Support NeoGAF

[nib95]

These are refugees not migrants... The distinction has very quickly been lost it appears. I wonder who wants that? There was little resentment with our women went the men and kids were taken away from them in ww2.


Maybe they should suck it up in the short to medium term until the issue is resolved. Maybe be thankful they are at least safe?


Camp Bastion in Iraq was huge, we have set massive camps up before that our own happily lived in for years, I'm sure we could do it again.

Even had KFC and Pizza hut.

Till what issue is resolved? How many male refugees have been taken in? How many have caused issues? How many of this group of thugs on New Years Eve were even refugees in the first place?

You're promoting the notion of breaking up families or potentially blocking the entry of male guardian refugees over the actions of a small few, and mostly off of the back of fearmomgering. How about just stick to more checks, and not break up families.

And a minute ago you said lefties are silly to think throwing money at things is the solution, but a moment later you're championing camp bastion. Such a project would basically entail a considerably more expensive and difficult to maintain version of the current German refugee shelters.

 

[funkypie]

I'm not sure how it works in Europe but in Canada refugees don't live in camps, they are free to go anywhere.

Good for Canada. It is easy to hand pick when you have an ocean between you and the refugees.

Canadians would be singing a different tune if they had the mass immigration problems the uk has had since 1997.

 

[n!smo]

Merkel fell over herself to make her look like some shining angel at any cost and it's exploded in her face, I wonder if she can sleep at night. She's endangered her own people and the very people she made out she wanted to help.

Pathetic really.

Yeah, it was the polices fault, I mean why wouldn't they mobilise across the country in readiness for mass sexual attacks? All they had to do was make they had their knee pads on and crawl around on the floor keeping an eye out for dudes copping a cheeky feel.

Happens all the time!

Don't read the news much then?

The lefts delusional denial of the problems they cause due to lack of simple thought astounds me sometimes.

You definitely don´t seem to suffer from this, that´s for sure.

 

[ClosingADoor]

You're promoting the notion of breaking up families or potentially blocking the entry of male guardian refugees over the actions of a small few, and mostly off of the back of fearmomgering. How about just stick to more checks, and not break up families.

The current policies in place already break up families, since you have young men making the journey across the sea and then walking towards Germany.

 

[kitch9]

Till what issue is resolved? How many male refugees have been taken in? How many have caused issues? How many of this group of thugs on New Years Eve were even refugees in the first place?

You're promoting the notion of breaking up families or potentially blocking the entry of male guardian refugees over the actions of a small few, and mostly off of the back of fearmomgering. How about just stick to more checks, and not break up families.

And a minute ago you said lefties are silly to think throwing money at things is the solution, but a moment later you're championing camp bastion. Such a project would basically entail a considerably more expensive and difficult to maintain version of the current German refugee shelters.

Camp bastion cost £50m to build and was the size of Reading...

It's far cheaper in human and monetary costs to set up high end heavily defended insulated tents in the desert than trying to house millions in city centres.

Chicken feed in the grand scheme of things. £1 billion is chicken feed when you consider the entire EUs current foreign aid budgets.

 

[nib95]

Yeah yeah, polices fault. Left mindset of forever throw money at a problem that you shouldn't have in the first place. Good one.

Nothing to do with the pathetic scum of the earth who were there because they were invited to take the piss by Merkel. In fact, thinking about it, they were the victims.

Got a bit cold on that boat it did, maybe give them a few euro in compensation... They might not stick their hands down womens pants then, you know gratitude and all that.

Did you read any of his post at all? Or are you judging all 1 million+ refugees on the actions of these small group of assholes? Similar to the way you generalised that all Muslim men think they're more important than women, or the way you think all the immigrants in your local area are to blame for all the issues.

Camp bastion cost £50m to build and was the size of Reading...

It's far cheaper in human and monetary costs to set up high end heavily defended insulated tents in the desert than trying to house millions in city centres.

Chicken feed in the grand scheme of things. £1 billion is chicken feed when you consider the entire EUs current foreign aid budgets.

So they claim. But camp Bastion also only housed around 28,000 personnel. This new version you're theorising would have to hold 38 or more times that.

 

[Kinyou]

If we need police all the time when large groups of immigrants are around because otherwise situations like these occur then something is wrong.

Bingo. No one expected something like this to happen because usually the amount of police was enough.

 

[kitch9]

Did you read any of his post at all? Or are you judging all 1 million+ refugees on the actions of these small group of assholes? Similar to the way you generalised that all Muslim men think they're more important than women, or the way you think all the immigrants in your local area are to blame for all the issues.

