Refugee crisis

[preCRT]

What to do about the crisis of refugees flooding out of Syria & Afghanistan currently trying to flood into western Europe?

I can't blame anyone for trying to escape the horrors of living under ISIS control. Reminds me of Jews trying to escape the Nazis in the 1930s, many turned back only to die in Hitler's camps.

 

[KMFJD]

What to do about the crisis of refugees flooding out of Syria & Afghanistan currently trying to flood into western Europe?

I can't blame anyone for trying to escape the horrors of living under ISIS control. Reminds me of Jews trying to escape the Nazis in the 1930s, many turned back only to die in Hitler's camps.

reminds me of people starving yet demanding the finest steak dinner while turning away a cheap free hamburger

 

[Fanatical Meat]

EU problem, not a US problem.
I frequently wonder why Europe doesn't put much effort into what's happening in Syria.

 

[flexy]

I was talking to my parents back in Germany today.

She told me some stuff. (I honestly wasn't all up-to-date with news back home).
Right now there are thousands of refugees arriving in Munich (and probably many other German/European cities also). She told me they donated clothes and actually drove down there for donations since (according to their words) "those people don't have anything but what they wear".

She also told me they recently met a group of Syrians on a train, they were here for 2 months now and at least a couple of them "spoke perfect, accent-free German". She was totally baffled about that.

(I guess that the German gvt sends them to German classes to increase their job chances, which sort-of makes sense).

She also told me they met Syrian refugees who only after a couple of years here actually finished school here with the "Mittlere Reife" GCSE secondary school certificate. (Which is like something between a GED and a degree). She told me that according from her impression, the refugees they met were all very eager to learn. (I am just telling you what she told me, not that this can be taken as a general description for all refugees, I am sure not)

So...now back to your question: The best thing we can do is indeed to educate them, have them learn German (or English or whatsoever), have them go to school and become "normal" people like anyone else, rather than keep them uneducated, unable to speak the language...and living off welfare. How about that?

 

[feralkid]

^^^Don't tell Trump.

 

[StinkyPinky]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...est-station-prompts-angry-clashes-police.html


Out of control.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

I was talking to my parents back in Germany today.

She told me some stuff. (I honestly wasn't all up-to-date with news back home).
Right now there are thousands of refugees arriving in Munich (and probably many other German/European cities also). She told me they donated clothes and actually drove down there for donations since (according to their words) "those people don't have anything but what they wear".

She also told me they recently met a group of Syrians on a train, they were here for 2 months now and at least a couple of them "spoke perfect, accent-free German". She was totally baffled about that.

(I guess that the German gvt sends them to German classes to increase their job chances, which sort-of makes sense).

She also told me they met Syrian refugees who only after a couple of years here actually finished school here with the "Mittlere Reife" GCSE secondary school certificate. (Which is like something between a GED and a degree). She told me that according from her impression, the refugees they met were all very eager to learn. (I am just telling you what she told me, not that this can be taken as a general description for all refugees, I am sure not)

So...now back to your question: The best thing we can do is indeed to educate them, have them learn German (or English or whatsoever), have them go to school and become "normal" people like anyone else, rather than keep them uneducated, unable to speak the language...and living off welfare. How about that?

Many of the refugees are highly educated. Many speak at least English, and often more Western languages. The problem is the number of refugees being so high by now that the countries around Syria cannot handle it. In Lebanon the Syrian refugees currently make up over 25% of the population now for example.

 

[John Connor]

^^^Don't tell Trump.

I didn't know Mexihole was war-torn?

 

[Harabec]

Many of the refugees are highly educated. Many speak at least English, and often more Western languages. The problem is the number of refugees being so high by now that the countries around Syria cannot handle it. In Lebanon the Syrian refugees currently make up over 25% of the population now for example.

Syrian refugees may be - they come from a place that used to have relatively modern culture.
The tens of thousands coming from Africa - how are you going to integrate someone 100-300 years behind your own culture?
IMO it'll be a total mess in a couple of years. Europe may be changing into a completely different entity.

 

[Murloc]

This issue was not born just now, the biggest jump was last year when first Italy and then European countries decided that the boats should be rescued right out of libyan territorial waters because of a few sinking, thus causing an enormous increase of illegal immigration through increasingly more dangerous boats (actually dinghies) with the final result of even more people dying in absolute numbers. Actually the real origin is the destruction of the Libyan state since the problem was of a controlled size before then.
The Syrians suddendly flooding through Kos island is only an added problem on top.

Problem
- welfare shopping: asylum seekers want to ask asylum in Germany because they have the best chances there, not because other countries in the Dublin zone are unsafe.
- acceptance rates: different countries have different acceptance rates, so asylum seekers pick the country with the highest rates for people from their country (not a problem for Syrians).
- abuse of asylum: economic illegal immigrants (kinda like your Mexicans) ask for asylum and make up stuff (e.g. claim they're syrian or that they're politically persecuted in countries not at war) just to live a few months on the dole during processing, maybe slinging drugs in the meanwhile and to get a chance to disappear and live as an illegal in the country (in case the request doesn't get accepted).
- the Dublin system: if you get registered/ask for asylum in one country in the dublin zone, if you run to another (richer) country and ask for asylum there you will be sent back to the first country. So nobody wants to be registered in Greece, or Hungary. That's why there's this mess in front of the train station.
- Germany and Sweden are getting too many asylum seekers, Eastern Europe likes the fact that nobody asks for asylum in their countries.


Hungary is respecting the EU rules, Germany is not because they decided that they're not going to send any syrians back to Greece. This caused the current mess in Hungary.
So now everybody on the Balkan route is suddenly a syrian.

An additional note: most on the balkan route are legitimate refugees. But they were in Turkey before, which is a safe country. They're asking for asylum in Europe because of the better long-term chances. There is nothing that can be done about this, we can forget about a worldwide refugee distribution system until there is a world government.
The point is, these people would have not left Syria if there wasn't a war.
On the balkan route there also are people from the indian subcontinent (mostly bangla), these are not legitimate, but the bangladeshi have a very organized network for illegal work so they don't care about getting asylum, just about getting in.
Those who arrive in Italy are in many cases not legitimate. West Africans are not legitimate asylum seekers and often commit crimes.
Eastern Africans also move for economic reasons, but Eritrea punishes emigration without permission as desertion so they cannot be sent back as that's a serious violation of freedom. Checkmate.

Solution
Dublin-wide asylum application in the first country of arrival with uniform acceptance rules, common-funded processing centres in those same countries, quickened processing so as to immediately send to expulsion centres in airports the abusers, then redistribution of the asylees and refugees to every country according to the population. Refugees should be sent back once the war has ended unless they're a net contributor (i.e. they don't need welfare).
Other kinds of asylees are probably going to stay forever.
If you are assigned to a country, you have to stay there and you will only be able to collect welfare and get housing if you stay there.
If there's too many people and the time needed for processing can't be reduced, also asylum seekers and the processing centres should be distributed equally among the countries.

Additional advantage: the chance of ending up in a poorer European country and not being able to choose it in any way by not getting identified by police will decrease the allure of illegal immigration for africans.
So doing this will help Europe long-term.

Political obstacles

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Syrian refugees may be - they come from a place that used to have relatively modern culture.
The tens of thousands coming from Africa - how are you going to integrate someone 100-300 years behind your own culture?
IMO it'll be a total mess in a couple of years. Europe may be changing into a completely different entity.

Many of those coming from East- and Central-Africa aren't refugees running from war and terror, they are hoping to get rich. I wouldn't mind those being screened much more strictly and most of them being shipped back. There's still some that indeed fear for their lives if they return to their home countries, but many of them could return without any problems. And many wouldn't need to run if you'd protect the local communities.

