Europe-Middle East-Africa Refugee Crisis General Thread

[Famous Mortimer]

If there was a flood of ultra-Orthodox Jews into Europe, I doubt people would be stoked either.

[politicus]

Meanwhile, White House spokesman Josh Earnest stated that Europe needs to solve the refugee problem itself. The US "will be glad to help Europe by giving advise" but will not take in refugees: "Europe has the capacity to solve the problem itself." He also said that European politicians shouldn't forget "that this is about human beings".

I don't think the US is under the obligation to take in refugees, but if they don't, at least I'd like the White House to refrain from taking the moral highground.

Yeah, that is hypocritical - especially with the very low level of Syrian UN refugees admitted to the US.

Then there is the matter of the indirect effects of the Iraq war on the Syrian civil war.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Meanwhile, White House spokesman Josh Earnest stated that Europe needs to solve the refugee problem itself. The US "will be glad to help Europe by giving advise" but will not take in refugees: "Europe has the capacity to solve the problem itself." He also said that European politicians shouldn't forget "that this is about human beings".

I don't think the US is under the obligation to take in refugees, but if they don't, at least I'd like the White House to refrain from taking the moral highground.

Yeah, that is hypocritical - especially with the very low level of Syrian UN refugees admitted to the US.

Then there is the matter of the indirect effects of the Iraq war on the Syrian civil war.

I agree that this is the height of hypocrisy.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm not going to say much more in this thread, because there isn't really appetite for a real discussion.

The suggestion that just because those fleeing are Muslims, somehow suggests that this means the descent of Sharia is just nuts. The point raised is that many of those fleeing Syria are educated, middle-class, skilled (ie people who would be a great boon for developed countries) and many are Christians and Kurds. Also this is a big reason why many other Islamic countries would be both unsuitable and dangerous for these people.

The "chart" below is indicative of the diseased thinking that is behind a big part of the paranoia about these people, despite all the evidence showing that it is not the extremists who are fleeing but the educated, middle-class that made pre-War Damascus one of the most remarkable cities on the planet. It's a dark day in hell when I agree with Piers Morgan, but I do. This isn't about economic opportunity, this is about fleeing a war zone.

I'm not concerned about offending people who are offended that people might think that they're racist. You can be concerned about large scale immigration without being racist, of course. But, at the same time I think we need to understand WHO these people are (outside of paranoid and uninformed views of Islamic people) and WHY they are leaving. They are fleeing death at the hands of violent Islamist extremists, not running off to spread it.

[dead0man]

They are fleeing death at the hands of violent Islamist extremists, not running off to spread it.

How far do they need to flee?  It seems they keep fleeing until they get to where they want to go, not to where it's safe.  Which makes me think it's less about fleeing and more about economics.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

They are fleeing death at the hands of violent Islamist extremists, not running off to spread it.

How far do they need to flee?  It seems they keep fleeing until they get to where they want to go, not to where it's safe.  Which makes me think it's less about fleeing and more about economics.

I get that point. I do. But look at a map of the Mediterranean - we're not talking huge distances here in many cases. I don't endorse people travelling through country after country to get to a location of their choice. It should be about the safest port, then having a discussion about appropriate settlement.

But at the same time, you and I can think like this, I can't put myself in the situation of these people and you'd have to think your logical capacity would be a little undermined. Desperation makes you do things that make no sense.

Again it comes to this issue being treated as one glob. When each situation is triggered by different things, the people are leaving for different reasons. This is part of the reason why I'm finding the conflation of all people fleeing into one mass so grating.

[ingemann]

Again it comes to this issue being treated as one glob. When each situation is triggered by different things, the people are leaving for different reasons. This is part of the reason why I'm finding the conflation of all people fleeing into one mass so grating.

This is hilarious, one side have generalised these people into one large unified faceless mass, and it's not the one side which you blame for it.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Again it comes to this issue being treated as one glob. When each situation is triggered by different things, the people are leaving for different reasons. This is part of the reason why I'm finding the conflation of all people fleeing into one mass so grating.

This is hilarious, one side have generalised these people into one large unified faceless mass, and it's not the one side which you blame for it.

The refugees are routinely described as Muslim and possessing "anti-Western" views, even when said refugees are Westernized or Christian or Kurdish. It's much easier to claim that refugees are ill-suited for liberal democracy when they're portrayed as anti-democratic or ill-liberal, which is ludicrous considering that many of their relatives died because they dared to fight against an autocrat.

i don't care about what "side" did what because this isn't a poop throwing contest. will you at least acknowledge that some refugees are perfectly suited for life in europe?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Again it comes to this issue being treated as one glob. When each situation is triggered by different things, the people are leaving for different reasons. This is part of the reason why I'm finding the conflation of all people fleeing into one mass so grating.

