Mediterranean migrants- specific questions

Nodin

David Fiala wrote: »

Yes search for this why-are-so-many-young-british-muslims-joining-islamic-state-iraq-syria
I can't post link as I'm new user

I know muslims from Britian joined IS - it was the notion that most British muslims had done so I was raising an eyebrow to.

jank

fartingforfun wrote: »

The father of the dead child was a people smuggler.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/11/us-europe-migrants-turkey-iraq-idUSKCN0RB2BE20150911

That would be the ultimate irony of this story. The father of the dead child washed up on a Turksih beach being part and parcel of the criminal network that puts these lives at risk. I have said it again and ill say it now, there is a lot of merit to the Australian solution here. 'Take the sugar off the table' thereby criminals will have no cause to endanger people. Distribute refugees from camps near the zone, not when they travel through 6 different countries and then claim asylum.

fartingforfun

My heart go out to those in the first wave of refugees, but those i see on TV now are just chancers. They are turning up at Hungarian train stations in suits with suit cases packed, they are just economic migrants.

Rightwing

fartingforfun wrote: »

My heart go out to those in the first wave of refugees, but those i see on TV now are just chancers. They are turning up at Hungarian train stations in suits with suit cases packed, they are just economic migrants.

I don't blame economic migrants. I blame the stupidity of those willing and encouraging migrants in. Some people need experience to teach them. They'll learn a lot from this one yet, but of course it will be far too late by then.

View

fartingforfun wrote: »

My heart go out to those in the first wave of refugees, but those i see on TV now are just chancers. They are turning up at Hungarian train stations in suits with suit cases packed, they are just economic migrants.

The fact they turn up with suit cases packed does not mean they are not genuine refugees.

The whole point of someone achieving refugee status is they get sanctuary AND the opportunity to re-build their life. They are not required to live in destitution for their entire lives.

fartingforfun

Just turn up at the EU border claim to be a muslim who converted to christianity who also happens to be Gay, they won't be turned away.

Nodin

fartingforfun wrote: »

My heart go out to those in the first wave of refugees, but those i see on TV now are just chancers. They are turning up at Hungarian train stations in suits with suit cases packed, they are just economic migrants.

.....based on?

RDM_83 again

I'm pretty confused by what game Germany and Merkel in particular is playing with the EU, they seem to have just abandoned the idea of a Europe built on consensus and consultation.
My personal prediction- current German government to fall in next couple of months or Merkel to stand down.

asherbassad

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

If these people are only seeking safety then why always move into Western Europe? Russia is closer to Syria than Ireland.

Also why move once they've reached a safe country? If a migrant lands in Italy then why leave Italy to move into France or Britain?

Russia are already hosting 800,000 refugees from the Ukrainian conflict. That's a damn sight more than the EU is taking in of any group of refugees. NATO are squarely and solely to blame for the wave of refugees fleeing from Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Sudan and Yemen. Bitching that others should take in the refugees that the EU/NATO created is a bit rich.

Wurzelbert

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm pretty confused by what game Germany and Merkel in particular is playing with the EU, they seem to have just abandoned the idea of a Europe built on consensus and consultation.
My personal prediction- current German government to fall in next couple of months or Merkel to stand down.

methinks it’s about time for the great cthulhu to awake from his slumber and take over…definitely after merkel has stepped down…

FelineOverLord

It's time that Europe took Germany in hand. Merkel created a massive problem by encouraging migrants to go to Germany, unsurprisingly Germany can't handle the numbers and she's switched from a policy of trying to intimidate other countries into taking more migrants with threats of imposing fines for countries who don't take them,to threatening to close German borders to countries, as well as Austria who don't tow the line she wants.

She has effectively introduced a mobile army of young Muslim men into Europe with little or no thought as to a potential terrorist threat that they may cause or the financial repercussions for less wealthy countries, not to mention potential political and social unrest caused by hundreds of thousands of people of a very strict religion with appalling views on women flooding into their communities. Some posters keep mentioning the migration of people after the second world war, those posters should bear in mind that it was post a world war where countries were allied with each other in fighting Hitler and the Nazis. Many towns and cities had been destroyed. Circumstances were very different and people were grateful to find asylum where they could. There were no social welfare payments or free medical care or social housing.

