europe (except Germany) isn't taking their fair share of refugees. Which is a fair critique.

 

[TSwizzle]

Just thought I'd tell you a bit about what's happening in Sweden. Since the refugee crisis started racists (yes, these are racists) have been writing miles and miles of blogg posts on the fact that if we don't radically change our policies we're heading for a system collapse (systemkollaps). Basically the whole Swedish society going down the drain. The below is an example of one such racist blog. Google translate and so on.

http://www.friatider.se/wallstr-m-sverige-g-r-mot-systemkollaps

http://avpixlat.info/2015/07/07/asylsokande-fangelse-ar-battre/

It's hyperbolic extreme language. Apocalyptic. The choice of language has made many journalists and people in general react and are now making fun of it. Just using the word "system collapse" in Sweden is a joke. Whenever there's minor snag anybody somebody will say "system collapse" and everybody laughs.

The refugee crisis is expensive. Nobody has questioned that. But it's been a question of just moving some money around. The effects aren't actually noticeable. Nothing much has happened and won't happen. Sweden has dealt with it just fine and will keep dealing with it just fine. We had a wave of refugees after the Iraq war as well. They've adjusted just fine. So we know how this will pan out. It'll be fine.

What is hyperbolic is that you keep referring to these migrants as refugees.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The question is not whether it is expensive but whether such a high level is affordable. The volume as I understand has been reduced arising out of stricter ID checks for people entering the country.

It's affordable. We could have ten times as many. It would still be affordable. Look... Sweden is a rich country nowadays. Reducing the volume has only to do with some sort of general hysteria. Here's a good article on the mood of Sweden. Just use Google translate to read.

http://www.dn.se/sthlm/mote-om-ensamkommande-flyktingar-sparade-ur/

Ordinary people's reaction is so out of proportion. People just take it for granted that a refugee asylum will lead to violence and rape and so on, even though there's nothing in the statistics to show it is happening.

Another reason is fairness. Swedes doesn't think that the rest of Europe (except Germany) isn't taking their fair share of refugees. Which is a fair critique.

The problem is Germany didn't distinguish between migrant and refugee and simply does not have the resources to look after all of them. Eu policy hasn't helped. It has its own pensioners and unemployed to care about. I believe both Germany and Sweden are now focused on repatriating unqualified visitors (which is a great cost) and being more selective in its checks. There are cases when people can lose their documents but this is quite rare.

Of course the Ultra right will assume and report the worst but there is still a problem with over representation of migrants in crime statistics. However different papers may give a different view on things. Now that Sweden does better border checks the amount entering has reduced. The over representation is because a the volume of unchecked persons leads to a high risk level. Deportations will also be costly.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just thought I'd tell you a bit about what's happening in Sweden. Since the refugee crisis started racists (yes, these are racists) have been writing miles and miles of blogg posts on the fact that if we don't radically change our policies we're heading for a system collapse (systemkollaps). Basically the whole Swedish society going down the drain. The below is an example of one such racist blog. Google translate and so on.

http://www.friatider.se/wallstr-m-sverige-g-r-mot-systemkollaps

http://avpixlat.info/2015/07/07/asylsokande-fangelse-ar-battre/

It's hyperbolic extreme language. Apocalyptic. The choice of language has made many journalists and people in general react and are now making fun of it. Just using the word "system collapse" in Sweden is a joke. Whenever there's minor snag anybody somebody will say "system collapse" and everybody laughs.

The refugee crisis is expensive. Nobody has questioned that. But it's been a question of just moving some money around. The effects aren't actually noticeable. Nothing much has happened and won't happen. Sweden has dealt with it just fine and will keep dealing with it just fine. We had a wave of refugees after the Iraq war as well. They've adjusted just fine. So we know how this will pan out. It'll be fine.

What is hyperbolic is that you keep referring to these migrants as refugees.

I refer to refugees as refugees and migrants as migrants. I've so far always used the words correctly.

 

[Jayjay]

What is hyperbolic is that you keep referring to these migrants as refugees.

I refer to refugees as refugees and migrants as migrants. I've so far always used the words correctly.

Then why are you calling it a "refugee crisis" instead of "migrant crisis"?