I wasn't replying to you.

I think.

 

[kitch9]

I'm not sure how it works in Europe but in Canada refugees don't live in camps, they are free to go anywhere.

I'm saying to set up camps near their countries of origins.

 

[kitch9]

Did you read any of his post at all? Or are you judging all 1 million+ refugees on the actions of these small group of assholes? Similar to the way you generalised that all Muslim men think they're more important than women, or the way you think all the immigrants in your local area are to blame for all the issues.



So they claim. But camp Bastion also only housed around 28,000 personnel. This new version you're theorising would have to hold 38 or more times that.

Camp bastion housed masses of military ordinance and an airport, probably not much need for that. £1 billion is 20x £50 million, hence my suggestion.

Let's say each EU country chucked in 80 million with the larger states chucking in a bit more.

Chicken feed compared to the current "solution."

 

[ClosingADoor]

Did you read any of his post at all? Or are you judging all 1 million+ refugees on the actions of these small group of assholes? Similar to the way you generalised that all Muslim men think they're more important than women, or the way you think all the immigrants in your local area are to blame for all the issues.

And here we go again. Somebody names the problems there are, and he is accused of being a racist. How is this in any way productive? Why can't it be said there are major problems because of faulty policy when it comes to immigration and the current refugee crisis without being branded as such?

Does everyone commit these crimes? Does everyone view women as lesser? No. Nobody is saying that. But the problems are large enough to take into account when making policy and looking at the long term and immediate impact taking in over a million people in a short time will have.

 

[nib95]

I'm saying to set up camps near their countries of origins.

Unless they are heavily armed, they would just be rife for attacks from terrorist groups and militia. In-fact, that is already what has happened in the past, with ISIS capturing refugee camps and beheading it's occupants in the masses. If you mean further from the origins of the war torn nations, well, that is already what has and is still happening, in the countries directly surrounding, Eg Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey etc.

And here we go again. Somebody names the problems there are, and he is accused of being a racist. How is this in any way productive? Why can't it be said there are major problems because of faulty policy when it comes to immigration and the current refugee crisis without being branded as such?

Does everyone commit these crimes? Does everyone view women as lesser? No. Nobody is saying that. But the problems are large enough to take into account when making policy and looking at the long term and immediate impact taking in over a million people in a short time will have.

That's not what you are saying, hence why I don't think anyone has called you out for it, at least I haven't anyway, but it's certainly the implication Kitch9 gave based on numerous posts he's made in this thread and others.

But he's gone for now, so enough about that.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Those rules about the first country are already pretty much gone. Nobody can reach Germany or Sweden (the two countries with the highest number at the moment) without entering other EU countries.

Nah, still in place but the countries they pass don't register them

I don't know about just having people fly in and apply on themselves, since the check then comes afterwards still, while it should be before they come to the country. That's why I think taking people directly from refugee camps and after a check is the best way.

So how should we deal with the issue if overflowing and downright dangerous refugee camps?

And yes, more countries should help, especially countries that have a majority of the same faith and background these people have so it won't clash as much.

All countries should help regardless.

But that is oppression in those Middle-eastern and Northern African countries these people are from. Not in Europe. We can not combat that from Europe, that has to come from the people there and will be a process that will take decades more probably. Meanwhile people coming here should adapt to the ways of the countries here and not bother others with their oppressive views. It's all fine if you want to think that way, but once you act on that and assault people you've wasted your chance here.

You know there are domestic and international groups committed to doing that? Groups that are formed by people from said regions.
I argue that by sopporting said groups we make a better world both in the middle east and here.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

I dont believe the answer lies in letting more people come here.

Well then, you may enlighten me.

The truth is that if Europe opened its borders, there would be millions upon millions who would migrate here, because people want to seek a better life (and who could blame them?). I was traveling in Pakistan a couple of years ago, and even there, there was people who tried to find ways to come to the west (as they asked me if there where white women who was looking to marry). This will continue in large scales going forward. And Europe will be forced to start building walls and fences to keep them out - because we cant help everybody.

Well anecdotal evidence is all fine and dandy but do you have something with a bit more substance?

And If you think a quote from Dick Cheney in 1994 is "proof" that the west is to blame for the situation in Syria, you need to dig deeper.

Once again you say I'm wrong but provide nothing that backup your claims.
Enlighten me!