Europe is a failed exercise and it's time that it was acknowledged.

Wurzelbert

FelineOverLord wrote: »

It's time that Europe took Germany in hand. Merkel created a massive problem by encouraging migrants to go to Germany, unsurprisingly Germany can't handle the numbers and she's switched from a policy of trying to intimidate other countries into taking more migrants with threats of imposing fines for countries who don't take them,to threatening to close German borders to countries, as well as Austria who don't tow the line she wants.

She has effectively introduced a mobile army of young Muslim men into Europe with little or no thought as to a potential terrorist threat that they may cause or the financial repercussions for less wealthy countries, not to mention potential political and social unrest caused by hundreds of thousands of people of a very strict religion with appalling views on women flooding into their communities. Some posters keep mentioning the migration of people after the second world war, those posters should bear in mind that it was post a world war where countries were allied with each other in fighting Hitler and the Nazis. Many towns and cities had been destroyed. Circumstances were very different and people were grateful to find asylum where they could. There were no social welfare payments or free medical care or social housing.

Europe is a failed exercise and it's time that it was acknowledged.

you have a point, but let’s not pretend merkel or germany created the problem…merkel screwed up in tackling it, she certainly did not create the migrant crisis as such…

FelineOverLord

Wurzelbert wrote: »

you have a point, but let’s not pretend merkel or germany created the problem…merkel screwed up in tackling it, she certainly did not create the migrant crisis as such…

She invited 800 thousand of them in and said Germany would take an additional half a million per year, meaning they would have to cross the borders of neighbouring countries who have made it clear that they don't want migrants pouring over their borders. The open invitation to move to Germany will have spurred more migrants to make the trip by boat from Turkey to Greece, thus more people are risking their lives. To a lot of migrants Germany is a place where the streets are paved with gold, and we all know that they're wrong.

The problem is the migrants/asylum seekers already in Germany aren't going to be happy with a few hundred euros a month to live on and being shunted out to rural Germany, which means they will want to leave Germany and go to other countries who can't cope with them or don't want them. That also leaves the problem of all of the migrants currently on route to Germany. We now have arguably the strongest European country dictating to the rest of Europe on a migration problem that they have made infinitly worse.

We've agreed to take 4000 and we know that number will at least triple. We know that money to fund them would be better spent on frontline services in this country and we're taking them in despite the fact that we have no legal obligation to do so and I don't believe that we have a moral obligation to do so either. Not our circus not our monkeys. Given Germanys U turn how many more are we now going to be forced to take in?

Wurzelbert

FelineOverLord wrote: »

She invited 800 thousand of them in and said Germany would take an additional half a million per year, meaning they would have to cross the borders of neighbouring countries who have made it clear that they don't want migrants pouring over their borders. The open invitation to move to Germany will have spurred more migrants to make the trip by boat from Turkey to Greece, thus more people are risking their lives. To a lot of migrants Germany is a place where the streets are paved with gold, and we all know that they're wrong.

The problem is the migrants/asylum seekers already in Germany aren't going to be happy with a few hundred euros a month to live on and being shunted out to rural Germany, which means they will want to leave Germany and go to other countries who can't cope with them or don't want them. That also leaves the problem of all of the migrants currently on route to Germany. We now have arguably the strongest European country dictating to the rest of Europe on a migration problem that they have made infinitly worse.

We've agreed to take 4000 and we know that number will at least triple. We know that money to fund them would be better spent on frontline services in this country and we're taking them in despite the fact that we have no legal obligation to do so and I don't believe that we have a moral obligation to do so either. Not our circus not our monkeys. Given Germanys U turn how many more are we now going to be forced to take in?

i get your point and i agree with much of it, but do we have reliable statistics on how many are on the move only because some morons in germany invited them to come, and who would otherwise have stayed put?

oscarBravo

FelineOverLord wrote: »

We know that money to fund them would be better spent on frontline services in this country...

"We" don't know anything of the sort. Not everyone subscribes to the belief that foreigners are inherently less deserving.

Not our circus not our monkeys.

