Ireland to assist in migrant crisis in the Med.

Geuze

MathDebater wrote: »

I think the Danish style points system for non EU citizens would work well here. Points for qualifications and where they were obtained, work experience, time already spent working/studying in another member state, other languages spoken etc that would help in our tech hubs. Have a gander - http://www.nyidanmark.dk/en-us/coming_to_dk/work/greencard-scheme/

A good idea, but given that we have 350,000 on the Live Register and 220,000 unemployed, why would we need non-EU immigrants at all?

Gatling

Geuze wrote: »

A good idea, but given that we have 350,000 on the Live Register and 220,000 unemployed, why would we need non-EU immigrants at all?

One poster suggested bring them in ,house them and create low paid job's for them.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Using that logic all countries in the world are 'racist' as..
a) not one country has 100% open borders
b) people who are citizens of a country have a right to reside in said country, people that are not citizens do not have that right.

Do you object to the very idea of a nation state? Are we going all internationalism now, ala communism of old?

The person who started that line of discussion referred - very specifically - to ethnicity.

wakka12

Nodin wrote: »

Favouring one ethnicity over another isn't racist? Tell me how that one works.

Its not favouring an ethnicity, there are people of all different ethnicities living in ireland and we are favouring all those people who make up the population over illegal refugees, as any country should.

Nodin

wakka12 wrote: »

Its not favouring an ethnicity, there are people of all different ethnicities living in ireland and we are favouring all those people who make up the population over illegal refugees, as any country should.

That's exactly what was said - ethnicity
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95564363&postcount=920

wakka12

Nodin wrote: »

That's exactly what was said - ethnicity
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95564363&postcount=920

Well maybe he was using ethnic group in the wrong context and meant more nationality, Irish people not just ethnically Irish people.

Nodin

wakka12 wrote: »

Well maybe he was using ethnic group in the wrong context and meant more nationality, Irish people not just ethnically Irish people.

...going on this, maybe not.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95569940&postcount=974

conorhal

Nodin wrote: »

...going on this, maybe not.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95569940&postcount=974

Wouldn't it make logical sense to send migrants to nations where they can most effectively integrate and contribute to their host society? Why bother sending them to places that they are only likely to end up in ethnic ghettos plagued by unemployment and seathing in resentment. why not learn from the obvious mistakes that other nations have made in that regard?
Wouldn't it make more sense to send, say Christian Syrians to places like Greece (where they share a lot in common with the Coptic Christians there) or even Ireland and send devout Sunnis to Saudi Arabia? You wouldn't send an Eskimo to Austrailia or vice versa now would you?

Carefully apportioning refugees to countries in which they would flourish seems like a more pragmatic, qualitative and considered approach that would benefit migrants in the long term, far better than some random round robin distribution that hammers square pegs into round holes for the sake of pretending that 'differences don't matter', which by the way, it does, as Sweeden learn the hard way when it stuck a load of refugees, some Shia others Sunni and both from different and antagonistic tribal regions all into the same Asylum seeker accomodation. Queue bloodshed!

Geuze

Gatling wrote: »

One poster suggested bring them in ,house them and create low paid job's for them.

The Govt doesn't "create" jobs.

If it could, then we wouldn't have 350,000 on the Live Register and 220,000 unemployed.

MorpheusKnight

conorhal wrote: »

Wouldn't it make logical sense to send migrants to nations where they can most effectively integrate and contribute to their host society? Why bother sending them to places that they are only likely to end up in ethnic ghettos plagued by unemployment and seathing in resentment. Wouldn't it make more sense to send, say Christian Syrians to places like Greece (where they share a lot in common with the Coptic Christians there) or even Ireland and send devout Sunnis to Saudi Arabia?

It would seem to be a consideration that would benefit migrants in the long term.

As Muslims have an extra 56 countries to avail of, and Christians are being subjected to genocide in the ME, it seems that Christians have much greater need to move to an area where they may feel safe.

As such, your suggestion seems very reasonable and I detect no racist undertones whatsoever.

If anywhere is racist, and mind numbingly so, it would appear to be the ME and parts of Africa.

MorpheusKnight

Nodin wrote: »

...going on this, maybe not.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95569940&postcount=974

Try replacing ethnicity with domestic citizenry.

Call it a nationalist thing.

There seems to be a couple of posters here who have very high regard for nationalism.

But for sure, racist or not, we cannot afford these economic migrants.

As mentioned before, we could outsource these migrants to Croatia at about 1/5th of the cost.

Not racist, just common economical sense.

Nodin

conorhal wrote: »

Wouldn't it make logical sense to send migrants to nations where they can most effectively integrate and contribute to their host society? Why bother sending them to places that they are only likely to end up in ethnic ghettos plagued by unemployment and seathing in resentment. Wouldn't it make more sense to send, say Christian Syrians to places like Greece (where they share a lot in common with the Coptic Christians there) or even Ireland and send devout Sunnis to Saudi Arabia?