With Syrians it's much harder to protect them locally, as they have a dictator on one site and IS on the other. Setting up more camps in the surrounding countries won't work as there simply is a lack of space, jobs and resources, and setting up camps in Syria is not safe for them unless you slap a massive security force there. Putting 50 soldiers in a town means 50 more beheadings by IS or them having to stand by and watch while Assad bombs the civilians.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

This issue was not born just now, the biggest jump was last year when first Italy and then European countries decided that the boats should be rescued right out of libyan territorial waters because of a few sinking, thus causing an enormous increase of illegal immigration through increasingly more dangerous boats (actually dinghies) with the final result of even more people dying in absolute numbers. Actually the real origin is the destruction of the Libyan state since the problem was of a controlled size before then.
The Syrians suddendly flooding through Kos island is only an added problem on top.

Problem
- welfare shopping: asylum seekers want to ask asylum in Germany because they have the best chances there, not because other countries in the Dublin zone are unsafe.
- acceptance rates: different countries have different acceptance rates, so asylum seekers pick the country with the highest rates for people from their country (not a problem for Syrians).
- abuse of asylum: economic illegal immigrants (kinda like your Mexicans) ask for asylum and make up stuff (e.g. claim they're syrian or that they're politically persecuted in countries not at war) just to live a few months on the dole during processing, maybe slinging drugs in the meanwhile and to get a chance to disappear and live as an illegal in the country (in case the request doesn't get accepted).
- the Dublin system: if you get registered/ask for asylum in one country in the dublin zone, if you run to another (richer) country and ask for asylum there you will be sent back to the first country. So nobody wants to be registered in Greece, or Hungary. That's why there's this mess in front of the train station.
- Germany and Sweden are getting too many asylum seekers, Eastern Europe likes the fact that nobody asks for asylum in their countries.


Hungary is respecting the EU rules, Germany is not because they decided that they're not going to send any syrians back to Greece. This caused the current mess in Hungary.
So now everybody on the Balkan route is suddenly a syrian.

An additional note: most on the balkan route are legitimate refugees. But they were in Turkey before, which is a safe country. They're asking for asylum in Europe because of the better long-term chances. There is nothing that can be done about this, we can forget about a worldwide refugee distribution system until there is a world government.
The point is, these people would have not left Syria if there wasn't a war.
On the balkan route there also are people from the indian subcontinent (mostly bangla), these are not legitimate, but the bangladeshi have a very organized network for illegal work so they don't care about getting asylum, just about getting in.
Those who arrive in Italy are in many cases not legitimate. West Africans are not legitimate asylum seekers and often commit crimes.
Eastern Africans also move for economic reasons, but Eritrea punishes emigration without permission as desertion so they cannot be sent back as that's a serious violation of freedom. Checkmate.

Solution
Dublin-wide asylum application in the first country of arrival with uniform acceptance rules, common-funded processing centres in those same countries, quickened processing so as to immediately send to expulsion centres in airports the abusers, then redistribution of the asylees and refugees to every country according to the population. Refugees should be sent back once the war has ended unless they're a net contributor (i.e. they don't need welfare).
Other kinds of asylees are probably going to stay forever.
If you are assigned to a country, you have to stay there and you will only be able to collect welfare and get housing if you stay there.
If there's too many people and the time needed for processing can't be reduced, also asylum seekers and the processing centres should be distributed equally among the countries.

Additional advantage: the chance of ending up in a poorer European country and not being able to choose it in any way by not getting identified by police will decrease the allure of illegal immigration for africans.
So doing this will help Europe long-term.

Political obstacles

Thank you I learned something today.
In your opinion why doesn't the EU take developments in Syria more serious?

 

[Murloc]

Thank you I learned something today.
In your opinion why doesn't the EU take developments in Syria more serious?

Europeans take Syria and Libya very seriously given all the terrorist attacks in France, the presence of the islamic state and al qaeda, and their geographic vicinity.

The EU can't do anything more than what it's doing since it's not a state, neutral countries are part of it too and there is no unified foreign policy.
NATO is the only real pan-european security organ.

France (typically hawkish, and the one that started the mess in Libya too, although to their credit they have had a very stabilizing role in the Sahel in recent years) has hopefully learned from Libya that destroying the dictator and his police state just makes it worse. They were about to bomb Assad too before Putin came up with his plan to destroy Assad's chemical weapons.
The other NATO countries in the EU sure did learn their lesson, Germany didn't even want to bomb Libya in the first place.

NATO countries also learned in Iraq that occupying a country for X years doesn't make islamism less attractive, nor does it help building a state able to stand on its own legs when the country is divided (without which there would have been no civil war in the first place, but either a toppling or a swift repression, e.g. Egypt and Tunisia).

So all European countries did in the end was preventing the IS from taking over Syrian Kurdistan by sending rocket launchers and training fighters, coupled with the US providing air support.
Bombing the IS is already being done by the US and the Gulf countries.

What else can you do really?

Refugees cost less money and cause less deaths and injuries than boots on the ground, plus boots on the ground have been proven ineffective. So many casualties in Fallujah, and it's now in the hands of the IS.

 

[Nebor]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...est-station-prompts-angry-clashes-police.html


Out of control.

All you need to know about these "refugees" is that being safe in Serbia or Hungary isn't enough for them. They want to get to the UK or Germany or Scandinavia where they'll get the most handouts from the government.

Maybe after Trump builds our wall he can come up with some sort of EuroWall. By then I think Europe will be on an unalterable demographic course though. When you take a wealthy civilization with low birth rates, many already below replacement rates, and add in hundreds of thousands of immigrants that exist on the largesse of the wealthy government and have birth rates 5x higher than the original population, it doesn't take long for substantial demographic change to happen. And before you know it the same problems that their parents fled are now happening in their new home.

 

[Nebor]

Europeans take Syria and Libya very seriously given all the terrorist attacks in France, the presence of the islamic state and al qaeda, and their geographic vicinity.

The EU can't do anything more than what it's doing since it's not a state, neutral countries are part of it too and there is no unified foreign policy.
NATO is the only real pan-european security organ.

France (typically hawkish, and the one that started the mess in Libya too, although to their credit they have had a very stabilizing role in the Sahel in recent years) has hopefully learned from Libya that destroying the dictator and his police state just makes it worse. They were about to bomb Assad too before Putin came up with his plan to destroy Assad's chemical weapons.
The other NATO countries in the EU sure did learn their lesson, Germany didn't even want to bomb Libya in the first place.

NATO countries also learned in Iraq that occupying a country for X years doesn't make islamism less attractive, nor does it help building a state able to stand on its own legs when the country is divided (without which there would have been no civil war in the first place, but either a toppling or a swift repression, e.g. Egypt and Tunisia).

So all European countries did in the end was preventing the IS from taking over Syrian Kurdistan by sending rocket launchers and training fighters, coupled with the US providing air support.
Bombing the IS is already being done by the US and the Gulf countries.

What else can you do really?

Refugees cost less money and cause less deaths and injuries than boots on the ground, plus boots on the ground have been proven ineffective. So many casualties in Fallujah, and it's now in the hands of the IS.

It's a culture that can only function under a dictator. The best we can hope for is a dictator that plays ball with the Western world. Getting rid of the dictator just destabilizes the entire system, causes hundreds of thousands of deaths and creates a flood of refugees that think the West is there to help them.

 

[MongGrel]

I didn't know Mexihole was war-torn?

Really ?

 

[alcoholbob]

What to do about the crisis of refugees flooding out of Syria & Afghanistan currently trying to flood into western Europe?

I can't blame anyone for trying to escape the horrors of living under ISIS control. Reminds me of Jews trying to escape the Nazis in the 1930s, many turned back only to die in Hitler's camps.

