Europe submits voluntarily

[whichphilosophy]

That's more than enough. They can contact radicals in the host country Even 10 can cause disruption. A whole army of ISIS is most improbable but it doesn't take a lot of people to plant a bomb or shoot someone

It doesn't take more than a few, true.

But one way or another, it's irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not to close the borders for the 1000s of refugees a day coming from Hungary to Germany right now.

If ISIS wants a bomb planted in a major European city, they recruit people already there, or they buy Bulgarian passports for their agents and put them on a plane from Sofia to Frankfurt. They have no reason to send their people on a long and exhausting trek where they might be identified by other refugees actually fleeing ISIS.

It simply makes no sense.

It does make sense for ISIS, though, to announce, counterfactually, that they will send thousands of people to come into Europe along with the legitimate refugees, for a number of reasons.

If you spread that rumor, you're helping and no-one but them.

To avoid detection they can simply destroy all their documents which the migrants tend to do. Skill in warfare is sometimes to do what makes the least sense if it is unexpected. I doubt if they can send hundreds of thousands or even thousands. It's more likely one or two here and there.
The point of this is we should secure our borders. This would most likely benefit refugees such as those from Syria with their papers.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The point is the root source for this issue is a paper far more interested in ideology than truth--there's no point in paying attention to it.

Are those from Pakistan and Bangladesh refugees. Yet only a few even want to apply for Asylum. Many are throwing away their IDs

They're throwing away their IDs because it makes it all but impossible to deport them. All the more reason to think they're economic migrants, not true refugees.

It's likely that most stories are written in the editors office. However if there were people coming into the UAE, I would know it because I am employed from there. There are no immigrants or Asylum seekers in the UAE and the press did not give any indication of such.
True under UAE law if a person doesn't have ID and conveniently forgets his name and birthday, deportation is very unlikely.

 

[Jokodo]

You got it upside down. Given that they're educated, its no wonder that they're informed without having to stipulate that they're "organised".

You keep assuming that they are educated, when the only thing we know for sure they are "educated" in are European laws and regulations regarding refugees.

When an entire family scrapes together their money to pay for one person's journey to Europe, they'll make damn sure that they send the one with the best prospects of making it there and getting a job soon enough. That'll be the most educated member. And most of the time, the families able to afford that are middle class to start.

 

[barbos]

You keep assuming that they are educated, when the only thing we know for sure they are "educated" in are European laws and regulations regarding refugees.

When an entire family scrapes together their money to pay for one person's journey to Europe, they'll make damn sure that they send the one with the best prospects of making it there and getting a job soon enough. That'll be the most educated member. And most of the time, the families able to afford that are middle class to start.

If you are saying that these people shouting "Fuck You" are Syrian professors then help us God.

I am sorry but history disagrees with you, most emigrant waves from problem countries were uneducated and poor. Irish, Italians, Mexicans come to mind. "Educated" are usually slow and less noticeable than "Fuck You!" people.

Truth is, these Syrian emigrants are average Syrians. Of course average Syrian is couple of grades better than average Saudi, but if you plan to increase average educational level of Europe then prepare to be disappointed.

 

[Jokodo]

When 200,000 Hungarians fled into Austria and Yugoslavia during and after the violent suppression of the 1956 uprising, most of them, instead of accepting to live in tent cities or former army barracks until further notice, went on to other countries as far afield as as the United States (40,000) or Australia (about 15,000).

They were not refugees? They were already safe from prosecution by the Soviet-backed putschists in Austria, weren't they?

These were refugees.

By your logic, they ceased to be refugees once they'd successfully crossed the bridge at Andau. They were safe in Austria (Turkey), they had no reason to go on to other countries.

Economic migrants from Bangladesh and Pakistan are not refugees. Your talking about 65,000.

A large majority went on to other countries. I only picked two destinations for which I could find fairly accurate figures.

Now it is sometimes impossible to distinguish refugees and illegal immigrants. Perhaps the ones with the I phone are not refugees.

By what logic? Does the i-phone have an app that makes users immune against bombs, bullets, beheadings, and unlawful incarceration such that they're necessarily safe in the middle of a war zone?

 

[Jokodo]

When 200,000 Hungarians fled into Austria and Yugoslavia during and after the violent suppression of the 1956 uprising, most of them, instead of accepting to live in tent cities or former army barracks until further notice, went on to other countries as far afield as as the United States (40,000) or Australia (about 15,000).

They were not refugees? They were already safe from prosecution by the Soviet-backed putschists in Austria, weren't they?