It would seem to be a consideration that would benefit migrants in the long term.

That's not the way it works, it would encourage racism and ethnic/sectarian "cleansing".

MorpheusKnight

Nodin wrote: »

That's not the way it works, it would encourage racism and ethnic/sectarian "cleansing".

And what about ethnic cleansing in the ME and Africa?

You cannot pretend that it is not happening.

It is happening nw.

Blasphemy used against Christians in Pakistan

Saudi does not allow people worship any thing except Islam.

Copts being attacked in Egypt.

etc etc

That's ethnic cleansing

conorhal

Nodin wrote: »

That's not the way it works, it would encourage racism and ethnic/sectarian "cleansing".

Eh, your way moreso. Perhaps you missed the memo but racism and ethnic/sectarian "cleansing" is what they're fleeing. My way they wouldn't be fleeing both from it and too it.

Radly

Nodin wrote: »

That's not the way it works, it would encourage racism and ethnic/sectarian "cleansing".

What is 'it' Nodin? Helping people?

Nodin

MorpheusKnight wrote: »

And what about ethnic cleansing in the ME and Africa?

.............

There is a great deal of sectarian violence in that region, against any who don't share certain groups ideologies. Lobbing people together who flee this kind of thing into categories and only permitting them go to certain areas only rewards and acknowledges that kind of sectarian nuttery.

MorpheusKnight

Nodin wrote: »

There is a great deal of sectarian violence in that region, against any who don't share certain groups ideologies. Lobbing people together who flee this kind of thing into categories and only permitting them go to certain areas only rewards and acknowledges that kind of sectarian nuttery.

Some have greater needs and less options in the ME and Africa than others.

The genocide of Christians, Copts, Ba'hai and Yazidis is obvious.

Again, muslims have any extra 56 countries where they could avail of asylum.

Christians, Copts, Ba'hai and Yazidi just face slaughter, ethnic cleansing and genocide in those extra 56 countries.

Their need to have somewhere to live is much greater under these circumstances.

Simple logic, and where the greater responsibility lies is very clear.

conorhal

Nodin wrote: »

There is a great deal of sectarian violence in that region, against any who don't share certain groups ideologies. Lobbing people together who flee this kind of thing into categories and only permitting them go to certain areas only rewards and acknowledges that kind of sectarian nuttery.

It doesn't go away you know, as I pointed out in the case in Sweden where an apartment block descended into a mini civil war when they accomodated asylum seekers from warring religious and ethnic groupings from Iraq in the same building.
How exactly would sending people to places they might thrive be 'rewarding sectarian nuttery' exactly? As opposed to say offering those fleeing it a better chance of integrating in their host communities. Do you imagine that ISIS give a fig where Yizidis or Christians or Shia go once they've ethnically clensed them? How exacty has ISIS been rewarded by the logical, qualitative distrubution of the refugees that they have created?

Or do you just mean that it offends your daft 'I'd like to buy the word a Coke' sensibility?

Nodin

conorhal wrote: »

It doesn't go (.............)word a Coke' sensibility?

No, it offends my notion decency by rewarding racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Western racists who'll hop on that bandwagon so fast they'll break the suspension. However, on the bright side, its not going to happen.

conorhal

Nodin wrote: »

No, it offends my notion decency by rewarding racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Western racists who'll hop on that bandwagon so fast they'll break the suspension. However, on the bright side, its not going to happen.

Ah so you'd 'like to buy the world a coke' so, fair enough, I can see how harmoniously sung platitudes might be far more important that real world solutions to real world problems that might make Nigel Farrage sink a pint
Sing it with me!.... 'In perfect harmony!'


You still haven't explained how racism is 'rewarded' by the way.

MorpheusKnight

Nodin wrote: »

No, it offends my notion decency by rewarding racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Western racists who'll hop on that bandwagon so fast they'll break the suspension. However, on the bright side, its not going to happen.

How do you feel about racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Muslim racists in those extra 56 countries ?

I do not understand why you have constant comments on how racist the Irish are, but are unable to give comment about racism and sectarian in the ME and Africa how it affects a core group of these migrants.

Nodin

MorpheusKnight wrote: »

How do you feel about racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Muslim racists in those extra 56 countries ?.

I thought it was going to be all love and hugs there, according to you?

MorpheusKnight wrote: »

I do not understand why you have constant comments on how racist the Irish are, but are unable to give comment about racism and sectarian in the ME and Africa how it affects a core group of these migrants.

I do? Quote and link please.

conorhal

MorpheusKnight wrote: »

How do you feel about racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Muslim racists in those extra 56 countries ?