 

[More Fun To Compute]

This may just be irrational pessimism on my part but... why do i sometimes get the feeling that this current refugee crisis will keep us busy, constantly trying to come up with new ways to handle this situation for years if not decades, until... climate change will finally catch up and have WAY bigger numbers of people fleeing their homelands which will have become uninhabitable by then (like some experts suggest apparently) and come knocking at the door as well? The EU nations really need to get their shit together, it's not like we have forever to get these issues sorted.

We are told that the world has never been more peaceful and the poorest places of the world are developing well. Perhaps part of this process is people from around the world becoming more angry that they don't yet have everything that they think they could have if they were born in the USA or Germany. I don't know. The progress of technology and capitalism does not seem to be making people more content and it doesn't seem to be spreading political stability. Throw in problems like the lax liberalism of Europe, the global system of patriarchy, religions spreading hate and war, climate change, peak cheap oil, economic instability, Easter bunny not being as cute as it used to be, video game journalists only giving big releases 8 out of 10. Certainly it's challenging.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Nah, still in place but the countries they pass don't register them

Effectively going, since Germany said they would take in people regardless. The rules were bullshit anyway, since you can't expect countries like Greece - which is already basically bankrupt - and Italy to pay for this.

So how should we deal with the issue if overflowing and downright dangerous refugee camps?

That issue will pop up everywhere, regardless. Right now we are asking the same question about the many people in Germany and Sweden for example. Helping directly there, better redistribution of people with more countries (going to be difficult...) and filtering out people who wouldn't get asylum anyway will help with this.

You know there are domestic and international groups committed to doing that? Groups that are formed by people from said regions.
I argue that by sopporting said groups we make a better world both in the middle east and here.

And that is good, because it is their fight. We can support that, but the West shouldn't barge in and say "this is how you are going to live now". Even if that way of live (more freedom for people, better economic prospects, more opportunities) would be better, they have to develop those things themselves or it won't catch on.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Effectively going, since Germany said they would take in people regardless. The rules were bullshit anyway, since you can't expect countries like Greece - which is already basically bankrupt - and Italy to pay for this.


That issue will pop up everywhere, regardless. Right now we are asking the same question about the many people in Germany and Sweden for example. Helping directly there, better redistribution of people with more countries (going to be difficult...) and filtering out people who wouldn't get asylum anyway will help with this.


And that is good, because it is their fight. We can support that, but the West shouldn't barge in and say "this is how you are going to live now". Even if that way of live (more freedom for people, better economic prospects, more opportunities) would be better, they have to develop those things themselves or it won't catch on.

I'm sorry but we are just doing a circular argument now. Not sure you and I can come past this.
The UNCHR asks that we help the relieve some on the burden in said camps.
Yet you are saying they should stay. I'll take the UNCHR word over yours.

Not sure about Germany but I am sure that there have been plenty of reports in Sweden of places that have space for more refugees.

The last part I agree with, the plight of muslim women is one that they must define. But they deserve and need our support.

 

[Moonstar]

Not sure about Germany but I am sure that there have been plenty of reports in Sweden of places that have space for more refugees.

Hasn't Sweden taken in more refugees per capita than any other nation?
I think before we ask Sweden to taken even more some other countries that have not stepped up so far should take people in.

 

[Forsete]

there have been plenty of reports in Sweden of places that have space for more refugees.

Then why are they building tent shelters?

And why has the government said there is no more room? And why are there ID checks at the danish border?

Face it, Sweden has had enough. If space hasn't run out, money sure as hell has. Immigration is being funded by LOANS as of right now.

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/skane/fuktigt-och-kallt-i-taltlagret-raed-atervander-till-irak Tent shelter outside Revinge, Lund. Raed decided to return to Iraq
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/regeringen-behover-lana-for-att-klara-flyktingkrisen/ Minister of finance must take loans to manage refugee crisis
http://www.svd.se/id-kontroller-justerat-i-riksdagen ID checks to limit number of refugees that enter the country
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/ost/boende-inte-langre-en-garanti-for-asylsokande Migration Agency says they no longer can guarantee shelter for immigrants

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Hasn't Sweden taken in more refugees per capita than any other nation?

I believe you are thinking about Lebanon.

I think before we ask Sweden to taken even more some other countries that have not stepped up so far should take people in.

Well I think the world would be better of if more did like Sweden.

 

[nynt9]

Hasn't Sweden taken in more refugees per capita than any other nation?
I think before we ask Sweden to taken even more some other countries that have not stepped up so far should take people in.

I believe you are thinking about Lebanon.

As of September 2015

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Then why are they building tent shelters?

And why has the government said there is no more room? And why are there ID checks at the danish border?

Face it, Sweden has had enough. If space hasn't run out, money sure as hell has. Immigration is being funded by LOANS as of right now.

Not sure why they did that since refugees welcome alone have said they have room for 450 people.

The bigger problem in Sweden regarding money are the private companys charging millions for taking care of refugees.

 

[Forsete]

Not sure why they did that since refugees welcome alone have said they have room for 450 people.

The bigger problem in Sweden regarding money are the private companys charging millions for taking care of refugees.

Yes, 450 people is about one days worth (at current numbers, thanks to the ID checks).
That wont get far. When it was at its highest the numbers were between 1000-2000 PER DAY.

Sweden has had enough, end of story.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I'm sorry but we are just doing a circular argument now. Not sure you and I can come past this.
The UNCHR asks that we help the relieve some on the burden in said camps.
Yet you are saying they should stay. I'll take the UNCHR word over yours.

Not sure about Germany but I am sure that there have been plenty of reports in Sweden of places that have space for more refugees.

The last part I agree with, the plight of muslim women is one that they must define. But they deserve and need our support.

I don't mean to just let everyone stay in the refugee camps there, although a lot of people unfortunately have to for some time. My argument is this:

1) Close the EU borders for immigrants for now.
2) Fund the camps in the region there for quick help, they really need it.
3) Go through the UN to get people directly from the refugee camps to multiple nations. This is already being done, but needs to be in larger numbers and to more countries.

This way we:

1) Do not force people to make a dangerous journey towards Europe.
2) Do not split up families.
3) Have a better ratio of men/women and young/old to help. Now the most vulnerable are left behind there because they can't make the journey.
4) Filter out people who wouldn't get asylum anyway but do overload the system for months. These are people from for example Albania, Morocco, Algeria, etc.
5) Have a better managed stream of people to prevent security risks.

With the money we use now to fund these operations in Europe, we could also fund a ton more in the region there I think. And we should look at the way to help the most people with the resources we have. The current system is not doing that.

As of September 2015

It's much more. BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911

Although not all of those arriving claim asylum, more than 942,400 people have done so in the EU, according to monthly figures from the EU statistics agency, Eurostat.

Germany has received the highest number of new asylum applications, with more than 315,000 by the end of October.

But far more people have arrived in the country - German officials said more than a million had been counted in Germany's "EASY" system for counting and distributing people before they make asylum claims.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Yes, 450 people is about one days worth (at current numbers, thanks to the ID checks).
That wont get far. When it was at its highest the numbers were between 1000-2000 PER DAY.

Sweden has had enough, end of story.

That was only one group among many. But the notion that we have had enough is bull.

 

[funkypie]

As of September 2015

That graph only says Syrians.

A lot of the refugees are not just coming from Syria and a chunk of the people are using the crisis As an excuse to get into Europe. Your graph is completely useless.

 

[Forsete]

That was only one group among many. But the notion that we have had enough is bull.

Then why did the Socialdemocratic/Green party government demand ID checks with the specific reason to limit the number of asylum seekers?

It is simple: We've. had. enough.

It is that simple, really. Let reality sink in for once. It did (finally) for the green party. Accept reality, really.. please do.

 

[cybamerc]

Face it, Sweden has had enough. If space hasn't run out, money sure as hell has. Immigration is being funded by LOANS as of right now.

I wonder if Annie Lööf still thinks you guys are able to accommodate 30 million new immigrants. After all you only received a little more than .5 % of that in 2015.

 

[Forsete]

I wonder if Annie Lööf still thinks you guys are able to accommodate 30 million new immigrants. After all you only received a little more than .5 % of that in 2015.

Annie Lööf should bury herself somewhere. Her version of reality is based somewhere in the Oculus Rift development center.

 

[Jacobi]

As of September 2015

Horribly outdated, Germany for example has estimated 480000 Syrians

 

[Thornquist]

Well then, you may enlighten me.

Strict and controlled immigration. Try to help humanitarian crises at the countries in question. And leave the Middle East well enough alone. Again, Im not against the general idea of immigration, the west is depending on it - but we need to be realize that we cant integrate people who come from a drastically different world than us.

Well anecdotal evidence is all fine and dandy but do you have something with a bit more substance?

About immigration becoming a bigger issue in the future? Cmon man, pretty much everyone agrees about this. Just google it and you will find hundreds of articles.God knows what we'll do when people are left homeless because of global warming.

People want a better life for themselves & their families. Thats human nature.

Once again you say I'm wrong but provide nothing that backup your claims.
Enlighten me!

You are the one who is saying "we" are to blame. The burden of proof is on your shoulders.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Strict and controlled immigration. Try to help humanitarian crises at the countries in question. And leave the Middle East well enough alone. Again, Im not against the general idea of immigration, the west is depending on it - but we need to be realize that we cant integrate people who come from a drastically different world than us.

'm confused. I asked you regarding "Even if the EU's policy is somewhat to blame in the large quantity of males, I dont believe the answer lies in letting more people come here. " what the answer is. And you reply the statement above?

We are talking about the amount of males and the reasons behind.

About immigration becoming a bigger issue in the future? Cmon man, pretty much everyone agrees about this. Just google it and you will find hundreds of articles.God knows what we'll do when people are left homeless because of global warming.

People want a better life for themselves & their families. Thats human nature.

I think you are confusing migrants with refugees here. The people fleeing Syria and Iraq are refugees.

You are the one who is saying "we" are to blame. The burden of proof is on your shoulders.

Today we are seeing the results of the US/UK invasion of the region. Or are you suggesting that the invasion has nothing to do with the current state of the region?

 

[YourMaster]

I think you are confusing migrants with refugees here. The people fleeing Syria and Iraq are refugees.

Yes, and when they flee from Syria, they arrive in countries like Turkey or Lebanon. They are now save from war, and you'll notice there are lots and lots of refugees there.
Now some of these Syrians having found save refuge will decide that when they are on the move anyway, they will be better of migrating to another more wealthy country that provides more than just a save refuge, so they'll migrate to Germany or Sweden.
Now they are migrants.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Yes, and when they flee from Syria, they arrive in countries like Turkey or Lebanon. They are now save from war, and you'll notice there are lots and lots of refugees there.
Now some of these Syrians having found save refuge will decide that when they are on the move anyway, they will be better of migrating to another more wealthy country that provides more than just a save refuge, so they'll migrate to Germany or Sweden.
Now they are migrants.

Is that according to the UN or according to you?

Found a video I think you could learn from.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A60t_hN0rqY

 

[ClosingADoor]

Don't know if this is the best place, but since it is the most active thread about the refugee situation.

Paris police station attacker lived in German refugee shelter: police
http://news.yahoo.com/paris-police-station-attacker-lived-german-refugee-shelter-223043866.html

The police statement did not specify that he was an asylum seeker but a source close to the matter told AFP the man was indeed registered as one.

[..]

French investigators said Friday the suspect appeared to have been identified by his family and was said to be a Tunisian named Tarek Belgacem.

I wonder why someone from Tunisia, a relatively safe country, stayed in a refugee shelter in Germany. This is one of the troubles with letting people from all over in. It is becoming a security risk because you just can't handle the amount without good oversight.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

I'm saying to set up camps near their countries of origins.

I think safe zones are better than having to unsuccessfully integrate these people into countries.

 

[spwolf]

Then why did the Socialdemocratic/Green party government demand ID checks with the specific reason to limit the number of asylum seekers?

It is simple: We've. had. enough.

It is that simple, really. Let reality sink in for once. It did (finally) for the green party. Accept reality, really.. please do.

I am all for refugees. I think we should accept them all. Even better, we should spend our time and effort to solve their crisis.

But they are not coming to my country.

Canada for instance accepted 13500 approved refugees in 2014 while in Germany more than 1mil came in 2015.

Thats wast difference of numbers. Not only that, there is no proper screening like there is when they get refugee visa to enter some country.

Of course there is a resentment in the countries that had large number of people come in, without proper procedures or ways of integration. Some of them are culturally so backward that they might never be able to integrate. At best cases, it will take years.

So it is not surprising when things happen like in Koln. For instance our police had to separate Afghans from other refugees because Afghan men would not allow women to be under same roof as them. It was unthinkable for them and fights would happen when other refugees come in under same large tent... after 10 days or so, police started physically separating them so there would be no fights so there were "Afgan" tents and "Syrian and others" tents.

Will those people ever adjust? I very much doubt it. People here complain about journalists being online harassed (rightfully) while this is something much much much worse.

 

[YourMaster]

Is that according to the UN or according to you?

Found a video I think you could learn from.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A60t_hN0rqY

According to the common understanding of the words. That's how language functions. We're using English here, not legal-speak.

I've watched your video, it is unrelated to the point to which we disagree, and as such it is only disrespectful on your part. It does not mention any situation where people flee from their country and later decide to move from that save country to another save country for economic reasons.

I'll give you one more chance to act like an adult and argue the facts. Semantics aside, do you really believe that the people crossing through Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary and Germany end up in Sweden because they only feel save there? That they where fleeing all that time?

