Europe-Middle East-Africa Refugee Crisis General Thread

[ag]

or deliberately misunderstanding what I write.

I am afraid, I am simply understanding you too well for your own comfort.

[ag]

so we can start having these factual debates.

Factual debates about what? What is it exactly that you would like to debate? I have asked you that very question. I hoped that the answer would be "what can we do to minimize death and suffering among the migrants?". Perhaps, subject to realistic political constraints - no problem there. But I hoped that it is minimizing death and suffering that would be the subject you would want to discuss. Ufortunately, that is, in fact, something you want to avoid discussing.

[dead0man]

You might want to discuss a change of meds with your doc.  These, aren't, working.

[Simfan34]

I am not trying to get your sympathy. You as a person are completely irrelevant in this discussion. I am trying to explain the political realities in Europe and what I think will happen.

I will tell you what will happen. WWIII will happen. And sooner than you expect. Pandering to racial resentment rarely ends well.

And what shall this war be? Eritrea and Syria vs the EU?

[ag]

I am not trying to get your sympathy. You as a person are completely irrelevant in this discussion. I am trying to explain the political realities in Europe and what I think will happen.

I will tell you what will happen. WWIII will happen. And sooner than you expect. Pandering to racial resentment rarely ends well.

And what shall this war be? Eritrea and Syria vs the EU?

As usual: Germany invading Denmark, of course.

I may be jesting here, but it is sad jesting.

[ag]

You might want to discuss a change of meds with your doc.  These, aren't, working.

I will think about it

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I am not trying to get your sympathy. You as a person are completely irrelevant in this discussion. I am trying to explain the political realities in Europe and what I think will happen.

I will tell you what will happen. WWIII will happen. And sooner than you expect. Pandering to racial resentment rarely ends well.

And what shall this war be? Eritrea and Syria vs the EU?

As usual: Germany invading Denmark, of course.

Why? So they can send the refugees on the vast unpeopled expanses of Greenland?

[ag]

I am not trying to get your sympathy. You as a person are completely irrelevant in this discussion. I am trying to explain the political realities in Europe and what I think will happen.

I will tell you what will happen. WWIII will happen. And sooner than you expect. Pandering to racial resentment rarely ends well.

And what shall this war be? Eritrea and Syria vs the EU?

As usual: Germany invading Denmark, of course.

Why? So they can send the refugees on the vast unpeopled expanses of Greenland?

again, I am jesting. But rize of nationalist parties may tear down th EU, and...

[Simfan34]

I am not trying to get your sympathy. You as a person are completely irrelevant in this discussion. I am trying to explain the political realities in Europe and what I think will happen.

I will tell you what will happen. WWIII will happen. And sooner than you expect. Pandering to racial resentment rarely ends well.

And what shall this war be? Eritrea and Syria vs the EU?

As usual: Germany invading Denmark, of course.

I may be jesting here, but it is sad jesting.

Surely France and Poland are "the usual", no?

[Helsinkian]

But rize of nationalist parties may tear down th EU

God, I hope so. The EU is a failed project. And the talk of the EU being responsible for maintaining peace in (Western) Europe is mostly non-sense; NATO gets the credit for that.

[ag]

But rize of nationalist parties may tear down th EU

NATO gets the credit for that.

And, of course, Finland is NOT a NATO member

[Хahar 🤔]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

[ag]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Am I? If this is the consensus, I will stop.

[politicus]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Why?

[politicus]

so we can start having these factual debates.

Factual debates about what? What is it exactly that you would like to debate? I have asked you that very question. I hoped that the answer would be "what can we do to minimize death and suffering among the migrants?". Perhaps, subject to realistic political constraints - no problem there. But I hoped that it is minimizing death and suffering that would be the subject you would want to discuss. Ufortunately, that is, in fact, something you want to avoid discussing.

No, I have tried repeatedly to move this discussion towards some of the changes in the international refugee system that will help it survive and function in the future. And help as many as possible - not just those that can pay a human trafficker.

(and I have also done so in my thread about the role of the West in the refugee crisis on Political Debate, where I have presented some basic dilemmas)

But a realistic debate must start with accepting the premise the European countries are not interested in mass immigration. So other solutions needs to be crafted - incl. safe areas/new towns in Africa (and a development plan for them), a detachment of payment for refugees and taking refugees, an internationally coordinated distribution of refugees with a view to where different groups of refugees have a chance of being integrated and possibly also internationally enforced regime changes in places like Eritrea with stabilization/rebuilding efforts afterwards.

You seems only to be interested in blaming Europeans for not wanting immigration using all sorts of more or less far fetched historical arguments. This blame game leads us nowhere.

Answering this with "I want open borders" is like replying to a thread about income equality with arguing for the workers taking over the means of production. You can have that principled opinion, but it has little relevance IRL.

[Cassius]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Why?

Because it seems to be Xahar's learned opinion that Europeans have nothing to contribute on any subject unless it is perfect concordance with the wishes of those of, ah, entirely or partially non-European heritage, whatever those wishes might be. He's made this rather clear on numerous occasions, and, I guess, he's entitled to that view.

[politicus]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Why?

Because it seems to be Xahar's learned opinion that Europeans have nothing to contribute on any subject unless it is perfect concordance with the wishes of those of, ah, entirely or partially non-European heritage, whatever those wishes might be. He's made this rather clear on numerous occasions, and, I guess, he's entitled to that view.

I know that, but even if you agree 100% with ag I fail to see how you can enjoy his wild detours and deliberate misunderstandings of opposing arguments and facts. It is a style that forces his opponents to keep repeating arguments over and over again, which ruins any meaningful exchange of ideas. He is generally among the least funny and most tiresome trolls here (so even if you enjoy "funny" in this tragic context, which I do not, there is little to gain).

[politicus]

The short term solutions for the refugees already in Europe deals with the same kind of issues: A disentangling of payment and hosting combined with a solidary distribution of expenses, so countries do not speculate in passing on the burden to their neighbors + a more even distribution that moves refugees from countries with a high refugee pressure to countries with (relatively) few asylum seekers. Many of these are also in Eastern Europe with lower costs of living, which will make the over all financial burden lower.

We also need a program for vulnerable groups such as gays, single women with children, torture victims and Christian converts (to name a few) securing them an easier path to integration and moving them out of camps.

[Simfan34]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Why?

Because it seems to be Xahar's learned opinion that Europeans have nothing to contribute on any subject unless it is perfect concordance with the wishes of those of, ah, entirely or partially non-European heritage, whatever those wishes might be. He's made this rather clear on numerous occasions, and, I guess, he's entitled to that view.

Is it? I've known Xahar for many years, but I've never drawn that conclusion.

[Tender Branson]

Even a seriously broken clock like Austrian Chancellor Faymann (Social Dems) is right once:

Faymann today said he favours a EU-wide asylum quota plan that basically forces non-complying countries like Poland, Portugal, Baltics etc. (which are taking in almost no asylum seekers) to take them, or face a cut in their EU-net receipts. The big "net payers" like Germany, Austria, Sweden etc. (who are also taking the lion's share of asylum seekers) would simply stop payments to the net receivers who are lazy in taking in the refugees. Apparently, these countries only think the EU's good if they receive money from us, but not when it comes to taking responsibility. Time to apply the thumbscrews on these countries and cut EU funding for them ...

[Beezer]

Yeah, that's going to work wonders for European solidarity. Moreover, I don't see why Poland or Portugal should be forced to share a burden that is to a certain extent caused by the open door policy of German and Swedish politicians. If these people see refugees as an "opportunity" they should be more than happy about keeping all of them in the country.

[ag]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Why?

Because it seems to be Xahar's learned opinion that Europeans have nothing to contribute on any subject unless it is perfect concordance with the wishes of those of, ah, entirely or partially non-European heritage, whatever those wishes might be. He's made this rather clear on numerous occasions, and, I guess, he's entitled to that view.

I know that, but even if you agree 100% with ag I fail to see how you can enjoy his wild detours and deliberate misunderstandings of opposing arguments and facts. It is a style that forces his opponents to keep repeating arguments over and over again, which ruins any meaningful exchange of ideas. He is generally among the least funny and most tiresome trolls here (so even if you enjoy "funny" in this tragic context, which I do not, there is little to gain).

Well, at least you acknowledge I am not being funny.

You, of course, believe my "detours" are beside the point. The problem is, your arguments are not so much "opposing" from where I come at it, as equally beside the point. I do not misunderstand you: I understand every single word you are saying - and find it awful. I know that you mean what you are saying, and that it is somehow important to you: hence, I do not claim you are trolling. I do find a lot, of what you are saying, quite immoral.

[Cassius]

I find the notion that ag is ruining any thread incredible.

Why?

Because it seems to be Xahar's learned opinion that Europeans have nothing to contribute on any subject unless it is perfect concordance with the wishes of those of, ah, entirely or partially non-European heritage, whatever those wishes might be. He's made this rather clear on numerous occasions, and, I guess, he's entitled to that view.

Is it? I've known Xahar for many years, but I've never drawn that conclusion.

Well, that's my impression, but then I hardly know him so...

[Jacobtm]

Hmmm why would it possibly be that these countries don't want any refugees?

[Helsinkian]

Even a seriously broken clock like Austrian Chancellor Faymann (Social Dems) is right once:

Faymann today said he favours a EU-wide asylum quota plan that basically forces non-complying countries like Poland, Portugal, Baltics etc. (which are taking in almost no asylum seekers) to take them, or face a cut in their EU-net receipts. The big "net payers" like Germany, Austria, Sweden etc. (who are also taking the lion's share of asylum seekers) would simply stop payments to the net receivers who are lazy in taking in the refugees. Apparently, these countries only think the EU's good if they receive money from us, but not when it comes to taking responsibility. Time to apply the thumbscrews on these countries and cut EU funding for them ...

Given a choice between accepting thousands of asylum seekers and losing a certain amount of € in subsidies, I am sure plenty of people would choose the latter.