I do not understand why you have constant comments on how racist the Irish are, but are unable to give comment about racism and sectarian in the ME and Africa how it affects a core group of these migrants.

He doesn't care, like most left wing open boarders proponents, he only really cares about sticking it to to conservative right wingers, the refugees are sort of incidental to this.

Nodin

conorhal wrote: »

..............

You still haven't explained how racism is 'rewarded' by the way.

Only moving Arabs to Arab areas, "black" Africans to "black" areas......any country with a minority can drive them out, and have their notion of racial exclusivity rewarded in the method of resettlement. It's fairly obvious.

MorpheusKnight

(MorpheusKnight)
'...How do you feel about racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Muslim racists in those extra 56 countries ?....'

Nodin wrote: »

I thought it was going to be all love and hugs there, according to you?.

Could you give a less flippant reply, please? And engage in the discussion


'...Originally Posted by MorpheusKnight
I do not understand why you have constant comments on how racist the Irish are, but are unable to give comment about racism and sectarian in the ME and Africa how it affects a core group of these migrants.

Nodin wrote: »

I do? Quote and link please - '...No, it offends my notion decency by rewarding racism, sectarianism, and giving fuel to Western racists who'll hop on that bandwagon so fast they'll break the suspension. However, on the bright side, its not going to happen. ...'.

...'Eh, like three posts ago - Post 1073

Hans Bricks

Nodin wrote: »

Only moving Arabs to Arab areas, "black" Africans to "black" areas......any country with a minority can drive them out, and have their notion of racial exclusivity rewarded in the method of resettlement. It's fairly obvious.

Haven't they already achieved this by driving them out in the first place, before the refugees have even managed to migrate or resettle permanently ? Whether or not they're put into categories or similar minority groupings in another host nation is kind of irrelevant by that stage.

conorhal

Nodin wrote: »

Only moving Arabs to Arab areas, "black" Africans to "black" areas......any country with a minority can drive them out, and have their notion of racial exclusivity rewarded in the method of resettlement. It's fairly obvious.

Really? Is it? Well it's a good thing we don't manage refugees in such a fashion so and thus we've ensured ethnic clensing hasn't happened as a result of such a policy.
The logical distribution of refugees to places where they more effortlessly integrate only rewards those refugees with a better chance of success not those that choose to persecute them. Those that persecute them could give a fig where they go just as long as they're gone.
the society that accepts them however and the agencies that distribute them should give a fig about where they go and what difficulties that might cause both the refugees and the host nation. A lot of problems faced by both could be avoided with the application of a little more logic and a little less fuzzy left wing ideology.

MorpheusKnight

Nodin wrote: »

Only moving Arabs to Arab areas, "black" Africans to "black" areas......any country with a minority can drive them out, and have their notion of racial exclusivity rewarded in the method of resettlement. It's fairly obvious.

THEY HAVE AREAS TO GO TO !

Christians, Copts, Yazidis and Ba'hai do not.

That is why we have a greater responsibility to these groups.

Jeez.

There are Arab Christians, and black Christians so using word like 'Arab' and 'Black' is disingenuous.

MorpheusKnight

conorhal wrote: »

He doesn't care, like most left wing open boarders proponents, he only really cares about sticking it to to conservative right wingers, the refugees are sort of incidental to this.

No. You are absolutely wrong.

It is the Irish who are sort of incidental to all of this.

AlekSmart

Hans Bricks wrote: »

Haven't they already achieved this by driving them out in the first place, before the refugees have even managed to migrate or resettle permanently ? Whether or not they're put into categories or similar minority groupings in another host nation is kind of irrelevant by that stage.

This all presupposes we do a group rush to unquestioningly accept the official "line",which is that all of these Boat-People are being "driven out" in the first place.

Whilst some are doubtlessly fleeing direct threat,I suggest that these are a minority.

The majority,appear to be from groups,often sizeable and geographically linked,who have PAID for a service to get them out of their region in order to access greater sources of income in Europe and particularly the UK.

These people are suffering the collateral damage of entering into commercial deals with organized criminal gangs,many of whom appear already well versed in piracy and assorted other attacks on ordinary people.

What Nodin suggests,is that Ireland,align itself with these gangs by demonstrating to the assembled watchers just how successful their services actually are.

Twittering on and on about ethnic,racist,or religious motivations for resisting further influxes of economic migrants,deliberately and cynically,rushes to avoid any questioning about Reality...particularly as to how this country is going to "Buy the World it's Coke".

It all appears to be based on ignorance really,but a studied ignorance,which seeks to denigrate those who espouse reality and caution,in favour of leppin up & down whilst roaring about Equality for All or Ending World Hunger and the assorted other "Feelin good about Feelin Bad" catchy causes.....:rolleyes: