I fail to understand how this is important or actually any of your concern.
Germany reinstates Border Controls - Temporarily exits from Schengen
- Thread starter Miles Quaritch
- Start date
- Status
I fail to understand how this is important or actually any of your concern.
harriet the spy
Member
But there is border control, so I am not 100% what your point is.
Just for research. It is interesting for me.
IdreamofHIME
Member
Diverse nations?
I was told the other day by a gaffer that there's no difference between an Eastern European and a Western European than there is between A New Yorker and a Californian.
I feel it's naive to think Merkel didn't know beforehand that it would only work for a few weeks. She's in a perfect position for the EU meeting tomorrow. The media portraying it as if she's like "Let's open the gates! ... Woah, too many! Close the gates!!11" are being naive as well.
spidey:
You're a terrible Gutmensch, didn't you get the memo?
well to clarify in Austria there's a 'Wahlgeheimnis' among people. you don't ask another person what or who the person votes, normally.
I don't know if that's a big thing in germany too
yeah I probably am.
this thread didn't disappoint though. the typical phrases from 'how many refugees are you housing' to 'most of them are criminals or economic refugees' are all there
Is that an actual rule (according to their law system) or just... you know, a nice advice?
It's a thing here, too. Asking people who they voted for is considered pretty rude. I don't even know which party my parents vote for as they never told me lol.
well there's the secrecy of ballocy the moment you vote which is defined by law. afterwards you can tell whoever you want what you voted but people chose here the don't ask don't tell policy.
Interesting. Thanks for the quick roundup =)
Classic Merkel move. It's hilarious that people really believed Germany would continue to let the refugees in. This "welcome refugees" agenda was so fake that it nearly made me vomit. Merkel never wanted to help refugees and that's still her policy, she never changed it. She just did what was inevitable at this moment. The majority of the German population was/ still is for taking more refugees in. Ignoring this would've led to a crisis for her party since the coaliton partner the SPD and the opposition are all in for more refugees. She just did what she had to do.
Furthermore it is strange that this "Germany welcomes you" attitude started when the international press started to label Germany as the "cold evil country" again. Refugee camps were burned down before (actually things like this already happened back in 1992 in Germany). But now they started this for 1-2 weeks where they could stage this attidude of a welcoming awesome country. Really? Refugee camps were destroyed in Germany in January and the CDU kept quite about it. But suddenly they're all in for refugees?
Now, don't misunderstand me it is awesome that Germany took all these refugees for 1-2 weeks with a good amount of help by the society but this was a political move and that's why it's not suprising that they close the borders. Germany never did a good job on integrating foreigners. It never gave and will never give a damn about racism and institutional racism and that's why I can't believe this staged move. The intent was never an ethical one from the government. Merkel did what she had to do with no other option left two weeks ago. The intent was always a politcal one.
Furthermore it is strange that this "Germany welcomes you" attitude started when the international press started to label Germany as the "cold evil country" again. Refugee camps were burned down before (actually things like this already happened back in 1992 in Germany). But now they started this for 1-2 weeks where they could stage this attidude of a welcoming awesome country. Really? Refugee camps were destroyed in Germany in January and the CDU kept quite about it. But suddenly they're all in for refugees?
Now, don't misunderstand me it is awesome that Germany took all these refugees for 1-2 weeks with a good amount of help by the society but this was a political move and that's why it's not suprising that they close the borders. Germany never did a good job on integrating foreigners. It never gave and will never give a damn about racism and institutional racism and that's why I can't believe this staged move. The intent was never an ethical one from the government. Merkel did what she had to do with no other option left two weeks ago. The intent was always a politcal one.
And the German interior minister is today saying:
"Thomas de Maiziere said refugees could "not choose" their host countries"
DragonSworne
Banned
Sorry to be ignorant but could someone explain why Germany is getting so many refugees?
There are a lot of other countries in the EU between Syria and Germany...
There are a lot of other countries in the EU between Syria and Germany...
PdotMichael
Banned
Did you hear it from people who never left their US state?
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
I have to add to this that in Austria you can either vote for idiots or racist idiots, so naturally people don't really like talking about who they voted cause they feel bad about it either way
Liberty4all
Banned
Germany has the best benefits.
Hardly an expert on it, but I always thought that was the Scandinavian countries. Is Germany actually better?
Liberty4all
Banned
I'm repeating what I've heard ... Its been said multiple times Germany offers better welfare, employment opportunities, housing, etc ... No idea if true or not ...
The reason why people want to go to Germany and Sweden is motivated by primarily relatives/friends/countrymen living there + the reputation (they don't treat Muslims like shit) + misinformation about benefits such as education
You're probably right, but given the circumstances, it was still the right thing to do. The alternative would have been tens of thousands of refugees living in sub-human condittions in transitional camps in Hungary or on the Serbian border. One can hope that they're going to use the time to work on their logistics so they can more easily deal with future influx, and then reopen the border.
This isn't going to happen. As long as other countries won't agree on taking equal amounts of refugees Germany won't open its borders for them again.
Germany has four times the population of Scandinavia so there's a much bigger chance they have relatives or friends living in Germany. Norway and especially Denmark also have a stricter policy against immigration. Denmark reinstated border controls in 2011.
While its true that Denmark is shitty as hell when it comes to immigration policies (I hate them) it is factually untrue that we reinstated border controls. It was only a marketing or symbol political move by the neo-racist party Danish People's Party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=9&v=09vqhZV6jt8
BBC radio call in's. I suspect the media is losing the narrative.
and holy hell, the emotional blackmail the BBC interviewer is using isn't working as well as it used too.
Or as a comment put it "Typical BBC presenter, pushing his own personal point of view and not listening or considering others peoples thoughts and opinions".
BBC radio call in's. I suspect the media is losing the narrative.
and holy hell, the emotional blackmail the BBC interviewer is using isn't working as well as it used too.
Or as a comment put it "Typical BBC presenter, pushing his own personal point of view and not listening or considering others peoples thoughts and opinions".
Mailenstein
Member
Called it when that whole arab spring stuff started that it will eventually blow up in the west's face. And it will get even worse. Seeing how united Europe is at the moment, they will be in for a surprise.
I'm just thinking that once living conditions for refugees start really devolving, public outrage may force hands again. After all, even Cameron folded after the picture of the drowned boy, and the German government is much more sensitive to public perception.
While I agree with your whole sentiment and the fact that Germany wasted tons of opportunities in the past, they do have some progress in this regard. Can they do better? Of course, Germany is years behind on the integration debate. But compared to other countries, they have recognized (some of) their mistakes in the past.
Kill Your Masters
Member
So the solution is to just let everyone die in front of fences and walls? Then let some refugees in as unskilled workers to clean the dead bodies. Sounds actually more European than what we were doing so far.
Anyone believing they'll just turn around now is in for a surprise.
Liljagare
Member
To be fair, most of the countries in EU have utterly failed on the integration part. Here in Sweden for example, we have entire projects that are 99% first or second generation refugees. Not a good thing at all, imho.
Europe like most places desperately need to fix the integration issues like yesterday, preferably in the 80's. :/
Europe like most places desperately need to fix the integration issues like yesterday, preferably in the 80's. :/
Liberty4all
Banned
Wow audience eviscerating the host.
This is the right of a nation state. Refugees are the problem of the entire world. Mass immigration must be handled. A country cannot absorbed so many people. It plummets economies, and displaces the self-determination of the local population.
TatteredHat
Member
Right now 70% of the refugees are adult men, the families are already split up. I'm merely proposing that the ratio is reversed.
Change young men to adult men, then. If there's no problem with 70% of refugees being adult men right now, there shouldn't be any problems with 70% of refugees being women/children/elderly instead.
Integration of immigrants is something that happens when people seek out citizenship out of desire to participate in another society.
Integration just doesn't occur smoothly for displaced peoples. It's taxing on any system, and most just want to establish their old lives under their new found safety. Sure there are things these nations could be doing more, but they have no obligation. It is such an tertiary function of the government, and what little they can do only exist as a result of building up society to the point where it is reasonably attainable through surplus resources.
MisterFalcon
Member
It's been a staple of interviewers to present anyone opposing immigration with a binary choice of allowing immigration or killing children. You either agree or are a monster.
TatteredHat
Member
It's been happening in this thread as well, only the binary choice is allowing uncontrolled immigration or killing all refugees.
Kill Your Masters
Member
Since none of you post any alternative solutions when shouting "close dem borders" to this crisis, its the only thing that can be assumed. You know, people die without food, water, shelter...
But please go on, post a solution then. Lets assume all borders are closed, thousands sit in front of a fence or wall not willing to move after going through multiple stages of hell. What now?
Only got minute and a half in before it cut out (on mobile) but there's a world of difference between being against mass immigration from a social cohesion perspective, and being a frothing at the mouth lunatic scared that everyone else is a rapist or a murderer or a pædophile.
Plus, automatic point reduction for lack of volume control.
MisterFalcon
Member
There are nine or so borders between Syria and Germany, which ones are hermetically closed in this scenario ?
(Keep in mind if the Turkey-Syria border is sealed ISIS will be cut off from support and will be defeated much quicker)
Yes, someone please answer this for me too. I've asked the same question several times in the thread. What are we supposed to do with the hundreds of thousands already at the European border and the millions more that will arrive over time as Syria collapses further?
Build a wall with armed guards across the Hungarian border and shoot anyone trying to climb it while we watch them starve on the other side? Maybe that would be the traditional European solution. We do have a history of being good at genocides after all...
Even better, outsource the genocide to Turkey. I'm sure the 10+ million that have already lost their homes and are fleeing will be just fine surviving in a country being reduced to rubble.
You might also want to read some refugee testimonies. Many of them chose to run so they wouldn't be recruited by ISIS because that was their only option. In a war as savage as the one in Syria you're left with two options: starve or fight for whichever faction controls the territory you're in, even if it's ISIS.