Charming.

FelineOverLord

Wurzelbert wrote: »

i get your point and i agree with much of it, but do we have reliable statistics on how many are on the move only because some morons in germany invited them to come, and who would otherwise have stayed put?

That's a bit like asking how long is a piece of rope. We know that huge numbers are on the move. We also know that many of the younger migrants who've made it to Europe are encouraging their parents to make the trip before the door closes. I've read accounts with young Iraqi's who've flown to Turkey to make the trip over to Germany because they were assured of a welcome in Germany. We won't have a definite idea of how many are on the move until they start being stopped at borders. It's impossible to say exactly how many will have been influenced by Merkl, but it is undeniable that many have been.

Wurzelbert

FelineOverLord wrote: »

That's a bit like asking how long is a piece of rope. We know that huge numbers are on the move. We also know that many of the younger migrants who've made it to Europe are encouraging their parents to make the trip before the door closes. I've read accounts with young Iraqi's who've flown to Turkey to make the trip over to Germany because they were assured of a welcome in Germany. We won't have a definite idea of how many are on the move until they start being stopped at borders. It's impossible to say exactly how many will have been influenced by Merkl, but it is undeniable that many have been.

yeah, of course there are no such statistics, was more like a rhetorical question…my point is that mass migration to europe was happening long before some german idiots started the whole “welcome” thing and “invited” everybody to come to germany…

jmayo

Rightwing wrote: »

Ireland isn't doing enough here. We are talking the talk, and little else. I agree with Merkel.

This was posted some time ago, so do you still agree with her ?

Rightwing wrote: »

Why not bring the ships to Ireland instead of the nearest port? Would our navy be so good then ?

Yeah I am sure they would enjoy sitting on the deck as the ship enters the Atlantic from the Straits of Gibraltar on the long trek home to Cork.
:rolleyes:

Lockstep wrote: »

Actually, they are Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan have taken in nearly 4 million refugees between them. Although the Gulf States have contributed vast amounts in aid.
However, it's also true that the Gulf States have taken in negligible numbers of refugees. This is unsurprising: no Gulf State is party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. At any rate, the Gulf States are utterly authoritarian and brutal states with terrible human rights records. Do you really want to use them as a benchmark for humanitarianism?

Yes, but some of those same Gulf States are actually fueling the problem.
And those same Gulf states have more culturally in common with the refugees than most of Europe.
BTW that is only two countries - Lebanon and Jordan (two of the smallest and less wealthy) of the Arab World/Arab League actually really bothering to help their fellow Arabs.

asherbassad wrote: »

Russia are already hosting 800,000 refugees from the Ukrainian conflict. That's a damn sight more than the EU is taking in of any group of refugees. NATO are squarely and solely to blame for the wave of refugees fleeing from Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Sudan and Yemen. Bitching that others should take in the refugees that the EU/NATO created is a bit rich.

Ehh some of your thinking is a bit blinkered.
Russia has helped fuel the Ukrainian crisis.
Blaming all the issues in the Arab world on EU/NATO is a fair bit of a cop out.
Yes they interfered in Libya, Syria and Iraq, but so have some of the neighbours.
The problem is some eejits in America and Europe (including big chunks of population) actually believe that some of these countries should have the Wests version of democracy.
These countries and more importantly a fair chunk of their citizens don't really do democracy.

Yes the West helped let the genie out of the bottle.
But lets face facts locals (and fundamentalist fueld western born descendants) are the ones only too happen to do the killings, the slaughters of those who don't happen to believe the exact same things or happen to be from the same inbred gene pool.

FelineOverLord wrote: »

It's time that Europe took Germany in hand. Merkel created a massive problem by encouraging migrants to go to Germany, unsurprisingly Germany can't handle the numbers and she's switched from a policy of trying to intimidate other countries into taking more migrants with threats of imposing fines for countries who don't take them,to threatening to close German borders to countries, as well as Austria who don't tow the line she wants.