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's affordable. We could have ten times as many. It would still be affordable. Look... Sweden is a rich country nowadays. Reducing the volume has only to do with some sort of general hysteria. Here's a good article on the mood of Sweden. Just use Google translate to read.

http://www.dn.se/sthlm/mote-om-ensamkommande-flyktingar-sparade-ur/

Ordinary people's reaction is so out of proportion. People just take it for granted that a refugee asylum will lead to violence and rape and so on, even though there's nothing in the statistics to show it is happening.

Another reason is fairness. Swedes doesn't think that the rest of Europe (except Germany) isn't taking their fair share of refugees. Which is a fair critique.

The problem is Germany didn't distinguish between migrant and refugee and simply does not have the resources to look after all of them. Eu policy hasn't helped. It has its own pensioners and unemployed to care about. I believe both Germany and Sweden are now focused on repatriating unqualified visitors (which is a great cost) and being more selective in its checks. There are cases when people can lose their documents but this is quite rare.

Of course the Ultra right will assume and report the worst but there is still a problem with over representation of migrants in crime statistics. However different papers may give a different view on things. Now that Sweden does better border checks the amount entering has reduced. The over representation is because a the volume of unchecked persons leads to a high risk level. Deportations will also be costly.

What is it you don't understand? We can't just refuse to take in refugees just because a bunch of migrants are also trying to slip in with them. That's what you are saying. If we do that we're failing to observe the UN refugee charter. That would make me sad.

Yes, it sucks. But do you know who it sucks even more for? The people who's entire country is on fire with people starving in the streets.

You keep making the same logical mistakes over and over. Just because we take in somebody temporarily (ie put them in a refugee camp) doesn't mean they get to stay. It means they get to stay until we've decided what to do with them. Once the war is over any claim to stay is moot.

I don't think you know how likely it is that somebody has lost their papers. How can I make this claim? Because nobody knows. There's just no way to even establish this.

As far as the cost. Don't be ridiculous. We'll be fine. Ok, so we'll have to tighten our belts a bit. Isn't that a price worth paying in order to help our Syrian brothers (and sisters) in need? These people really are suffering. And our poor and suffering pensioners. They're suffering, not because we can't help them, but because we don't care about them. That's just a fact. Because helping them is seen as socialism and nobody wants to come across as a socialist. This is the age of narcissism and not giving a shit. We'd have no problems helping both the refugees and pensioners. You might just have to buy slightly less mobile phones, playstations and inflatable fuck-dolls. It's only a matter of priorities. It's retarded to think that we suddenly will start giving a shit about our pensioners just because we kick all the refugees out.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I refer to refugees as refugees and migrants as migrants. I've so far always used the words correctly.

Then why are you calling it a "refugee crisis" instead of "migrant crisis"?

Are you saying it isn't? As far as I know the migrants aren't in a crisis. They're just opportunists. The refugees on the other hand really are in crisis. It goes with the terminology. Unless there's a crisis we wouldn't get refugees.

And calling the flood of migrants and refugees to Europe a crisis for Europe is being facetious. It's not a crisis. We're more like a parent who doesn't want to change it's kids diapers so they drag their feet hoping the other parent will do it, so they won't have to. There's nothing admirable about that.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The problem is Germany didn't distinguish between migrant and refugee and simply does not have the resources to look after all of them. Eu policy hasn't helped. It has its own pensioners and unemployed to care about. I believe both Germany and Sweden are now focused on repatriating unqualified visitors (which is a great cost) and being more selective in its checks. There are cases when people can lose their documents but this is quite rare.

Of course the Ultra right will assume and report the worst but there is still a problem with over representation of migrants in crime statistics. However different papers may give a different view on things. Now that Sweden does better border checks the amount entering has reduced. The over representation is because a the volume of unchecked persons leads to a high risk level. Deportations will also be costly.

What is it you don't understand? We can't just refuse to take in refugees just because a bunch of migrants are also trying to slip in with them. That's what you are saying. If we do that we're failing to observe the UN refugee charter. That would make me sad.

Yes, it sucks. But do you know who it sucks even more for? The people who's entire country is on fire with people starving in the streets.

You keep making the same logical mistakes over and over. Just because we take in somebody temporarily (ie put them in a refugee camp) doesn't mean they get to stay. It means they get to stay until we've decided what to do with them. Once the war is over any claim to stay is moot.

I don't think you know how likely it is that somebody has lost their papers. How can I make this claim? Because nobody knows. There's just no way to even establish this.

