IMMIGRATION thread

[Husar]

The article does so too, in part:

It blames Kenya for not aowing the refugees to work while they are there in camps.
You are aware that they are not allowed to work in Germany for example either?

The answer to this is blindingly simple - you're going to refuse the vast majority of applications because you don't accept "refugees" you accept political Asylum Seekers. People forget that the whole point of political asylum is to protect the political opposition to a tyrannical regime, it is NOT a reason to allow mass migration.

There might be a lot of legit cases for that in these camps. And even if not, the number of applicants will robably be huge. Currently there are tens of thousands who come to Europe but in these camps there are millions. IIRC only about 5% of the refugeees come to Europe, the rest stay somewhere in Africa or the Middle East.

We should not be allowing mass migration, end of, because it hurts our citizens and our first duty is to them and not to aliens. Look, a "refugee" who escapes Somalia to Uganda and has a place in a camp in Uganda should not then be allowed to enter the UK because he already has a safe place to live, it might be crap but the reality is that if we take him in he will likely go from living off UN handouts in that camp to living off UK handouts in a Council House and that, frankly, is not a beneficial change for anyone. He might as well wait in the UN camp until Somalia is stabilised and then he can go home and help rebuild his country.

I agree that taking in half of Africa is not a solution, but at the same time, I also think that we had part in creating the problem in the first place. And not only because France and Britain wanted to bomb Gaddhafi. African and Middle Eastern countries already house the vast majority of the millions of refugees from their areas, sometimes with UN help and their infrastructure is neither as strong as that of European countries, nor are they even responsible for the problems that made people flee in many cases. The question is, why can we bomb other countries and then force yet other countries to pick up all the refugees while we take none? Most of the refugees are fleeing temporarily and I never said we should give them all citizenship. What we could do is take some of them temporarily, just like countries in the area do, and stop screwing up other countries.
Yes, maybe Gaddhafi was an evil dictator, but we hardly helped that by supporting him for years. Now we bombed him and still complain about the result. Maybe it's this application of half-done "solutions" that just increases the amount of problems.
Who upplied weapons to Syrian islamist rebels and whose weapons and political vacuum did ISIS use to begin its reign of terror? Who originally trained Al Queda o fight the other evil soviets? The west keeps having the strangest alliances for the weirdest gains, lets companies go rouge in these regions in ways that do not help the locals build anything at all and the response is to blame the locals for not having beaten colonialization and the US hegemony in the first place or something like that. I'm saying that stance it very weird according to modern morals. If you're a Darwinist it might be "fair", but then you also shouldn't mind people dying in the Mediterranean or bankers doing what they want (which probably includes ruining African countries even further).

I gave you fair warning.

Your view of refugees actually say a LOT about the ideas a socialistic german might have.

Your view:
There is a war here - better move to Europe and get a better life.

It is a view I can understand from their perspective, but as I said to PVC, I do not think taking in everyone who wants to be a football player for Manchester United is a viable solution to African problems in the long term. Your understanding of my view is questionable at best.

My view:
There is a war here - better get the **** out of this location and plead for my life.

Is that your view because you live in a safe country, grew up in a safe country and do not want so many refugees here?
Would you also have that view if you grew up in Africa, had no education, no job, no perspective for the future in your country and no idea how to change it AND grew up learning tht the only one who looks out for you is yourself and maybe your family?
It just doesn't seem genuine to say that you would act differently given that you have a completely different background compared to these people. And neither you nor they chose to be born in the place you were born.

People who avoid refugee camps and straight want to get here, most often do it not because their life is at risk, but because they can afford smugglers to take them to the "Heavenly West".

And people who undercut the prices of African farmers do it to make profit, not because they actually want to help Africa.
People who built leaking oil rigs in Africa do it because of "heavenly profits", not because their life depends on it or because they can't afford to repair the leaks. And the people who gave weapons to islamists also didn't quite do it because their lives depended on it. Colonialization didn't happen because we had to, but because we wanted "heavenly profits" from all the resources and slavery and so on. Many profitable businesses with oil, diamonds and other resources are still run by Europeans and the African countries get almost nothing from the profits. I think Viking was suggesting that the Africans just murder anyone who tries to prevent them from throwing out these companies and taking over their mines and oil rigs. What do you think? I honestly think it's a hard decision but we certainly aren't helping them by continuing to run these operations while we take in most of the profit.

YOUR position only comfort the ones who pay criminal smugglers who set them on sinking ships, can you get that?

What position of mine? Are you capable of explaining that?

As to who will turn around the "boats"... Read what I already wrote? European nations have to help out to secure the coasts, as it IS a shared problem.

Well, why don't they? Didn't Italy already complain and beg for help several times? And shouldn't e drop the EU anyway and just let each country go alone? Why is it Britain's problem if Italy is overrun by Africans? If all the borders were closed, they wouldn't even come to the channel. Why do the stupid Italians try to offload their problems on other countries? They should fix their neighbors if they have a problem, just like Kenya should. No?

Exactly, see above.

Sorry, but that line of you is just... Less than I expect when speaking to a fellow Org.

So are your condescending replies. You see, I gave PVC a much nicer reply because he gives respectful replies as well. Telling me I'm an idiot and then repeating what I already gave replies to is not a proper way to debate an issue.

YES we should sink the ships in the harbour.
YES we should drag the ships who make it to open sea back.

Why?

A) To make sure people don't die in masses in faulty crafts as is how it is today.
B) To strengthen the point that ILLEGAL immigration is, well, illegal and will not be submitted.

Kenya could close the UN camps with the same argument, but refugees are not illegal immigrants. Noone demanded that we give all of them ctizenship. It's almost as though you are fighting windmills.

They have found other ways, that is why Eastern European countries have started to build HUGE fences with barbed wire and all...

I don't think this is positive... We HAVE to just automatically send them back if they come here illegally. If you are against THAT you are efficiently pro:

A) Illegal immigrants.
B) Immigrants risking their life with bad odds just to get here.

Again, windmills. We are causing maybe 40% of the problems in Africa and the Middle East, yet are unwilling to temporarily house even 5% of the refugees. And you keep referring to Africans when the vast majority of refugees who arreive in Italy are from Syria and Afghanistan. "We" delivered weapons to Syrian rebels and I suppose we have nothing to do with why people flee from Afghanistan.

The blood will be on your hands, Mr. Good Guy.

If it's as real as the giants you're fighting then it's probably not a big problem.

I see it more as neither wanting chaos-cultures to influence my nation... Neither do I like that humans are dying because of shitty smugglers trying to bring them here.

I would like some god damned ORDER in the whole thingy, you might appreciate that at least.

There we go again.
As for the order, how about we stop disrupting that? Once we stop bombing these countries or paying their dictators to afford a military that allows them to stay in power and support our companies in bleeding the countries dry, maybe we can begin blaming the problems entirely on them. But at the moment we want to bomb our cake and eat it, too.