She has effectively introduced a mobile army of young Muslim men into Europe with little or no thought as to a potential terrorist threat that they may cause or the financial repercussions for less wealthy countries, not to mention potential political and social unrest caused by hundreds of thousands of people of a very strict religion with appalling views on women flooding into their communities. Some posters keep mentioning the migration of people after the second world war, those posters should bear in mind that it was post a world war where countries were allied with each other in fighting Hitler and the Nazis. Many towns and cities had been destroyed. Circumstances were very different and people were grateful to find asylum where they could. There were no social welfare payments or free medical care or social housing.

Europe is a failed exercise and it's time that it was acknowledged.

Shhhh you can't say that around here.

Merkel has opened her big gob and has created a sh**storm and now demands the rest of us tidy up her mess.
Hell before this, she and her EU mouthpieces were lecturing everyone.
She has made the problems worse for all countries from Greece to her own neighbours.

Maybe some Germans, Merkel included, have a guilty conscience, but they shouldn't expect the rest of Europe to dance to their tune.

And how is all this helping the poor sods sitting in refugee camps in the likes of Lebanon who are facing cuts in food rations with an oncoming winter ?

ancapailldorcha

FelineOverLord, do not post in this thread again.

RDM_83 again

oscarBravo wrote: »

"We" don't know anything of the sort. Not everyone subscribes to the belief that foreigners are inherently less deserving.

Fine I think we should add an extra rate of tax for high earners to support this opening of borders.
It does so often seem to be those that aren't ever likely to be dependent on the concept of a modern welfare state that are so eager to dismantle it.

Lockstep

jmayo wrote: »

Yes, but some of those same Gulf States are actually fueling the problem.
And those same Gulf states have more culturally in common with the refugees than most of Europe.
BTW that is only two countries - Lebanon and Jordan (two of the smallest and less wealthy) of the Arab World/Arab League actually really bothering to help their fellow Arabs.

Very true but if we're expecting humanitarianism out of the Gulf States, we'll be waiting a very long time. They're hardly beacons of generosity and liberalism.

Nodin

jmayo wrote: »

Yes, but some of those same Gulf States are actually fueling the problem.
And those same Gulf states have more culturally in common with the refugees than most of Europe.
BTW that is only two countries - Lebanon and Jordan (two of the smallest and less wealthy) of the Arab World/Arab League actually really bothering to help their fellow Arabs.

Wahabis are a minority sect within Islam, and can be likened for the sake of comparison to the kind of out there Bible bashers they like to show on TV from the states. They think they're superior to the rest of the Sunnis. The Shia and other minorities are about as welcome there as a Celtic jersey at Ibrox.

The Gulf states aren't like the rest of the middle east, and notions that you can traipse in there for a bit of "hail fellow, well met" show a misunderstanding of the reality.

A Primal Nut

Nodin wrote: »

Wahabis are a minority sect within Islam, and can be likened for the sake of comparison to the kind of out there Bible bashers they like to show on TV from the states. They think they're superior to the rest of the Sunnis. The Shia and other minorities are about as welcome there as a Celtic jersey at Ibrox.

The Gulf states aren't like the rest of the middle east, and notions that you can traipse in there for a bit of "hail fellow, well met" show a misunderstanding of the reality.

We have to acknowledge that there are cultural issues like this throughout the middle east. It's why democracy doesn't work because the minorities will always resent being ruled by whatever the majority rule is, and it will be largely justified because the majority rule will discriminate against the minorities. You can't even have power sharing because there are too many different types of Islam which would need to share power. Even within the same religion there are so many different interpretations, for example the leaders in Iran have a stricter interpretation than most of the people.

oscarBravo

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Fine I think we should add an extra rate of tax for high earners to support this opening of borders.

Accepting refugees isn't opening borders.

It does so often seem to be those that aren't ever likely to be dependent on the concept of a modern welfare state that are so eager to dismantle it.

Yes. Taking in a few thousand refugees will destroy civilisation as we know it.

Hyperbole much?

RDM_83 again

oscarBravo wrote: »

Accepting refugees isn't opening borders. Yes. Taking in a few thousand refugees will destroy civilisation as we know it.

Hyperbole much?