As far as the cost. Don't be ridiculous. We'll be fine. Ok, so we'll have to tighten our belts a bit. Isn't that a price worth paying in order to help our Syrian brothers (and sisters) in need? These people really are suffering. And our poor and suffering pensioners. They're suffering, not because we can't help them, but because we don't care about them. That's just a fact. Because helping them is seen as socialism and nobody wants to come across as a socialist. This is the age of narcissism and not giving a shit. We'd have no problems helping both the refugees and pensioners. You might just have to buy slightly less mobile phones, playstations and inflatable fuck-dolls. It's only a matter of priorities. It's retarded to think that we suddenly will start giving a shit about our pensioners just because we kick all the refugees out.

You don't have to tighten your belts so much if you tighten your borders. People can also be caught out if it turns out their claims of lost papers turn out to be false. The problem is not refugees but others who are not. If a nation spends less, it causes unemployment as less money circulates into the economy. Economic migrants are not asylum seekers.

 

[angelo]

Controlling the borders also has the potential to stop perhaps thousands of drownings at sea by people risking their lives using people smugglers to try to get to Europe, or elsewhete. During the Labor years when Labor under Rudd re-opened the borders, 50.000 economic migrants landed in Australia, and over 1000 of them perished at sea. Since Labor realised they made a major blunder and again closed the porous borders, not one death at sea, and the detention centers are almost empty from the thousands that were there previously.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Controlling the borders also has the potential to stop perhaps thousands of drownings at sea by people risking their lives using people smugglers to try to get to Europe, or elsewhete. During the Labor years when Labor under Rudd re-opened the borders, 50.000 economic migrants landed in Australia, and over 1000 of them perished at sea. Since Labor realised they made a major blunder and again closed the porous borders, not one death at sea, and the detention centers are almost empty from the thousands that were there previously.

The Australians are actually processing Asylum seekers if they come through border check points and not try to creep in through sea. This has worked.
The Australians have managed to stem the tide of economic migrants. The message is clear. Come through proper checkpoints and only then will their claims be entertained. This is also an issue of security. If migrants can simply walk in, how many militants could sneak in?

Now back to the UK
Economic migrants nonetheless are schooled on how to play the system

Here is a Video from YOUTUBE showing how the British Border Farce deals with false applicants. Quite funny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAuAtscuyy8

it doesn't matter that his papers and story were fake. He was allowed in anyway and then later disappeared.

 

[angelo]

England and the rest of Europe will have to learn the hard way it seems, but I fear it may be too late when they finally realise that East and West shall never meet. That wherever large numbers of moslems live, they create little Syria's, little Lebanon's, Iraq, ect, that nowhere have these peaple intergrated into Western society.

 

[bigfield]

The Australians have managed to stem the tide of economic migrants. The message is clear. Come through proper checkpoints and only then will their claims be entertained. This is also an issue of security. If migrants can simply walk in, how many militants could sneak in?

It's just one ridiculously ignorant statement after another from you.

Nobody 'walks' into Australia across the Timor Sea; the boats are detected up by the Navy, usually before they even reach Australian territorial waters. The idea that militants could sneak through the Naval patrols, land in the far north, and then make their way across the wilderness to Australia's major population centres is just laughable.

- - - Updated - - -

Controlling the borders also has the potential to stop perhaps thousands of drownings at sea by people risking their lives using people smugglers to try to get to Europe, or elsewhete. During the Labor years when Labor under Rudd re-opened the borders, 50.000 economic migrants landed in Australia, and over 1000 of them perished at sea. Since Labor realised they made a major blunder and again closed the porous borders, not one death at sea, and the detention centers are almost empty from the thousands that were there previously.

Calling them economic migrants--something you can;t possibly know--is a scumbag tactic.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Controlling the borders also has the potential to stop perhaps thousands of drownings at sea by people risking their lives using people smugglers to try to get to Europe, or elsewhete. During the Labor years when Labor under Rudd re-opened the borders, 50.000 economic migrants landed in Australia, and over 1000 of them perished at sea. Since Labor realised they made a major blunder and again closed the porous borders, not one death at sea, and the detention centers are almost empty from the thousands that were there previously.

Right now people are starving in Syria. As in dropping dead in the streets. There's nothing you can do to stop these people. Keeping these people in Syria isn't an option. It's a question of how many you wish to kill along the way. The countries closing borders has blood on their hands