This is hilarious, one side have generalised these people into one large unified faceless mass, and it's not the one side which you blame for it.

Lol - right. This isn't about sides.

[traininthedistance]

Maybe I missed it, but I don't see any mention in this thread as to how Merkel and Germany have been taking the lead in welcoming refugees, and (after some hemming and hawing) being willing to frame it as the moral issue that it is.

I've had harsh words for Merkel and Germany in the past, so I just want to go on record saying that credit where it's due, and I take back many of those harsh words.  They're doing the right thing and more of Europe should follow their lead.  (And so should America!  Though we are an ocean away; the refugees we most need to take in are Central American instead.)

As for the tenor of this current flamewar: yes, we can couch things in questions of political feasibility, but as is so often the case it is hard for me to look past what just is "the moral unacceptability of the NIMBY-aspect".  That is all.

[DavidB.]

The nazi attacks on refugees have made it a lot easier for Merkel and her government to frame the issue as a moral issue. If there's one country bent on not making the same mistakes as in the past, it's Germany. This "German exceptionalism" is also the reason that other European countries won't be able to sell this frame as easily/successfully as Merkel.

In the Netherlands, for instance, the refugee debate is much more cynical. We have become such a polarized country, and every low-information, emotional opinion (on both sides of the debate) seems acceptable nowadays.

[Zanas]

Since when do people have a right to live in democracies? These people are (mostly) no political refugees, they are war refugees. Why would the authoritarian character of some states diminish their capacities to deal with migrants from the same region?

Would you happen to have heard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ? Ok, it's unbinding, but it's supposed to be an ideal towards which we should all tend. I guess everyone has forgotten that nowadays...

I'll just make a few remarks since this thread gives me nausea.

I've read a few posters talk about "we should put these refugees here, and those refugees there". Hint : you don't get to put people wherever the hell you want. They're not livestock. They're people. I guess that also seems lost on a number of people nowadays.

Also, of course these people are fleeing appalling countries and situations, and of course, once they do, they don't just stop one mile after the border. Once you flee, you ask yourself : "where could I get the best opportunity to start a new life and potentially help my relatives who've stayed at home?" So they keep on travelling until they get to financially healthy(-ish) countries such as Germany, France, the UK or Sweden. It's not that difficult to understand really. Each and every one of you would do the same, cast under the same circumstances.

Now, we European people can whine as much as we like : those people are coming, and are gonna keep on coming more and more in the coming years. There's really nothing we can do to completely stop them. So we're gonna have to deal with it, one way or another.

And finally, I'm against forced emigration. I feel that nobody should be forced to emigrate to a strange foreign country because there are no opportunities at home. Do y'all really think that a rural Tchad or Eritrea farmer is excited about making a 3000 miles trip to go live in a grim suburb of London, Paris, Hamburg, in tiny hounsing and promiscuity, working nights and day fearing detention and repatriation by the local police each waking hour ? DO YOU THINK THEY DO THIS FOR FUN ? Don't you think this Tchad or Eritrea farmer would be happier staying with his family, his friends, people who speak his language, who have the same culture, traditions ? But if he can't farm without getting in the way of dictatorship and war, or without starving, well then, yes, he's gonna say his goodbyes and reach for Europe to try and live better. A little better at least.

The whole debate here is really between a few altruists and utter egocentrics, and ultimately between a preference for hope or for fear.

[bore]

It's hardly surprising that so many refugees want travel through Hungary and go to Germany because, apart from the economic reasons, it's abundantly clear that the Hungarian government doesn't want them whereas the German government does. That the people who spend the most time complaining about the migrants travelling to Germany and through other safe countries are often the same people who would make those safe countries so miserable to stay in is a bit hypocritical.

[Helsinkian]

I've read a few posters talk about "we should put these refugees here, and those refugees there". Hint : you don't get to put people wherever the hell you want. They're not livestock. They're people. I guess that also seems lost on a number of people nowadays.

They don't get to come wherever the hell they want. States have the right to control their borders and decide who gets in and who gets to stay. A state that has lost control of its borders is essentially a failed state.

Also, of course these people are fleeing appalling countries and situations, and of course, once they do, they don't just stop one mile after the border. Once you flee, you ask yourself : "where could I get the best opportunity to start a new life and potentially help my relatives who've stayed at home?" So they keep on travelling until they get to financially healthy(-ish) countries such as Germany, France, the UK or Sweden.

These people are not refugees. They are economic migrants. And, as has been stated, they are not even the most vulnerable ones nor the poorest: those who can afford to travel to Europe are the relatively well-off people compared to their poorer countrymen who remain either in their native country or in camps in neighbouring countries.

With one billion euros we could either give a comfortable life to a thousand middle-class Syrians in Europe or we could vastly improve the lives of 10,000-20,000 poor Syrians living in Lebanon and Turkey or displaced within Syria. Which is preferable?

Mass immigration to Western countries is the least effective way of ridding the world of of suffering and poverty.

[ag]

Maybe I missed it, but I don't see any mention in this thread as to how Merkel and Germany have been taking the lead in welcoming refugees, and (after some hemming and hawing) being willing to frame it as the moral issue that it is.

I've had harsh words for Merkel and Germany in the past, so I just want to go on record saying that credit where it's due, and I take back many of those harsh words.  

I have always liked Angela Merkel. These days I increasingly admire her.

[Simfan34]

I have not seen much evidence to back up the claim that most of these refugees are part of the "educated middle-class". Indeed, I haven't seen any, aside from these fact these people could cobble together several thousand dollars to pay the smugglers, and that they had pictures lying around. I find this an interesting claim, though, and would like to see some support for it.

If governments emphasized that the migrants were mainly "middle class and educated, Kurdish, or Christian", I suspect the reception would be far warmer.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Cameron has caved... a little bit. Better than nothing I suppose. Curiously it was Yvette Cooper got the political pressure ball rolling; will that have an impact on the leadership election I wonder? Even if it is very late in the day now. But that's for another thread.

[Zanas]

I've read a few posters talk about "we should put these refugees here, and those refugees there". Hint : you don't get to put people wherever the hell you want. They're not livestock. They're people. I guess that also seems lost on a number of people nowadays.

They don't get to come wherever the hell they want. States have the right to control their borders and decide who gets in and who gets to stay. A state that has lost control of its borders is essentially a failed state.

I was speaking in terms of countries : "we should put 1,500 in Austria and 500 in Iceland" doesn't make sense if they are not willing to immigrate to these countries and rather immigrate to other ones. They will simply settle in for a small time and move on.

You say "they don't get to come wherever the hell they want". Ok. But, evidently, they get to choose whatever country they hope to immigrate to and stick to it. Doesn't mean they are entitled to enter this particular country, but they will still keep on trying nonetheless.

Also, of course these people are fleeing appalling countries and situations, and of course, once they do, they don't just stop one mile after the border. Once you flee, you ask yourself : "where could I get the best opportunity to start a new life and potentially help my relatives who've stayed at home?" So they keep on travelling until they get to financially healthy(-ish) countries such as Germany, France, the UK or Sweden.

These people are not refugees. They are economic migrants. And, as has been stated, they are not even the most vulnerable ones nor the poorest: those who can afford to travel to Europe are the relatively well-off people compared to their poorer countrymen who remain either in their native country or in camps in neighbouring countries.

With one billion euros we could either give a comfortable life to a thousand middle-class Syrians in Europe or we could vastly improve the lives of 10,000-20,000 poor Syrians living in Lebanon and Turkey or displaced within Syria. Which is preferable?

Mass immigration to Western countries is the least effective way of ridding the world of of suffering and poverty.

My point exactly, we actually agree on that. Codevelopment and a stop to corporate and agro-alimentary imperialism are the way to go. But right now we get that flow coming in. I'd rather react to it humanely than inhumanely. Not saying you, Helsinkian, are doing that, but others in this thread clearly are.

[ingemann]

If we make a quota for how the refugees are split, it means that if someone try to leave one EU country for another, they can be deported back to the first country. Deportations between different EU countries are fully legal, if people are non-EU citizens and only have a residence permits in one country, and they can't seek asylum as any EU country is seen as safe.

[Tender Branson]

Football hooligans are attacking migrants in Hungary:



Meanwhile, about 1.000 migrants disappeared from camps in Hungary and started marching towards Austria on the major highway ...



Pretty dangerous with cars passing them at 80 mph ...

[Tender Branson]

The Austrian football team today:

[ag]

The Austrian football team today:

Respect.

[Hnv1]

Football hooligans are attacking migrants in Hungary:



Meanwhile, about 1.000 migrants disappeared from camps in Hungary and started marching towards Austria on the major highway ...



Pretty dangerous with cars passing them at 80 mph ...

Jobbik and their thugs hadd been awfully quite so far

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Coming soon to a country near you:

Christian refugees murdered by Muslim migrants for praying.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Coming soon to a country near you:

Christian refugees murdered by Muslim migrants for praying.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You really are a disgusting human being