We could easily be looking at 240,000,000.
Say 4000 initial entry rising to 8000 with family unification.
15,000 a year is a middling cost per annum per person (you hear between 12 and 18)
Take two years in some sort of direct provision or social welfare (despite the upturn we are still running a high unemployment rate so two years seems a reasonable timescale)

8000*15,000*2 = 240, 000, 000

Now to me in a country with the debts Ireland has that figure seems like an awful lot considering its potentially at the lower end of numbers that could arrive.
I'd feel a lot happier if it was funded by a rise of say 1% in the PRSI of those earning above 50-70k, after all its been shown that this sort of migration has a negative effect on the bottom 5% without even taking into account the increased housing lists and increased strain on emergency social welfare funds (e,g those administered by the HSE).
Then we could all be doing our part :cool:

Personally as I said on the other thread of taking in 4000 as family units direct from the camps and a strict interpretation of Dublin Regs on any one else would be something that I could accept the need for.

BuilderPlumber

At the end of the day, this crisis can only be solved by an improved Middle East. Since around 1979, one country after another has seen the coming to power of one grotesque regime worse than the last. No wonder this has given us the horror of the Taliban, ISIS and all the other groups that seem to have more power than many governments in some places.

Now, while none were ideal, the likes of Saddam, Najibullah, Pahlavi, Mubarak and so on were much better than the effers that came after them and helped ruin their countries. The problems should have been tackled in 1979 or 1989 or whenever these regimes started overstepping the mark: tell them, no oil bought unless you implement moderate policies. Give funding to countries that respect the rights of its people. But, that's not what happened: ALL these brutal regimes were allowed to exist and were tolerated as bulwarks against Soviet and later Russian interests. Thus, they were allowed turn Islam into a fascist cult and learned how to market personality cults from the likes of Kim Il Sung/Jong Un and how to implement naked terror from Pol Pot. It is perhaps too late now to tackle things as most Middle Eastern countries are either governed by fascist tyrants or a fascist terrorist group is very active in them. The world community let these develop and now we are harvesting the seeds we sowed back in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and indeed even in more recent years.

BuilderPlumber

Nodin wrote: »

Wahabis are a minority sect within Islam, and can be likened for the sake of comparison to the kind of out there Bible bashers they like to show on TV from the states. They think they're superior to the rest of the Sunnis. The Shia and other minorities are about as welcome there as a Celtic jersey at Ibrox.

The Gulf states aren't like the rest of the middle east, and notions that you can traipse in there for a bit of "hail fellow, well met" show a misunderstanding of the reality.

The Wahabi sect are arrogant and act superior because they have massive support from American big business. You will notice how Saudi Arabia will always try and mess things up with its rivals. Saudi Arabia want to see Iraq, Iran and anyone else messed up so they can remain as top dog oil producer. The Gulf states obviously do not want refugees and will not taken them in. They look down on Iraqis and Syrians and hate the Shias and even fellow Sunnis from different traditions.

With regard to the bible bashers: at least, you won't find Jimmy Swaggart beheading people on his TV station! I turned him on yesterday and had to laugh at his 'You can watch all the Rambo you like but never forget Jesus' argument!! At least, there's a bit of comedy here rather than some savage in a balaclava with a knife about to behead someone. Maybe, Rambo is exactly what we need for the latter! But seriously speaking, these bible bashers are very moderate in comparison to the worst Wahabi inspired preachers.

Nodin

A Primal Nut wrote: »

We have to acknowledge that there are cultural issues like this throughout the middle east. It's why democracy doesn't work because the minorities will always resent being ruled by whatever the majority rule is, and it will be largely justified because the majority rule will discriminate against the minorities. You can't even have power sharing because there are too many different types of Islam which would need to share power. Even within the same religion there are so many different interpretations, for example the leaders in Iran have a stricter interpretation than most of the people.

You could have said that about Europe for most of its history.

A Primal Nut

Nodin wrote: »

You could have said that about Europe for most of its history.

True, but it's mostly a problem in the middle east these days.

Nodin

A Primal Nut wrote: »

True, but it's mostly a problem in the middle east these days.

Yes, and in time it will change, painfully more than likely. The notion that the situation in the middle east is some exception to the norms of human or European civilisation overall is fundamentally incorrect.