 

[KDR_11k]

According to the common understanding of the words. That's how language functions. We're using English here, not legal-speak.

No, this is a very key issue that a lot of anti-refugee folks use to brand anyone coming to their country as an economic migrant. It's an easy way to avoid responsibility when you're a wealthy nation that doesn't directly border a warzone.

People don't need to drop everything the moment they're no longer being shot at. They want actual asylum, not a camp that's technically safe but about as nice as Gitmo and a promise that their case might be heard in five years during which they cannot leave the camp or take any work. That's not asylum. That's not what refugees have a right to.

 

[Machspeed007]

According to the common understanding of the words. That's how language functions. We're using English here, not legal-speak.

I've watched your video, it is unrelated to the point to which we disagree, and as such it is only disrespectful on your part. It does not mention any situation where people flee from their country and later decide to move from that save country to another save country for economic reasons.

I'll give you one more chance to act like an adult and argue the facts. Semantics aside, do you really believe that the people crossing through Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary and Germany end up in Sweden because they only feel save there? That they where fleeing all that time?

It's not about where they "feel save", it's about where they are granted asylum.

Refugees & Asylum in Turkey
Legal Overview
Turkey was one of the original signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention. However, Turkey adopted the Convention with a “geographical-limitation.”
This means that Turkey assumes full responsibility for refugees coming from countries that are members of the Council of Europe. For those coming from outside of this zone, Turkey may grant limited protection in the form of one of many temporary statuses (conditional refugee status, humanitarian residence permit, or temporary protection). This means that individuals qualifying for international protection may be granted an ability to stay in Turkey and not be subject to return to their home country, but must ultimately find a long-term solution outside Turkey. They do not have the ability to integrate into Turkish society..
http://www.refugeesolidaritynetwork.org/learn-more/turkey-asylum-basics/

Sure, some of them choose to stay in Turkey, but going out to find asylum status is still normal:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 14. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

Now, when it comes to Greece, we have this:

This case examined the compatibility of the Dublin II Regulation with the European Convention on Human Rights regarding transfers to Greece under the Dublin II Regulation. The Court found that there was a violation of Article 3 ECHR by the Greece Government because of the applicant’s conditions of detention, violation of Article 3 ECHR by Greece concerning the applicant’s living conditions in Greece, violation of Article 13 taken in conjunction with Article 3 ECHR against Greece because of the deficiencies in the asylum procedure followed in the applicant’s case and the risk of his expulsion to Afghanistan without any serious examination of the merits of his asylum application and without any access to an effective remedy. The Court also found in relation to Belgium that there was a violation of Article 3 by sending the applicant back to Greece and exposing him to risks linked to the deficiencies in the asylum procedure in that State, also held against Belgium a violation of Article 3 for sending him to Greece and exposing him to detention and living conditions there that were in breach of that ECHR article. The Court also found a violation of Article 13 ECHR taking in conjunction with Article 3 ECHR against Belgium.
http://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/content/ecthr-mss-v-belgium-and-greece-gc-application-no-3069609

So, seeking asylum in Greece is an issue as well.
This is an EU problem, not only Greece/Italy's problem.

 

[YourMaster]

People don't need to drop everything the moment they're no longer being shot at. They want actual asylum, not a camp that's technically safe but about as nice as Gitmo and a promise that their case might be heard in five years during which they cannot leave the camp or take any work. That's not asylum. That's not what refugees have a right to.

It's not about where they "feel save", it's about where they are granted asylum.

All the people seeking asylum in Sweden have crossed through Germany, a country well known to give all the people from war zones asylum and most others at least a temporary status. It is not as simple as you make it out to be, people don't just have 'one' reason to do something, it is not that they 'either' want to be save 'or' want a better economic position for them and their families. The 'official' definitions do assume there's just the one motive, which is not how human beings work.
The reason they leave Syria is because they don't want to be there - most likely because of the war but many also come from save areas - they reason they arrive in northern Europe is because they feel that's the best place for them - most likely for economic reasons.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

According to the common understanding of the words. That's how language functions. We're using English here, not legal-speak.

I've watched your video, it is unrelated to the point to which we disagree, and as such it is only disrespectful on your part. It does not mention any situation where people flee from their country and later decide to move from that save country to another save country for economic reasons.

I'll give you one more chance to act like an adult and argue the facts. Semantics aside, do you really believe that the people crossing through Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary and Germany end up in Sweden because they only feel save there? That they where fleeing all that time?

Like the people before me have posted there are legal definitions of who isa refugee and who is an asylum seeker.
You don't get to redefine what the word means.
I love the fact your implying I'm not an adult while you ignore legal facts and make up your own definition of words.

All the people seeking asylum in Sweden have crossed through Germany, a country well known to give all the people from war zones asylum and most others at least a temporary status. It is not as simple as you make it out to be, people don't just have 'one' reason to do something, it is not that they 'either' want to be save 'or' want a better economic position for them and their families. The 'official' definitions do assume there's just the one motive, which is not how human beings work.
The reason they leave Syria is because they don't want to be there - most likely because of the war but many also come from save areas - they reason they arrive in northern Europe is because they feel that's the best place for them - most likely for economic reasons.

Yeah, no. You are wrong again.

First you said that they should stay in the refugee camps in the neighboring countries.
Now people give you facts to why they can't in said countries.
Now you are moving the goalpost to Germany claiming they should stay there, while ignoring the facts that,
A: The EUs policies are responsible for people walking across the EU.
B: The notion that people shouldn't be allowed to choose what country they seeks asylum.

 

[Violet_0]

with the new model for immigration policies that Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and a bunch of other countries are pushing for, refugee centers are planned in various places along the refugees routes and even outside the EU, such as in countries like Morocco. Refugees are supposed to no longer apply for asylum in the country of their choice, but at those centers, and then await the evaluation. The distribution of the refugees would be fairly equal across all member states (and mandatory for each country), factoring in circumstances such as economic power and the political climate. And then there's the somewhat unethical deal with Turkey where they get to be the doorkeeper of the EU in exchange for various benefits

afaik, a number of Eastern European countries are against it

 

[Jasup]

All the people seeking asylum in Sweden have crossed through Germany, a country well known to give all the people from war zones asylum and most others at least a temporary status. It is not as simple as you make it out to be, people don't just have 'one' reason to do something, it is not that they 'either' want to be save 'or' want a better economic position for them and their families. The 'official' definitions do assume there's just the one motive, which is not how human beings work.
The reason they leave Syria is because they don't want to be there - most likely because of the war but many also come from save areas - they reason they arrive in northern Europe is because they feel that's the best place for them - most likely for economic reasons.

I'm addressing this point as it's a bit speculative. The aid asylum seekers get does vary between the countries, but within Western and Northern Europe the amounts are comparable.

When we're talking about Northern European countries, one of the main reasons people come here is the network. People have phones and use the internet and they stay with connected with others, and they use that to inform others where the chances to get an asylum are better.

For example by far the largest group to Finland is Iraqi refugees. And the biggest entry point is the border between Finland and Sweden. And although the financial aid they get is better on the Swedish side of the border, Finnish immigration service considered Iraq to be unsafe - whereas only parts of Iraq were considered that by many other countries. This resulted in higher percentage of positive asylum decision within the Iraqis than elsewhere, and the word got around. Since then the Finnish immigration service has revised its policy regarding Iraq, but the rumour is still out there making rounds.

The second reason is of course familiarity. People know someone who is living in the north, or they know someone who knows someone. People tend to follow others. It's easier to come in to a country where you have at least some connections and possible social circles.

Of course there are economic reasons too. If you get messages from relatives or friends about someone who has gotten in, is working and has an apartment and they compare that to your current situation in a shelter or where-ever you are at the moment. You get that idealized picture of opportunity elsewhere and many do follow that, even though it's not really based on reality.

But to say it's only economic reasons to get the best benefits or whatever is in my opinion a bit too simplistic.

 

[YourMaster]

Like the people before me have posted there are legal definitions of who is a refugee and who is an asylum seeker.
You don't get to redefine what the word means.
I love the fact your implying I'm not an adult while you ignore legal facts and make up your own definition of words.

You don't seem to understand how language works. Lawyers don't make up language, legal facts don't determine how we speak and understand things, native speakers do.
And this is a prime example why this is,... the 'legal definition' is too limited, and doesn't fit real live properly. Legal definitions are black and white, where reality is nuanced and grey.
The people here don't do something either for safety or for a better future, but a bit of both and for each individual how the two aspects compare will differ.

Yeah, no. You are wrong again.

First you said that they should stay in the refugee camps in the neighboring countries.
Now people give you facts to why they can't in said countries.
Now you are moving the goalpost to Germany claiming they should stay there, while ignoring the facts that,
A: The EUs policies are responsible for people walking across the EU.
B: The notion that people shouldn't be allowed to choose what country they seeks asylum.

