|
Kaal posted:on the coast of Hungary. Admiral Horthy's dream will never die.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 14:02 |
|
|
Kaal posted:On a Wikipedia list comparing all the countries of the world, or a Facebook info graphic? No there's practically no difference at all. In the real world, most people straddle the line and desperately hope for whatever status can grant them the longest stay (which isn't necessarily refugee status). The vast, vast majority of the folks fleeing Syria will be classified as asylum-seekers, and perhaps eventually as refugees, and they'll spend the next few years bouncing around European aid organizations before their visa expires and they are returned to Syria. Sorry but your thing about "a wikipedia list or facebook info graphic" is confusing me. Are you referring to the graphic EMarx posted? And what exactly are you trying to say about it, that's it''s misleading because it doesn't take into account migrant laborers entering the US? And it seems that you're saying that yes, people fleeing Syria are refugees? Or maybe you aren't and that they "straddle the line" and so the migrant/refugee distinction is meaningless? Sorry but honestly I'm not sure what you're saying. Just to be clear, my position is that people fleeing Syria are refugees and invoking migrant laborers when comparing numbers is disingenuous, as I agree with Amnesty when they make distinctions between the two groups.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
Ernie Muppari posted:i also don't take anyone seriously ever so your contribution to this debate is what, ironic implied moral outrage? that's really cool and valuable imo, it's not like people are dying and we don't have a solution
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Also Lebanon's refugee population mostly lives in UN aid camps that are run by gangs and look like this: Dang, those tents look pretty lovely. I'm sure they'd all prefer a watery grave at the bottom of the Mediterranean, or life in an ISIS rape camp
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:24
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Sorry but your thing about "a wikipedia list or facebook info graphic" is confusing me. Are you referring to the graphic EMarx posted? And what exactly are you trying to say about it, that's it''s misleading because it doesn't take into account migrant laborers entering the US? And it seems that you're saying that yes, people fleeing Syria are refugees? Or maybe you aren't and that they "straddle the line" and so the migrant/refugee distinction is meaningless? Sorry but honestly I'm not sure what you're saying. Just to be clear, my position is that people fleeing Syria are refugees and invoking migrant laborers when comparing numbers is disingenuous, as I agree with Amnesty when they make distinctions between the two groups. Well none of the people fleeing Syria are refugees since that's a specifically designated status bestowed by the UNHCR, which they haven't had time to be assigned. Which I suppose is rather the point. If you are casually comparing numbers without context or appreciation for what those numbers mean, then quibbling over details that you're going to ignore anyway doesn't make much of a difference. What I'm saying is actually look at the issue. If you did, you'd see that these sorts of numbers change quite a bit year to year, as refugee populations are quickly converted from asylum seekers, into refugees, then into residents/citizens or returned to the origin country. So a Somali that the US took in as a refugee, then gained a permanent residency, would no longer be represented as an American refugee despite continuing to live in the United States. Since you don't seem that concerned about the specific details of the status, nor comparing the overall yearly trend or immigrant population rather than a per capita, there's really no point in making hay over the specifics of the designations since you're ignoring them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Should we what, exactly? "Do something now!" is a stupid answer that results in the Syrians living in UN border camps for the next 10-30 years. I don't know why anyone would think that war refugees are a recent or unique phenomenon. Refugees have been pouring out of Africa and the Middle East for decades, and will continue to do so. Get a good photo of a kid dead on a beach and the public wakes up to it for a while, but the reality is that public interest will fade and then the practical concerns of "who is going to pay for all of this" and "how many can we take in" will resurface. There are 60 million war refugees in the world. There are far more economic migrants who similarly are looking for a better life in a rich country. Does your solution apply to them, or just people who say they're from Syria? Why or why not? Do what you ask? Let them in - as I said. Before we have to have pictures of dead children to prompt lip service from our politicians. I'd like some stats to back your claim up that some refugees are "faking it" and just want more money even though they are not in dire straits. Although I am not sure it matters - let those ones in too. All the questions you posed are questions that'll still be there when they get there - we'll figure it out. Who will pay for it? In the short term, the people who live in the destination country. In the long term, the same since the refugees will live in that country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
Zodium posted:so your contribution to this debate is what, ironic implied moral outrage?  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
TBQH I'm not convinced this whole Syrian Civil War thing isn't just a sham put on by those dastardly Arabs to infiltrate Europe and pollute our pure culture
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Well none of the people fleeing Syria are refugees since that's a specifically designated status bestowed by the UNHCR, which they haven't had time to be assigned. Which I suppose is rather the point. If you are casually comparing numbers without context or appreciation for what those numbers mean, then quibbling over details that you're going to ignore anyway doesn't make much of a difference. What I'm saying is actually look at the issue. If you did, you'd see that these sorts of numbers change quite a bit year to year, as refugee populations are quickly converted from asylum seekers, into refugees, then into residents/citizens or returned to the origin country. So a Somali that the US took in as a refugee, then gained a permanent residency, would no longer be represented as an American refugee despite continuing to live in the United States. Since you don't seem that concerned about the specific details of the status, nor comparing the overall yearly trend or immigrant population rather than a per capita, there's really no point in making hay over the specifics of the designations since you're ignoring them. Well first of all you're not bothering to answer simple questions like "are you referring to this graph," or "is Amnesty Intl. right or wrong," that would help me make sense of what you're trying to say. But I'd like to focus on this statement: Kaal posted:Well none of the people fleeing Syria are refugees since that's a specifically designated status bestowed by the UNHCR, which they haven't had time to be assigned. which is just wrong. You're trying to make some technically-correct point, but even the UNHCR doesn't support it, as they list over 3 million refugees from Syria: http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49e486a76.html quote:It also includes persons in a refugee-like situation for whom refugee status has, for practical or other reasons, not been ascertained. In the absence of Government figures, UNHCR has estimated the refugee population in many industrialized countries based on 10 years of individual asylum-seeker recognition. So even if their refugee status hasn't been ascertained and they don't have all the right stamps in their file, it would be ridiculous to pretend like they're not, in the real world, refugees, regardless of their status on paper. Which is something that you, for whatever reason, seem to insist on doing, even bringing in the UNHCR to support that argument, even though they in fact disagree with you and feel it's totally good to go ahead and put these people in the "refugees" box on their graph. It's like you're saying "The right boxes haven't been checked, they're not refugees! They're just people moving around in some quantum state until years after the fact and their paperwork has been sorted," while the UNHCR is like "Nah those people fleeing ISIS and Assad are totally refugees."
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:47
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Well none of the people fleeing Syria are refugees since that's a specifically designated status bestowed by the UNHCR, which they haven't had time to be assigned. Kaal, you just said there are 60 million refugees in the world, which includes the figures of not just refugees who haven't been designated refugees, but also the internally displaced who still live in Syria. If you're going to be an annoying, pedantic gently caress, be consistent. And second, that 60 million number? It's significant. Not since WW2 has there been over 50 million displaced people worldwide. We crossed that number in 2013, and the pace isn't slowing down. If we aren't facing the largest humanitarian crisis in world history, we're close to it. So don't sit here and act like this is more of the same old same, and people are just noticing it now because of that recent picture. It's not. This has been a growing issue over the past year, with huge measures taken in Germany and elsewhere before the picture even came out. This is a drastic situation that requires drastic measures, and there's no argument to be made about that. So if your intention in this thread is to tut tut about people beginning to recognize the status quo needs to change, while simultaneously downplaying the severity of the current situation, kindly gently caress off. Volkerball fucked around with this message at 08:00 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 07:55
|
|
|
I think that Europe would be a lot more willing to accept lots of refugees if other countries around the world besides those near Syria (the Gulf States for example) were making an effort to accept refugees. As it is, while a photo of a drowned child might create some sympathy for a week, in the long run it doesn't do much more than play into the anti-immigrant crowd.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
Syria has an ongoing civil war, so people fleeing that war are war refugees. If you're dying of starvation in your home country, and try to flee to europe, are you a migrant or a refugee? What if you are dying because you don't have proper medical care? What if you're living in poverty? This, I think, is where the distinction becomes less clear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 08:21
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Well none of the people fleeing Syria are refugees since that's a specifically designated status bestowed by the UNHCR, which they haven't had time to be assigned. Which I suppose is rather the point. If you are casually comparing numbers without context or appreciation for what those numbers mean, then quibbling over details that you're going to ignore anyway doesn't make much of a difference. What I'm saying is actually look at the issue. If you did, you'd see that these sorts of numbers change quite a bit year to year, as refugee populations are quickly converted from asylum seekers, into refugees, then into residents/citizens or returned to the origin country. So a Somali that the US took in as a refugee, then gained a permanent residency, would no longer be represented as an American refugee despite continuing to live in the United States. Since you don't seem that concerned about the specific details of the status, nor comparing the overall yearly trend or immigrant population rather than a per capita, there's really no point in making hay over the specifics of the designations since you're ignoring them. loving lol at this post.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 08:37
|
|
|
We should start by designating all the refugees to different EU countries while they get on our EU sponsored transports, which we start deploying to drive smugglers out of business and increase the safety of the journey. I guess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 08:47
|
|
|
Teddles posted:I think that Europe would be a lot more willing to accept lots of refugees if other countries around the world besides those near Syria (the Gulf States for example) were making an effort to accept refugees. As it is, while a photo of a drowned child might create some sympathy for a week, in the long run it doesn't do much more than play into the anti-immigrant crowd. What other countries around the world are there? The EU comprises literally over half of the total population and GDP of the developed world. Who else is supposed to take them? Australia? Japan? The US? This would be like if a homeless, starving person asked me for food and I got pissy because lots of other people don't give homeless people food, but also I owned over half the wealth in the entire world
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
Do this, everywhere.quote:Refugee resettlement has created 70 full-time jobs and added $40 million to a struggling rural Victorian town's economy, a new study shows. http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/04/23/refugee-resettlement-adds-40m-struggling-victorian-towns-economy
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
Reddit is a cesspit for any kind of discussion of this crisis, highest rated comment in most threads is about how that little boy is "nothing special, kids die everyday, who would have children during wartime" "The literal opposition of Canada is "far left". gently caress that cesspit. I've literally not seen any decent discussion whatsoever anywhere about this. I'm glad there is some kind of outrage here, not against the immigration, but the wanton treatment asylum seekers are facing in their struggle to escape literal hell on earth. The positive outlook so many have when interviewed, simply for being the hell away from Syria is something special, and the reactionaries online are determined to pretend they're all a product of radical Islamism, and not of a region destabilized by a united developed world effort. Sorry for ranting, but it's a lot to get my head around lately, basically thanks for this thread. Nonsense fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 09:03
|
|
|
He's right kids have been dying every day in the same way for months but because there weren't photos plastered everywhere people could just push it to the back of their minds. He probably intends it in a "So we shouldn't care" way, rather than "We are disgusting for not caring before" way, though. Literally the only reason David Cameron cares about this is because it is absolutely awful publicity for him. In the morning he was all ready to stick to his "gently caress 'em" line, but as it became readily apparent over the course of yesterday that even other Tories thought he was being a heartless bastard and it was not playing well his hand was forced and he had to agree to take more refugees. Which is a good thing, but it's really bad that that is what it took for him to pretend to be a human being.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 09:09
|
|
|
Teddles posted:I think that Europe would be a lot more willing to accept lots of refugees if other countries around the world besides those near Syria (the Gulf States for example) were making an effort to accept refugees. As it is, while a photo of a drowned child might create some sympathy for a week, in the long run it doesn't do much more than play into the anti-immigrant crowd. Syrians aren't as exploitable for use as unskilled labour as S/E Asians, so the Gulf States don't want them. Besides, they shouldn't be held up as a paragon of anything by anyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 09:11
|
|
|
XMNN posted:He's right kids have been dying every day in the same way for months but because there weren't photos plastered everywhere people could just push it to the back of their minds. He probably intends it in a "So we shouldn't care" way, rather than "We are disgusting for not caring before" way, though. Which people didn't care before now? Kaal is assuming people posting in this thread didn't care until now because it suits them. David Cameron might only care because of polls but David Cameron isn't posting in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
Germany should integrate refugees already, so most of them stay here. Fresh, young workforces to keep our failing pension system up a few more years - Germany is loving OLD and refugees are mostly 20-30 years old. Also, I saw a lot of documentation and videos, and there's a lot of educated people coming through, speaking better english than most of the people in my IT firm. It's because the truly hopeless don't even have the money to pay the smugglers with (ending as internally displaced refugees). Taking in refugees is a constitutional commitment of Germany anyway, it's just that the government dismisses this fact and would rather appeal to the lowest common denominators in the populace.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
katlington posted:Which people didn't care before now? Kaal is assuming people posting in this thread didn't care until now because it suits them. David Cameron might only care because of polls but David Cameron isn't posting in this thread. I wouldn't presume anyone in this thread is only just now becoming concerned because of one particular tragic incident that made big news out of hundreds of similar ones, because people on here tend to be fairly well informed of world events and have functioning senses of empathy and compassion. Unfortunately that can't be said for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Hm, what if everyone in Europe just became a rational humanist all at once? That would solve a lot of our problems today. Politics is pretty easy, if you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
First some numbers, and then some things. Eurostat and Frontex data on asylum seekers in the EU area tell us that between 2004-2010 EU received between 200 to 280 asylum seekers but since that there's been a sharp rice: 2011: 309 000 2012: 335 000 2013: 435 000 2014: 626 000 2015: More than 350 00 by April (not counting those this far undetected). Mediterranean crossings: 2013: 45 000 2014: 171 000 (sharp rise after the sea rescue operations were launched so smugglers started sending people out in vessels completely unseaworthy) 2015: 135 00 by June. (Link) According to the EU Libe commission in April 2015, roughtly half of the migrants in 2014 were either Eritrean or Syrian but the numbers are dropping and more and more are "ecomic migrants" from Sub-Saharan or Western Africa. For example Here are the nationalities of the people who landed in Italy between January and March of 2015. Gambia, Senegal, Nigeria and Mali are well represented. A recent graph:  Link to story. You will notice most of the people have passed through several safe countries before entering EU. Indeed many come from countries where the conditions are poor, and the governing atrocious. But do they really fulfill the UNHCR definition of a refugee? According to Merit Wager from the Swedish Migration Agency some 80% of Syrians requesting asylum do not come from Syria, but from already safe countries like Turkey, Iran, Jordania etc. but heard Sweden grants an automatic residence permit for anyone with a Syrian passport, so they head there anyway because living in a flat in Malmö probably beats living in a camp in Jordania. Eritrea is has a poor human-rights record. They forcible press men to the army for indefinite periods. But the counry is not at war or a smoking ruin. Somalia on the other hand? According to a study by the Danish Refugee Council, "the major driver of irregular migration is economic concerns, including unemployment and joblessness. Peace concerns are not factors of irregular migration. The people have developed trust in the Government to take care of their safety and security. Despite this, livelihood concerns, including limited opportunities in the country for young people to succeed are seen as major causes of migration." (Source. Page 56.) The Amoud university lists the reasons of emigration in order of priority as follows: Unemployment, finding a better life, influence of friends, success stories, low income, lack of hope, and so on. Source. These people are economic migrants. The phenomenon is known as "tahriib". Our politicians, for example in Finland, keep telling Somalians "escape war". But it's simply not true. Sure, it's a dangerous country, especially for a Western tourist (you'd get kidnapped for ransom in no time, probably) but Somalians are not feeling because the country is a wartorn pit of death. The Swedish newspaper Östersunds-Posten recently ran an article on the things that pull people to countries like Sweden. They use various online sources (like social media sites by human smuggler rings that advertise trips to Scandinavia) and conducted interviews. The found out young men are, literally, being wooed by promises of money and hot European blondes. Money and girls! The oldest trick in the world, huh. "If you go to Sweden, you will get a house, a lot of money, and a girlfriend". So they leave their safe but probably poor conditions in Turkey and head for Scandinavia in search of riches. No wonder they are upset when they find themselves in a reception center in the middle of nowhere instead. A route to Sweden with a truck can be arranged for 11 000€, at a certain martket square in Ipsala (Turkey). A "comfortable" cruise boat ride to a Greek island can be bought for 4500€ on the other hand. But the OP report is not an isolated thing, Frontex officials have been saying for a while now that the only way so many people make the expensive and often dangerous trip is that they've basically been sold unrealistic dreams by those who profit from the current migration wave. If you've read reports of the migrant flow to Europe for the past decade, you will have come by the same story "in Europe, you will get a nice house, a car, a good looking wife" countless of times. (The reality might be you will end up being tossed between refugee centers and countries for a few years, and eventually end up selling sunshades at some South European beach.) Look guys. The "refugee crisis" is not exactly what it seems to be for some, i.e. desperate children fleeing cities under artillery fire or religious minorites with ISIS at their heels (even though these things happen too on a vast scale). There are solutions, but the how the system works now is broken and doesn't do what it's intented to do. We all understand people want to move after a better life. poo poo, we Finns were moving to USA en masse a century ago, and more recently to work at the many Swedish factories and Norwegian fisheries. The migrants who flock to Europe want to do the same, but almost the only way they can get a residence permit, and later a work permit, is to "seek asylum". If they had another way, they'd use that. The conditions in the countries of many of the arrivals are deplorable. But so is life in the favelas of Rio, or the slums of Mumbai and Jakarta. But none of this can be solved by moving population from the poor or developing or even total shitholes to Europe, where countries have very delicately calibrated welfare systems. I know someone thinks "but we need youth since the population is aging" but this doesn't seem to be true. Europe has been in the throes of very high youth unemployment for a while now. And do the people from Senegal, Eritrea, Somalia or Iraq really have a skillset that Europeans countries can use? Accordingly the unemployment rates of most of the non-OECD migrants, it doesn't seem like that. (For example in Finland, 1 out of 10 Somalians are both included in the workforce, and employed). One thing is sure: there will be no end to dictatorships, internal strife, poverty, hunger, unemployment and all of that in the world. That means, unless the EU area changes it's policies, this "refugee crisis" will not end. There are more than 3 or was 4 billion people in the world living with two dollars a day, or less. Flash them possibility of asylum though. Ligur fucked around with this message at 13:31 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I demand that this conference turn rain into gummy bears so I can have a nice snack whenever work stops. Yeah what I'm suggesting looks pretty unlikely. Instead people will wring their hands that something must be done but no one will claim responsibility or take any substantial action. If the UNSC can't deal with this crisis we're all as good as dead - beacuse they will certainly not be able to handle the rest of this century.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
Speaking of numbers, are there any dataviz like this for migration? Would be very handy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
Here's a good peace about rather well of Africans heading to Europe and why more and more will come. It seems to be a national sport in Senegal! They will also ask for asylum. Good story from the Economist as well. Also supports that most Italian "asylum seekers" come from Gambia, Senegal and Somalia this year. You can call them refugees if you want to, but they are actually what EU calls "economic migrants".
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
This idea that European Union is just too poor to accept a fraction of refugees in the world is a complete fabrication. The idea that European Union accepting one fifth of the refugees that Lebanon has accepted makes it another Lebanon is retarded. The European Union has 230 times the GDP and 127 times the population. The idea that we don't somehow share a responsibility in refugees because we don't happen to border the countries where they come from is ludicrous. The idea that many European (or Western) countries don't have a massive responsibility in creating many of these refugee crisis is ignoring history, and I'm talking about very recent history, not colonial times. The idea that this is the first refugee crisis in the world, and there has never been anything equivalent to it ignores a pretty huge blind spot in history too. EDIT: And the idea that if we start taking care of refugees the all of the poor in the world will migrate to Europe is...I don't know. How can someone say that with a straight face? How is the current crisis, primarily driven by war and oppression, any way indicative of the situation in the vast, vast majority of the poor world? There are 5.9 billion people in the developing world. Most of them seem to be just fine staying where they are. And like previously said, they're taking care of numbers of refugees that make the European situation seem nothing while having a fraction of the resources. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
I wonder who will be the first person in Europe to use "Welfare Queens" unironically in reference to refugees.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Zodium posted:Hm, what if everyone in Europe just became a rational humanist all at once? That would solve a lot of our problems today. Politics is pretty easy, if you think about it. What if at least the rational humanists began to whine less about how expensive this all is going to be? That'd be a start.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:EDIT: And the idea that if we start taking care of refugees the all of the poor in the world will migrate to Europe is...I don't know. How can someone say that with a straight face? How is the current crisis, primarily driven by war and oppression, any way indicative of the situation in the vast, vast majority of the poor world? There are 5.9 billion people in the developing world. Most of them seem to be just fine staying where they are. And like previously said, they're taking care of numbers of refugees that make the European situation seem nothing while having a fraction of the resources. You'll be happy to know nobody thinks or says all of the poor people in the world will migrate to Europe. (Ok some random guy on a newspaper comments section will, but whatever.) By all anecdata, most people, even poor, want to stay where they are. edit: well it appears this can't be said for Somalians though, if you can find a focuse group where 60-70% of the people said most of the people they knew were planning to leave or already left 
Ligur fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:14
|
|
It turned out Aylan Kurdi's family had applied for refugee status in Canada and been knocked back, and now the Canadian Immigration Minister has gone into hiding  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/immigration-minister-chris-alexander-suspends-re-election-campaign-reports/article26203372/
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
Ligur posted:"If you go to Sweden, you will get a house, a lot of money, and a girlfriend". Sounds good to me! Seriously though, why shouldn't they have a chance at that? Scandinavia has a lot to give - sounds like you are just being selfish. Sweden has been very good to me and I think we can do more, even if it hurts a little. I guarantee that the vast majority of these refugees are not bored men looking to meet hot blondes. VVV It's depressing how common his point of view is becoming Red Rox fucked around with this message at 14:33 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
Disco De Soto posted:I guarantee that the vast majority of these refugees are not bored men looking to It's impressive how close the parallels are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Disco De Soto posted:Sounds good to me! Seriously though, why shouldn't they have have a chance at that? Scandinavia has a lot to give - sounds like you are just being selfish. I'm all for people getting to move from place A to place B as long as they are not a burden to place B. If you have a job, money for rent etc. go ahead. However, if you are in a safe place, it's not my "human right" to skip to some other place and have the society provide for me, right? Nordic countries are world leaders in all kind of benefits esp. housing. At these latitudes, you die of exposure otherwise. That's pretty expensive though. Disco De Soto posted:I guarantee that the vast majority of these refugees are not bored men looking to meet hot blondes. Uhh, sure. That's just one of the marketing schemes of the human smuggler organizations. edit: Disco De Soto posted:VVV It's depressing how common his point of view is becoming WTF? It's not my "point of view". I was talking about the marketing schemes smugglers use in Turkey? Ligur fucked around with this message at 14:39 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
Want to see a screenshot of a human smuggling banner ad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Ligur posted:I'm all for people getting to move from place A to place B as long as they are not a burden to place B. Better to be a burden than dead. Quite a few of us "burdens" turn out to be productive members of society. I think you are focusing on the wrong issue here. There are aid organizations that specifically help refugee children (not babe-seekers) maybe you could donate some time or money to them?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Ligur posted:I'm all for people getting to move from place A to place B as long as they are not a burden to place B. If you have a job, money for rent etc. go ahead. However, if you are in a safe place, it's not my "human right" to skip to some other place and have the society provide for me, right? So again, where in any of the international agreements signed by European nations is refugee acceptance and taking care of refugees based on geographic proximity? Is Iran really forced to accept a million refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan because it happens to border two countries where Western powers started two incredibly irresponsible wars that has driven instability in the region for over a decade? Is that fair? Is that how international co-operation should work according to any of the legal framework on the subject? Aren't say, U.S. or Great Britain a little bit more responsible of the refugees in Iran then Iran? Is "welp I guess you're poo poo out of luck since you happen to border that country, maybe if they had touched base somewhere else you'd be fine" really the best way to solve the refugee crisis? What if say something opens in Latakia and Syrians start to swarm to Cyprus - is it Cyprus's turn to take a million Syrians because they are close? How does this work, exactly? DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Want to see a screenshot of a human smuggling banner ad. That'd be cool. Here's screenshots of smuggling marketing material though! Nothing too raunchy though, I really hope the Swedish reportes would have done everyone a benefit and publish pictures of their findings. This one is actually a Finnish cruise ship   Apparently FB takes down smuggler pages pretty fast but they keep creating new ones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 14:02 |
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:So again, where in any of the international agreements signed by European nations is refugee acceptance and taking care of refugees based on geographic proximity? It's in the Dublin Regulation. Well not literally, but de facto the first country the refugee enters will be Greece or Italy. The Dublin Regulation is not very good :/ "Look at all these gulf states doing nothing" is not wrong but I find it a bit of a weird argument really. Who knew that Saudi-Arabia was the benchmark by which Europe should measure its efforts when helping people? e: it's a regulation
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 14:50
|
|