These Hungarians had no intention on living on handouts (I doubt there were any actually), and had no option of ever going back. Effectively they were forced to emigrate to the west.

They were forced to emigrate from Hungary. By your logic, they had no reason not to stay in Austria or Yugoslavia, so when they did go to the USA (almost 3 times Austria's per capita GDP at the time), they were economic migrants.

In case of Syrian refugees their intentions are rather clear.

Indeed: Their intention is not to spend indefinitely, potentially the rest of their lives in tent cities in Turkey, Lebonon, or Jordan, with no possibilities to integrate with those countries' population, no economic prospects, only basic schooling for the children, and UN aid slowly drying up due to a lack of funding by the international community. Instead, they want to be able to work for their living, to have their kids go to good schools so that they'll be well equipped to rebuild the country if and when they eventually return.

What's so evil about that?

 

[barbos]

These Hungarians had no intention on living on handouts (I doubt there were any actually), and had no option of ever going back. Effectively they were forced to emigrate to the west.

They were forced to emigrate from Hungary. By your logic, they had no reason not to stay in Austria or Yugoslavia, so when they did go to the USA (almost 3 times Austria's per capita GDP at the time), they were economic migrants.

You don't know what were intentions of these hungarian "refugees". It was quite possible that going to US was not completely their decision let alone intention.
Also, in case of Syria, assumption is, syrian "refugees" go back to Syria once war is over. There were no such assumptions with Hungarians.

In case of Syrian refugees their intentions are rather clear.

Indeed: Their intention is not to spend indefinitely, potentially the rest of their lives in tent cities in Turkey, Lebonon, or Jordan, with no possibilities to integrate with those countries' population, no economic prospects,

Don't be ridiculous, Turkey is a large and developed country with Muslim population, and version of islam is the same.

only basic schooling for the children, and UN aid slowly drying up due to a lack of funding by the international community. Instead, they want to be able to work for their living, to have their kids go to good schools so that they'll be well equipped to rebuild the country if and when they eventually return.

What's so evil about that?

Nothing Evil about that, but it's not sustainable. Europe does have birth rate problem but at the same time they can't let everyone In because literally everyone would want to get in. Do you think Chinese/Indians don't want to go to Europe or US? I am pretty sure 200mil chinese can go right now, and 200mil tomorrow. And I don't even talk about smaller countries like Russia/Ukraine. Yes, you should prepare for Ukrainian refugees, because that's going to happen it seems.

 

[arkirk]

Nothing as reliable as a thread about immigrants to get people who purport to be liberals, or to value basic democratic principles, to show their true colors.

Reminded me a scientific study of differences between liberals and conservatives. Turned out conservatives cared more about actual people they know especially in their group and less about abstract people in general. Liberals were the opposite, they cared more about abstract people and less about real people near them.
Basically, conservatives hate people they don't know, and liberals hate people they know
So neither group turned to be inherently better than the other.

I am in the center - hate everybody equally

I know, that is exactly what Warpoet was saying. You do show your true colors. Also your description of liberals and conservatives, while catchy especially to those who think as you do is about as accurate as Loren says UNHCR data is. Caring about people is not an abstraction. That is only in the minds of people who haven't done much caring about people.

 

[barbos]

Reminded me a scientific study of differences between liberals and conservatives. Turned out conservatives cared more about actual people they know especially in their group and less about abstract people in general. Liberals were the opposite, they cared more about abstract people and less about real people near them.
Basically, conservatives hate people they don't know, and liberals hate people they know
So neither group turned to be inherently better than the other.

I am in the center - hate everybody equally

I know, that is exactly what Warpoet was saying. You do show your true colors. Also your description of liberals and conservatives, while catchy especially to those who think as you do is about as accurate as Loren says UNHCR data is. Caring about people is not an abstraction. That is only in the minds of people who haven't done much caring about people.

No, that's not what he was saying. And it was not my description, it was a scientific study which came to such description.

As for true colors, I would like to know what our "true" liberals actually did to help refugees, because as study suggests most liberals are mostly words and no hard work

 

[Jokodo]

They were forced to emigrate from Hungary. By your logic, they had no reason not to stay in Austria or Yugoslavia, so when they did go to the USA (almost 3 times Austria's per capita GDP at the time), they were economic migrants.

You don't know what were intentions of these hungarian "refugees". It was quite possible that going to US was not completely their decision let alone intention.

To the extent that it was not their decision, it happened because the world agreed that post-war Austria with its 7.5 million people couldn't fully integrate 180,000 refugees, and it was understood that it would be inhumane to let them live in tent cities indefinitely. But somehow, expecting 2 million refugees (and growing) to vegetate in tent cities in Turkey (75 million inhabitants) indefinitely is OK?

Also, in case of Syria, assumption is, syrian "refugees" go back to Syria once war is over.

Does it look like this war is ending anytime soon to you?

There were no such assumptions with Hungarians.

In case of Syrian refugees their intentions are rather clear.

Indeed: Their intention is not to spend indefinitely, potentially the rest of their lives in tent cities in Turkey, Lebonon, or Jordan, with no possibilities to integrate with those countries' population, no economic prospects,

Don't be ridiculous, Turkey is a large and developed country with Muslim population, and version of islam is the same.

The Syrian refugee population in Turkey in proportion to the population already exceeds the Hungarian refugee population in Austria in 1956 had they all stayed in the country.

only basic schooling for the children, and UN aid slowly drying up due to a lack of funding by the international community. Instead, they want to be able to work for their living, to have their kids go to good schools so that they'll be well equipped to rebuild the country if and when they eventually return.

What's so evil about that?

Nothing Evil about that, but it's not sustainable.

How is a generation of Syrians that grew up in tent cities going to rebuild the country if and when the war does end? That's not sustainable.

 

[barbos]

You don't know what were intentions of these hungarian "refugees". It was quite possible that going to US was not completely their decision let alone intention.

To the extent that it was not their decision, it happened because the world agreed that post-war Austria with its 7.5 million people couldn't fully integrate 180,000 refugees,

So, you see, it was not their decision at all. In case of Syria, no one even considers staying in Hungary, their intention from the start was to get to Germany.

and it was understood that it would be inhumane to let them live in tent cities indefinitely. But somehow, expecting 2 million refugees (and growing) to vegetate in tent cities in Turkey (75 million inhabitants) indefinitely is OK?

Who said it must be tents forever? These are educated syrians according to you, they can surely find a job in Turkey.

Also, in case of Syria, assumption is, syrian "refugees" go back to Syria once war is over.

Does it look like this war is ending anytime soon to you?

Actually it does, thanks to this refugee mess Europe will soon realize that they need to end it.

There were no such assumptions with Hungarians.

In case of Syrian refugees their intentions are rather clear.

Indeed: Their intention is not to spend indefinitely, potentially the rest of their lives in tent cities in Turkey, Lebonon, or Jordan, with no possibilities to integrate with those countries' population, no economic prospects,

On individual level all these refugees can integrate in Turkey just fine.
Don't be ridiculous, Turkey is a large and developed country with Muslim population, and version of islam is the same.

The Syrian refugee population in Turkey in proportion to the population already exceeds the Hungarian refugee population in Austria in 1956 had they all stayed in the country.

So?
It is not about current numbers, they are pretty small for Europe, it's about trends. And trends are not looking good for Europe.

only basic schooling for the children,

And how is that worse than what they had before civil war in Syria?

and UN aid slowly drying up due to a lack of funding by the international community. Instead, they want to be able to work for their living, to have their kids go to good schools so that they'll be well equipped to rebuild the country if and when they eventually return.

Nobody returns from Europe/US, nobody.

What's so evil about that?

Nothing Evil about that, but it's not sustainable.

How is a generation of Syrians that grew up in tent cities going to rebuild the country if and when the war does end? That's not sustainable.

Again, no one will go back to Syria from Europe, not by one's own will, You will have to deport them, and that would have to include syrian refugee children who speak perfect german. So your point about rebuilding Syria is moot.

 

[Jokodo]

To the extent that it was not their decision, it happened because the world agreed that post-war Austria with its 7.5 million people couldn't fully integrate 180,000 refugees,

So, you see, it was not their decision at all.

So what, you're still applying two different standards. Hungarian refugees are people who deserve to be treated humanely, while Syrian "refugees" are "people" who better shut up when they're treated as cage animals, and when they don't, you call them obnoxious.

In case of Syria, no one even considers staying in Hungary, their intention from the start was to get to Germany.

Hungary has received almost exactly twice as many asylum applications/100,000 citizens than Germany during the first six months of 2015. (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/27/world/europe/100000003880572.mobile.html)

 

[barbos]

So, you see, it was not their decision at all.

So what, you're still applying two different standards. Hungarian refugees are people who deserve to be treated humanely, while Syrian "refugees" are "people" who better shut up when they're treated as cage animals, and when they don't, you call them obnoxious.

Yes, and I am not alone, as long as borders exist governments will be applying different standards.
US will try to keep border with Mexico and EU will try to keep africans and now syrians out.
And again, you keep ignoring arguments that EU simply can't let everyone in.

In case of Syria, no one even considers staying in Hungary, their intention from the start was to get to Germany.

Hungary has received almost exactly twice as many asylum applications/100,000 citizens than Germany during the first six months of 2015. (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/27/world/europe/100000003880572.mobile.html)

I doubt these numbers, they may not be what they say they are.

 

[whichphilosophy]

These were refugees.

By your logic, they ceased to be refugees once they'd successfully crossed the bridge at Andau. They were safe in Austria (Turkey), they had no reason to go on to other countries.

Economic migrants from Bangladesh and Pakistan are not refugees. Your talking about 65,000.

A large majority went on to other countries. I only picked two destinations for which I could find fairly accurate figures.

Now it is sometimes impossible to distinguish refugees and illegal immigrants. Perhaps the ones with the I phone are not refugees.

By what logic? Does the i-phone have an app that makes users immune against bombs, bullets, beheadings, and unlawful incarceration such that they're necessarily safe in the middle of a war zone?

My feeble attempt at humour here (I phones). An I phone may deflect or even stop a bullet.
With the collapse of our borders it is harder to distinguish between those who are most likely genuine asylum seekers and those who are not. Normally I feel we should be cautious about opening our doors to the world but Syria is a special case. The West instigated havoc in Syria and this is the result.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Some sources claim that Saudi Arabia has informally accepted half a million Syrians since 2011 but without declaring them as refugees - with 200,000 additional residencies issued to Syrian nationals and an estimated 300,000 who entered on tourist visas but never left.

It's still shameful that they won't accept anyone as refugees - but expected. They haven't even signed the Geneva convention, so hey. Saying that we shouldn't accept anyone until they do is like saying that we should have the death penalty for apostasy from Christianity as long as they have the death penalty for apostasy from Islam.

I don't know about you guys, but I want to live in a society that thrives to be one of the best, not one that models itself after the worst.

I found this article but perhaps more searching is required:
http://www.infowars.com/saudi-arabi...3-million-people-yet-has-taken-zero-refugees/

Saudi Arabia Has 100,000 Air Conditioned Tents That Can House 3 Million People Sitting Empty Yet Has Taken Zero Refugees

While Europe takes the burden of the migrant crisis

I am sure this is true. Why would Saudi wish to ruin its reputation as an upstanding pillar on human rights by taking people in.

Infowars is Alex Jones. He's a conspiracy theory nutjob. I wouldn't trust anything he says.

 

[barbos]

Germany says migrants/refugees coming to Europe can't choose place to live. Also they say there will be border control for migrants.
I guess German government agrees with me.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Germany says migrants/refugees coming to Europe can't choose place to live. Also they say there will be border control for migrants.
I guess German government agrees with me.

Germany had borders against migrants but the EU took them down. You can't blame the migrants for that.

 

[OLDMAN]

Canada has about 1 person for every 6 square miles....but where do all immigrants end up? Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver. Because of large numbers, new Canadians often don't learn English or French, cultures, traditions or ethics that are traditionally Canadian. What we have are small pockets of other cultures from the nations they originated. What equalizes things is the school system, by the third generation the kids have intergrated, but if numbers are large enough to demand their own schools, then language, religion and everything stays old world. Pockets are not good for multicultural societies.

 

[Tammuz]

Canada has about 1 person for every 6 square miles....but where do all immigrants end up? Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver. Because of large numbers, new Canadians often don't learn English or French, cultures, traditions or ethics that are traditionally Canadian. What we have are small pockets of other cultures from the nations they originated.

Well, what do expect? That they should found new cities in the wilderness?

What equalizes things is the school system, by the third generation the kids have intergrated, but if numbers are large enough to demand their own schools, then language, religion and everything stays old world. Pockets are not good for multicultural societies.

That's what multiculturalism means, and that's why I'd object to it. The American melting pot ideal is superior IMO.

All that aside, it would be good if the US and Canada took in more regugees. They are much better at integrating immigrants than Sweden is. Those who come to Sweden have escaped the war, but will not have much of a future.

 

[bigfield]

Canada has about 1 person for every 6 square miles....but where do all immigrants end up? Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver. Because of large numbers, new Canadians often don't learn English or French, cultures, traditions or ethics that are traditionally Canadian. What we have are small pockets of other cultures from the nations they originated. What equalizes things is the school system, by the third generation the kids have intergrated, but if numbers are large enough to demand their own schools, then language, religion and everything stays old world. Pockets are not good for multicultural societies.

Agreed: you should ban French in Quebec.