I'm not ignoring that the EU is responsible for people walking across the EU, that is my whole point. IS is causing people to walk out of Syria, the EU is causing the massive migration streams across Europe. And I don't know what they want to accomplish, but their policies are completely shortsighted. EU countries seem to want to help as many refugees as possible and at the same time prevent too many refugees from coming to their country. But they do so with policies that cause people to drown in the Mediterranean, certain countries to get flooded while others hardly take any people, and motivate people from completely safe countries like the Balkans to join the massive migrations. Now let's pretend giving Turkey a few billion Euro's and a renewed outlook at EU membership and new border controls between EU countries will help with the problems we're having.

To solve a problem you need to understand a problem, and classic refugees aren't the problem for the EU. They mostly just flee to the first save country they can find, and return in a few months/years. Then there's also a group of more costly refugees from long term problem areas that officially register as refugees who on average can only return home after 15-20 years.
Now the problem is - which also explains why some countries are overrun and others left alone - is that the people seeking asylum now do so strongly considering the quality of life they expect to have in their new country, so for economic reasons. The minority leaving from Syria(most of them are from other countries) might have left their because of IS, but none of the people arrive in an EU country of choice because of IS, that is a choice motivated by other reasons.

So if you want to reduce the number of migrants to specific countries, it is not higher border walls you need, or other countries 'willing to accept' more people, but to change what the outlook is for people coming to that country.

But to say it's only economic reasons to get the best benefits or whatever is in my opinion a bit too simplistic.

I agree, it is a multitude of reasons. Naturally people chose their destination based on many factors, but beyond the neighboring countries, never ONLY for safety reasons. The chances of being allowed to stay is one of the most important ones I think.

 

[jimbobsmells]

Today we are seeing the results of the US/UK invasion of the region. Or are you suggesting that the invasion has nothing to do with the current state of the region?

I'd love to see you evidence that.

 

[Kinokou]

NYT: On Perilous Migrant Trail, Women Often Become Prey to Sexual Abuse

A 30-year-old Syrian mother of four fled the war with her family early last year. When her husband ran out of money to pay their smuggler in Bulgaria, he offered his wife as payment instead. For three months, she was raped almost daily to earn her family’s onward journey.

Soon her own husband was abusing her, too. A “twisted logic,” Ms. Höhne said. “What her husband made her do ended up tainting his honor. She became the guilty party.”

The woman now has asylum and lives in Berlin with her children. Her husband, who lives elsewhere in Germany but has stalked her on the street in Berlin at least once, is under a restraining order. But she remains too terrified to provide even her first name, for fear of being killed by him or another relative over the perception that she brought “dishonor” to the family.

Bolding is mine.

Just one out more cases in the article, but this one made me go WTF the most. How can the guy just be under a restraining order after pimping, raping, stalking and I assume serious threats to his wife???

 

[ClosingADoor]

NYT: On Perilous Migrant Trail, Women Often Become Prey to Sexual Abuse




Bolding is mine.

Just one out more cases in the article, but this one made me go WTF the most. How can the guy just be under a restraining order after pimping, raping, stalking and I assume serious threats to his wife???

Unbelievable. Have your wife raped daily and then blame her for it and make up some bullshit about your honor. And scum like that can live here freely now?

Good that people in Germany are helping these women. Hope they can make a better life for themselves, but it seems clear the problems with this are widespread and I see no immediate solution to suddenly change the way a lot of these men seem to think.

She has been lucky, Ms. Horani said: “I’ve only been beaten and robbed.”

Among the more than one million migrants who have entered Europe over the past year, fleeing war and poverty in the Middle East and beyond, men outnumber women by more than three to one, United Nations statistics show. “The men dominate, numerically and otherwise,” says Heike Rabe, a gender expert at the German Institute for Human Rights.

“The women are in the shadow of the men,” Mr. Schebaum said. “Their voices are drowned out, and it’s a problem.”

 

[Shredderi]

NYT: On Perilous Migrant Trail, Women Often Become Prey to Sexual Abuse




Bolding is mine.

Just one out more cases in the article, but this one made me go WTF the most. How can the guy just be under a restraining order after pimping, raping, stalking and I assume serious threats to his wife???

The guy offer's her wife to be raped daily for three months?! And then puts the blame on her for dishonouring him? Now that is some twisted fucking mental gymnastics right there.

 

[jimbobsmells]

Just one out more cases in the article, but this one made me go WTF the most. How can the guy just be under a restraining order after pimping, raping, stalking and I assume serious threats to his wife???

This kind of thing is why there are calls to toughen laws on deporting migrants.