EDIT: And for the record, ISIS isn't even the main threat in Syria. Assad is. Even if ISIS is defeated the war won't end.
dapperbandit
Banned
The war wouldn't end if Assad was defeated either.
As for the question posed, would people in this thread on any side of the debate agree that there is a physical capacity, that there are structural limits to the amount each European state can support?
The crisis won't end this year and the conflicts and crises that create these refugees won't end for years to come. All we're doing now is encouraging more to do the same.
As things stand Europe will have to say "No" eventually. What then?
As for the question posed, would people in this thread on any side of the debate agree that there is a physical capacity, that there are structural limits to the amount each European state can support?
The crisis won't end this year and the conflicts and crises that create these refugees won't end for years to come. All we're doing now is encouraging more to do the same.
As things stand Europe will have to say "No" eventually. What then?
The war won't end for years and years at least, if ever. Syria might devolve into the next Somalia. On that we can agree. But that also means that the world needs to be prepared to accommodate what could possibly end up as over 10 million refugees - mark my words, Syria will end up almost depopulated because of the war, with the only people left in the country being fighters, die-hard supporters and the few who for one reason or the other can't or won't run.
The EU has a population of 500 million. We're losing our minds over 500,000 refugees - one refugee for every 1,000 EU citizens - while Turkey supports 1 refugee for every 40 citizen and Lebanon supports 1 refugee for every 4 citizen. It's shameful. We could take in millions. Hell, if the entire Union actually cooperated on this and made sure that resources for the refugees were spent in the best way possible I doubt even the entire population of Syria would be enough to overwhelm any "structural" limitations because we would still be in only marginally more refugees per capita than Turkey does currently. Adding all 18 million Syrians to the EU would lead to a population increase of 3,6 % compared to Turkey's current 2 %.
But no one is arguing for that. No one is suggesting we evacuate Syria. What is suggested is that we at the very least help the hundreds of thousands who are already here and have risked everything to get here. We have a moral and humanitarian responsibility to do so, even if it comes at a modest economic price. We even have a legal responsibility - we have signed treaties regulating the rights of refugees and the right to asylum is itself enshrined in article 4 of the UDHR.
And not helping them is essentially condemning them to death. They can't go back and they won't stop trying to go forward.
PdotMichael
Banned
Refugees and immigrants aren't synonyms. It's our responsibility to help people who aren't safe in their home country.
witchedwiz
Member
No offense, you're clueless..
Have you EVER visit ed Italy ?
On paper we are just a transit port, but all those that don't have any means to move out (economically) and those who have no official paper stack are not accounted for and ultimately they roam around (inside) Italy like an invisibile plague..
It's lovely to accept refugees, but trust me, most of the "destinati on country" gets the best of the crop, educated migrants or middle class migrants..
Italy, greece and spain have always had to deal with the end of the line migrants (criminals, poors, uneducated to further collapse the social assistance) that are NOT tax players, that will NOT get integrated and are ultimately just a cost for the nation...
While germany or other eu nation accepts migrant because ultimately they are facing a birth crisis that has to be countered somehow, the situation in Italy while on the same direction is still wildly better.. We're taking refugees in because of reasons..
First it was people from albania/similar countries, then a massive influx from morocco and other northern africa countries, now it's from syria...
Italy used to be a economic giant in the old days, but mis management in the last 20 years turned her into a husk that is Now forced to spread the little welfare resource it has among the unemployed and the pseudo-refugees..
It would be really interesting if i could found translated tidbits of stuff where they do some interesting reportage on the attitude of lawbreaking refugees in Italy that consider themselves above the law, for if they are sent back, they can be here again just in two days via the usual illegal boats...
mercenar1e
Member
did anyone watch the Vice video that was posted a few days ago? seems to me that the refugees only want Germany and nothing else.. they even refuse to be finger printed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbwFCoHP_bg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbwFCoHP_bg
dark_inferno
Member
By making their Homecountries safe. But that wont happen because War is profitable.
PdotMichael
Banned
Well, Germany refuses to accept people from the Balkan. So it's misleading to believe that the crazy high numbers of refugees right now in Germany will stay in Germany or EU.
How do some people in this thread not get that this is first and foremost a safety measure?
A country should have the right to temporarily halt huge streams of immigrants for the safety of their own people (I'm not talking about crimes and violence, I'm talking about the mass of people at the MAIN station)
A country should have the right to temporarily halt huge streams of immigrants for the safety of their own people (I'm not talking about crimes and violence, I'm talking about the mass of people at the MAIN station)
hobblygobbly
Member
Not sure if one is better than another but both are very good in most areas. Sweden has better child care (like parents having more ability to leave work to look after their child). Germany's in comparison isn't very good (speaking as a German myself), it's actually cited as one of the issues of Germany's low birth rate as well because people don't feel they can meet the responsibility to look after the child adequately. Otherwise in the other areas of welfare they're not all too different (employment, disability, etc).
Doczu
Member
Is it? Does anyone have some links that could provide how many refugees returned to their countries after the wars ended? It doesn't have to be specifically Germany. Any Dutch people who can give some insight on how many former Yugoslavians returned home?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked