IMMIGRATION thread

[Viking]

How is that going to help now? Should they prepare now and for what?

Well, if you want to prepare something; it pays to have a functioning country. It would act as a preparation for most things..

Europeans discovered the Americas and became global colonizers because they wanted to find a sea route to the Indies and become rich trading in spices and other goods, not because they were naturally curious. The East coast of Africa already had sea routes to the Indies, where the wealthy Swahili city-states served as hubs for Arab traders. Europeans had reasons to explore that Africans didn't.

And besides that, the colonization of Africa happened a long time after Europeans made contact, the Europeans didn't just suddenly come out of nowhere.

I wasn't saying anything about what drove the Europeans of that time, but that surely almost everyone has some curiosity about what's beyond the next hill. For those who don't, they can still realise that such a curiosity can pay off and even become vital.

[Husar]

Well, if you want to prepare something; it pays to have a functioning country. It would act as a preparation for most things..

Now we are arguing in circles. Whose fault is it that they do not have a functioning country? What are the factors that led to, say, Afghanistan not being a functional country today? You may also pick an African country that spills out a lot of refugees.

[Viking]

We have indeed gone (almost) full circle, and I am not repeating my arguments.

[Husar]

We have indeed gone (almost) full circle, and I am not repeating my arguments.

So you still blame Africans?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...refugee-crisis

War and political upheaval may create refugees, but it's time to acknowledge that the global system for dealing with the problem is broken—and that's in no small part because the industrialized world does so little to help fix it.

But hey, it's the communist Bloomberg thing, probably can't be trusted.

[Brenus]

"Lets take an example to Hungary, they just build a fence that is not impossible to get over" They will go under... And me who thought that the Fall of the Berlin Wall was a victory for democracy... Mind you, taken example from Hungary which was Nazi then Communist... They know how to built wall and to deport people, unarmed and poor people preferably...

The solution to stop immigration is to stop the causes of immigration, like thinking before invading others countries. The Syrians who are fleeing are trying to save their skins from an horror we created. The trade "agreements" we impose to others countries create unemployment and misery.

[Fragony]

Who's we

[Greyblades]

An Africa thread with no kadagar, feels empty.

[Kadagar_AV]

An Africa thread with no kadagar, feels empty.

I don't really have much input?

It's a disaster in the Med sea... And as long as we keep signaling that people can get a better life here, people will try and many will die. I heard the number of refugees in the world now reach around 60 million... It's very obvious that the solution isn't to accept them, but instead to help build up their countries.

I would suggest 4 things:

1. Raids on the ports where these boats set out. Sink them before they take off.

2. Any boat that does get away should be found, and dragged back to Africa (and get sunk after everyone got off).

3. Anyone who comes in an illegal way will automatically be refused and shipped back.

4. Put the whole asylum thingie IN THE ACTUAL COUNTRIES where the refugees are... IE, if you are in a camp in Somalia and want to get to Sweden, you apply in that camp in Somalia, and get a yes/no. If anyone comes anyway, as I just said, they should be automatically shipped back.

[Fragony]

All sound ideas. Radical idea to keep them from comming in the first place, stage a fictional labour-camp with convincing actors. Spread the word. A lot will believe it given the history of Europa. We can use smuggler's propaganda against them, they are told that there is work for everyone VOILA working camps with horrible conditions. You only have to spread the rumour. That is only going to work in places like Somalia though, the Middle-Eastern refugees will know it's bull

[Brenus]

"Who's we" All the "coalitions", "Allies" and others names aggressors gave themselves for the invasions bits. For free-marketeers, EU, USA, France, Germany, Italy. Spain, Russia, China and all others looting natural resources.

The message we have to send is we finally get it, and we will act as human being and stop to loot and wage wars, and to exploit the poorest to make our rich richer, that we understand finally that we leave in the same Eco-system so, with our polluting economy we created the drought which obliged populations to emigrate, that climate change is a reality and we understand the Bangladeshi who refuse to drown. We will really start to help instead of just pretending, and we will stop to be blind and racist, accepting under "cultural difference" behaviours and laws against Human Rights, or to impose permanent suffering to entire populations for what ever reasons that suit us.
Not only we have to sent the message, but we have to implement.
And this will never happen because the rightful owners of EU, US and others want money, and like the dentist killing a lion, they think it is ok because they PAY for it, and the lobbies they pay to buy the national and international law makers insure it is "legal".

So "illegal" migrants will come, and you can built as much as fences, mines fields, or worst, you want, they will come to die on our shore lines to remind the tourists their death is the price to pay for the lollies, and beach folding-chairs made in Pakistan by under-age under-paid children.

[Kadagar_AV]

"Who's we" All the "coalitions", "Allies" and others names aggressors gave themselves for the invasions bits. For free-marketeers, EU, USA, France, Germany, Italy. Spain, Russia, China and all others looting natural resources.

The message we have to send is we finally get it, and we will act as human being and stop to loot and wage wars, and to exploit the poorest to make our rich richer, that we understand finally that we leave in the same Eco-system so, with our polluting economy we created the drought which obliged populations to emigrate, that climate change is a reality and we understand the Bangladeshi who refuse to drown. We will really start to help instead of just pretending, and we will stop to be blind and racist, accepting under "cultural difference" behaviours and laws against Human Rights, or to impose permanent suffering to entire populations for what ever reasons that suit us.
Not only we have to sent the message, but we have to implement.
And this will never happen because the rightful owners of EU, US and others want money, and like the dentist killing a lion, they think it is ok because they PAY for it, and the lobbies they pay to buy the national and international law makers insure it is "legal".

So "illegal" migrants will come, and you can built as much as fences, mines fields, or worst, you want, they will come to die on our shore lines to remind the tourists their death is the price to pay for the lollies, and beach folding-chairs made in Pakistan by under-age under-paid children.

You kind of come up as some sort of western flagellant...

Black people and Arabs will continue to be just that (black and arabic). They will not fix their own countries, instead they want to move to functional countries - and once there - they will want to spread exactly the culture that made their home nation fall to pieces.

There is NOTHING we can do to help them, until they start to help themselves...

I mean, geez... I wonder what Sweden would have been like if everyone would have fled instead of standing up!!?? I wonder what the western world would have been like, had people fled instead of standing up.

Disregard that, we KNOW what the world would have looked like. It would have looked like North Korea, like Afghanistan, like Somalia...

I am ALL for helping Africa... But not by bringing africans here and having me suffer their inability to function in a modern society.

[Fragony]

"Who's we" All the "coalitions", "Allies" and others names aggressors gave themselves for the invasions bits. For free-marketeers, EU, USA, France, Germany, Italy. Spain, Russia, China and all others looting natural resources.

The message we have to send is we finally get it, and we will act as human being and stop to loot and wage wars, and to exploit the poorest to make our rich richer, that we understand finally that we leave in the same Eco-system so, with our polluting economy we created the drought which obliged populations to emigrate, that climate change is a reality and we understand the Bangladeshi who refuse to drown. We will really start to help instead of just pretending, and we will stop to be blind and racist, accepting under "cultural difference" behaviours and laws against Human Rights, or to impose permanent suffering to entire populations for what ever reasons that suit us.
Not only we have to sent the message, but we have to implement.
And this will never happen because the rightful owners of EU, US and others want money, and like the dentist killing a lion, they think it is ok because they PAY for it, and the lobbies they pay to buy the national and international law makers insure it is "legal".

So "illegal" migrants will come, and you can built as much as fences, mines fields, or worst, you want, they will come to die on our shore lines to remind the tourists their death is the price to pay for the lollies, and beach folding-chairs made in Pakistan by under-age under-paid children.

'We' simply can't help them. Bigger scumbags than 'us' make their lives a living hell. When here they bring it with them instead of leaving it behind

[Husar]

4. Put the whole asylum thingie IN THE ACTUAL COUNTRIES where the refugees are... IE, if you are in a camp in Somalia and want to get to Sweden, you apply in that camp in Somalia, and get a yes/no. If anyone comes anyway, as I just said, they should be automatically shipped back.

Don't have much time, but, you mean set up military bases in every war zone?
Isn't that basically the same as colonizing half the world again?

[Fragony]

Isn't that basically the same as colonizing half the world again?

Would that really be such a bad idea? Somali friend of mine would love it if the west takes over Somalia. But I don't think he means that.

[Husar]

Would that really be such a bad idea? Somali friend of mine would love it if the west takes over Somalia. But I don't think he means that.

So we go back to Afghanistan, invade Syria and create outposts all over Africa, partially by force since the locals may not want that, and that is supposed to be easier and cheaper than accepting some refugees? And we send all European navies to patrol the northern african coast because Italy is obviously tired of doing it all by themselves. Or maybe we just invade Italy as well and make them do it?

And then, I assume, we get the British to run all of this because the locals always love them.

[Fragony]

So we go back to Afghanistan, invade Syria and create outposts all over Africa, partially by force since the locals may not want that, and that is supposed to be easier and cheaper than accepting some refugees? And we send all European navies to patrol the northern african coast because Italy is obviously tired of doing it all by themselves. Or maybe we just invade Italy as well and make them do it?

And then, I assume, we get the British to run all of this because the locals always love them.

Can't be practical without being heartless or indifferent. What do you do yourself besides asking questions. I got a Somali refugee sleeping below me right now, there's just a bed there but he can use my toilet or take a shower any time he wants. Doing more than most.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Don't have much time, but, you mean set up military bases in every war zone?
Isn't that basically the same as colonizing half the world again?

Sounds like Kad was arguing more for an Aid-Station-cum-Embassy than a military base, it's a bit much for you to make that jump.

Hi basic point is sound - importing refugees is liable to create more refugees as the fit able and useful will be most able to flee and subsequently resettle the countries in question will suffer an increasing "brain drain" which will, critically, cause their civil society to collapse along with their educational establishment. This is not a theory it's fact embodied in Somali and Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent even in countries like Pakistan and India.

The NHS runs on Indian doctors and even accounting for India's excellent education system and huge population that still means fewer doctors per capita in India. Now consider a country like Somalia, where pretty much all the professionals got out in the early nineties and settled in Europe or the US. True, some of them are now going back but everyone else has has two decades of virtually no society outside Somaliland and Puntland.

[Kadagar_AV]

So we go back to Afghanistan, invade Syria and create outposts all over Africa, partially by force since the locals may not want that, and that is supposed to be easier and cheaper than accepting some refugees? And we send all European navies to patrol the northern african coast because Italy is obviously tired of doing it all by themselves. Or maybe we just invade Italy as well and make them do it?

And then, I assume, we get the British to run all of this because the locals always love them.

Eeeeh, like PVC said, you draw very big conclusions...

First of all, I don't see much need for military outposts... Embassies could of course be one place where immigrants can apply (they are already protected).

Also, to set up asylum-centers in refugee camps could easily fall under, say, the UN. It's about time the UN got a place back in the world scene regardless.

Best would of course to make these asylum-centers multinational... So instead of Sweden having a center, Norway one and so on... There is a shared system to accept/refuse asylum seekers. That way we can handle the cases where the people are, so they don't have to risk their life trying to flee here on their own by supporting criminal gangs who take a huge amount of cash to put you on a boat that is well past its "best before" date.

To send the European navies to control the Med Sea shouldn't be that hard to organize... Italy does some work already, other countries should help.... I mean, really, it's not like our navies have all THAT much other things to do...

Australia already have run a system like this... They got a whole lot of refugees coming in boats... As I understood it they just flat out stopped admitting them and sent them back... And the boats stopped coming.

It can be just as simple as that.

[Husar]

Eeeeh, like PVC said, you draw very big conclusions...

First of all, I don't see much need for military outposts... Embassies could of course be one place where immigrants can apply (they are already protected).

My point was indirect. If you want to catch the refugees at their origin, you have to go to the war zones, and I'm not sure how well-protected embassies are in war zones, especially when a thousand people line up every day. Also consider that a lot more people will come there, even the ones who cannot afford to travel to Europe. So you basically need a huge infrastucture and a lot of protection for your ambassador or you may end up with another Benghazi or something similar. I would also think that people can already apply at most embassies, but there might be reasons why they don't. For example that embassies in war zones tend to be evacuated or that for the people who want to kill them, an embassy would be a point where the victims can easily be intercepted before they get in. And who says that the ones who are denied (which according to most people here should be 90-99% or so, otherwise there is no point to the discussion), will not try to get in anyway and take to the boats after their denied request?

There is this Spanish enclave in Africa where people constantly try to climb the three fences even though the police is likely to beat them, even though the local military may raid their camps and burn their tents and even though the spanish police is said to often illegally send them back after they have made it onto Spanish territory. These people are really hard to convince that they shouldn't have nice things.
Maybe the solution is to send ou poor people there in order to teach them how to be poor and shut up about it?

[Kadagar_AV]

Blabber

First of all, no, refugees are typically NOT in a warzone or they wouldn't be refugees. See, that is kind of what refugee MEANS... Get it?

There are most often refugee camps in secure zones in the country at war, and in surrounding countries...


Secondly, if we accept asylum seekers OF COURSE we also transport them, doh!! I in no way suggest that we would grant them asylum and then ask them to make their own way there. That would be retarded.


Thirdly, that Spanish enclave in Africa with immigrants jumping the fence... See, that is EXACTLY why we should sink the refugee boats in the harbour, and escort them back if they left the harbour.

Not ONE of those boats should reach Europe, or we set a precedent for others to follow. And others WILL follow, desperately, like you yourself attest to.



Or we can continue to disease the Mediterranean Sea with dead Africans, is that your solution?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

For those thinking what a bastard Kad is - dead Libyans in a fishing boat's hold: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33946912

Stopping the crisis at source is the only longterm solution.

You know what, if we DO have to re-invade Iraq and Afghanistan and commit to them for another two decades it would be money well spent if a generation grew up where women were educated and men didn't get their hands cut off for stealing.

[Husar]

First of all, no, refugees are typically NOT in a warzone or they wouldn't be refugees. See, that is kind of what refugee MEANS... Get it?

There are most often refugee camps in secure zones in the country at war, and in surrounding countries...

So your point is to go to the refugees who go to these camps (and don't want to come here apparently) and offer them refugee status as well?
Okay, works for me.

I'm just not sure how that stops the ones who avoid those camps and try to get here. Oh right, turn around the boats. Who will turn around the boats?

Secondly, if we accept asylum seekers OF COURSE we also transport them, doh!! I in no way suggest that we would grant them asylum and then ask them to make their own way there. That would be retarded.

I never suggested otherwise, I asked what if the ones you turn down still try to come here on boats?- -but yes, turn around all the boats, see above.

Thirdly, that Spanish enclave in Africa with immigrants jumping the fence... See, that is EXACTLY why we should sink the refugee boats in the harbour, and escort them back if they left the harbour.

What if all the boat people go to the fence then? Build a concrete fortress?

Not ONE of those boats should reach Europe, or we set a precedent for others to follow. And others WILL follow, desperately, like you yourself attest to.

What if they find other ways? And again, securing such a long coastline is probably very expensive and requires a lot of effort, who is going to pay for this? We used to pay the local dictators to keep people away but apparently that doesn't work anymore since we bombed them away.

Or we can continue to disease the Mediterranean Sea with dead Africans, is that your solution?

Obviously, if that is what you derive from my posts here.

For those thinking what a bastard Kad is - dead Libyans in a fishing boat's hold: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33946912

Stopping the crisis at source is the only longterm solution.

You know what, if we DO have to re-invade Iraq and Afghanistan and commit to them for another two decades it would be money well spent if a generation grew up where women were educated and men didn't get their hands cut off for stealing.

Isn't that part of the problem? That we want to have our cake, eat it and not pay for it either? And then we just blame the desperate masses who arrive here for demanding a crumb that fell off our cake.

[Kadagar_AV]

So your point is to go to the refugees who go to these camps (and don't want to come here apparently) and offer them refugee status as well?
Okay, works for me.

I'm just not sure how that stops the ones who avoid those camps and try to get here. Oh right, turn around the boats. Who will turn around the boats?



I never suggested otherwise, I asked what if the ones you turn down still try to come here on boats?- -but yes, turn around all the boats, see above.



What if all the boat people go to the fence then? Build a concrete fortress?



What if they find other ways? And again, securing such a long coastline is probably very expensive and requires a lot of effort, who is going to pay for this? We used to pay the local dictators to keep people away but apparently that doesn't work anymore since we bombed them away.



Obviously, if that is what you derive from my posts here.



Isn't that part of the problem? That we want to have our cake, eat it and not pay for it either? And then we just blame the desperate masses who arrive here for demanding a crumb that fell off our cake.

Oh my...

04 in the morning, and I have a lot of work right now...

I will rip your post to shreds when I have time, but till then, might you want to reconsider?

Read what I wrote again with objective eyes and see if you wont answer some of those questions yourself.

[Noncommunist]

Sounds like Kad was arguing more for an Aid-Station-cum-Embassy than a military base, it's a bit much for you to make that jump.

Hi basic point is sound - importing refugees is liable to create more refugees as the fit able and useful will be most able to flee and subsequently resettle the countries in question will suffer an increasing "brain drain" which will, critically, cause their civil society to collapse along with their educational establishment. This is not a theory it's fact embodied in Somali and Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent even in countries like Pakistan and India.

The NHS runs on Indian doctors and even accounting for India's excellent education system and huge population that still means fewer doctors per capita in India. Now consider a country like Somalia, where pretty much all the professionals got out in the early nineties and settled in Europe or the US. True, some of them are now going back but everyone else has has two decades of virtually no society outside Somaliland and Puntland.

Given that many send remittances to their home country, a large diaspora in the west may enrich the developing country.

[Kadagar_AV]

Given that many send remittances to their home country, a large diaspora in the west may enrich the developing country.

Trickle-down economic works in your reality?

[Husar]

Oh my...

04 in the morning, and I have a lot of work right now...

I will rip your post to shreds when I have time, but till then, might you want to reconsider?

Read what I wrote again with objective eyes and see if you wont answer some of those questions yourself.

Right, you want to go to the African coast and just sink the boats there, won't that violate a lot of international laws unless the countries where you want to do that allow it?
And if you want to get fewer refugees, why set up outposts near locations where most of the refuges in the world are and take applications there? The number of total refugees may easily increase then.

[Fragony]

Right, you want to go to the African coast and just sink the boats there, won't that violate a lot of international laws unless the countries where you want to do that allow it?
And if you want to get fewer refugees, why set up outposts near locations where most of the refuges in the world are and take applications there? The number of total refugees may easily increase then.

International laws are already broken as they should ask for asylum in the country they arive. If they want to go to Sweden or England, Embassies are for that. It's all pretty easy, a rope. Attach to ship full of refugees, and bring them back to the coast. Give them some food and water.

[Brenus]

"Attach to ship full of refugees, and bring them back to the coast. Give them some food and water." And this resolved.... A part increasing the cost (and possibly the bonus of some sailors) to the navies involved?
Now, I can see another door for migrants. Foot. Hungary closes (what a joke!) its borders, well, you have still plenty of others entrances, even by sea, Monte Negro smuggling cigarettes with speed boats is one, or Croatia, Slovenia (through Bosnia)...
So, should we re-open shipyards? Mind you, France has 2 beautiful never used Mistral to sell, as France had to pay back the undelivered ships to Russia. And I don't see any other countries buying from a so much unreliable constructor, and no other countries rushing to buy them, we can probably use these ship in chasing migrants.
And don't forget to sent a fleet in the Black Sea.

[Viking]

So you still blame Africans?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...refugee-crisis



But hey, it's the communist Bloomberg thing, probably can't be trusted.

The article does so too, in part:

In Kenya, for example, refugees were channeled into the Dadaab camp, 60 miles from the Somali border. They are banned from working and left to live in tents supplied with food rations from the UN.

[...]

Uganda allowed waves of refugees from conflicts in Rwanda and Congo to settle in local communities, integrating service provision and encouraging the refugees to work. Only about one-third of the 385,000 refugees in the country are left in camps. That isn’t only a plus for the refugees: Merle Kreibaum of the University of Goettingen looked at data on consumption and access to services, including education in the areas where refugees settled. She suggests that local Ugandans have seen slight improvements in these measures because of the presence of refugees and the aid that has followed them.

[Fragony]

"Attach to ship full of refugees, and bring them back to the coast. Give them some food and water." And this resolved.... A part increasing the cost (and possibly the bonus of some sailors) to the navies involved?
Now, I can see another door for migrants. Foot. Hungary closes (what a joke!) its borders, well, you have still plenty of others entrances, even by sea, Monte Negro smuggling cigarettes with speed boats is one, or Croatia, Slovenia (through Bosnia)...
So, should we re-open shipyards? Mind you, France has 2 beautiful never used Mistral to sell, as France had to pay back the undelivered ships to Russia. And I don't see any other countries buying from a so much unreliable constructor, and no other countries rushing to buy them, we can probably use these ship in chasing migrants.
And don't forget to sent a fleet in the Black Sea.

You don't need warships to attach a rope, anything with a small engine can haul a lot of weight in the water, a 15 meter boat with 40pk will do fine with the boats most come with, just needs to be big enough for suplies.