Except this time the countries where people are escaping to are the same governments that are instigating conditions that led the the migrations. So ultimately the people of Europe will have to decide whether they like the consequences of continuing to fund regional uprisings and proxy wars.

 

[alcoholbob]

France (typically hawkish, and the one that started the mess in Libya too, although to their credit they have had a very stabilizing role in the Sahel in recent years) has hopefully learned from Libya that destroying the dictator and his police state just makes it worse.

Mess in Libya indeed. The irony is Libya used to have a very strict border and Gadaffi used ask the Europeans for financial help due the huge cost of keeping migrants trying to cross Libya's border and enter Europe. NATO toppled Gaddaffi and now hundreds of thousands of migrants are pouring through Libya into Europe and its cushy health and welfare benefits.

Western Europe has only itself to blame for its eventual decline and collapse.

 

[pcgeek11]

What to do about the crisis of refugees flooding out of Syria & Afghanistan currently trying to flood into western Europe?

I can't blame anyone for trying to escape the horrors of living under ISIS control. Reminds me of Jews trying to escape the Nazis in the 1930s, many turned back only to die in Hitler's camps.

Maybe Western Europe will get up off of their collective @sses and do something about ISIS.

Myself as an American at this point don't care about them or their issues.

 

[pcgeek11]

I was talking to my parents back in Germany today.

She told me some stuff. (I honestly wasn't all up-to-date with news back home).
Right now there are thousands of refugees arriving in Munich (and probably many other German/European cities also). She told me they donated clothes and actually drove down there for donations since (according to their words) "those people don't have anything but what they wear".

She also told me they recently met a group of Syrians on a train, they were here for 2 months now and at least a couple of them "spoke perfect, accent-free German". She was totally baffled about that.

(I guess that the German gvt sends them to German classes to increase their job chances, which sort-of makes sense).

She also told me they met Syrian refugees who only after a couple of years here actually finished school here with the "Mittlere Reife" GCSE secondary school certificate. (Which is like something between a GED and a degree). She told me that according from her impression, the refugees they met were all very eager to learn. (I am just telling you what she told me, not that this can be taken as a general description for all refugees, I am sure not)

So...now back to your question: The best thing we can do is indeed to educate them, have them learn German (or English or whatsoever), have them go to school and become "normal" people like anyone else, rather than keep them uneducated, unable to speak the language...and living off welfare. How about that?

For one thing Nobody can learn "spoke perfect, accent-free German" in a few months. Maybe a few years.

 

[piasabird]

This is what happens when you have free and open borders.

 

[John Connor]

Maybe Obozo should have not pulled troops from Iraq so ISIS can fill the vacuum. The "red line?" That was crossed over a year ago and look what this far-left asshole of a President is doing. Playing golf, renaming a mountain and going on a TV show. I bet he takes his selfie stick.

Bottom line, this country is what makes the world go round. And this President lacks balls on the global stage and things are going to hell in a hand basket right quick. 2016 couldn't come quick enough and God willing the sheep don't vote with their head up their ass this time around. Just look at this Iran BS? OMFG!

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

All you need to know about these "refugees" is that being safe in Serbia or Hungary isn't enough for them. They want to get to the UK or Germany or Scandinavia where they'll get the most handouts from the government.

Correction, all you WANT to know if you're a right-wing extremist is what's above.

If you request asylum anywhere in the EU you cannot request it in any other country anymore. That country will process it, and not to EU standards but to whatever they want to do. Hungary declined 95% of all asylum requests last year, which means there'd be an extremely high chance they'd be deported back to Syria, where they would be killed by either Assad or IS. Serbia is more right-wing than even Nazi Germany was. Many Serbians see themselves as 'Ubermenschen', and everyone else (and especially Muslims) as Untermenschen. So why would you want to risk moving your kids to a country where they'll be about as safe as in between IS, Al Qaida or the Tea Party?

Economic refugees choose to go somewhere to gain wealth. They weren't in any risk, they just wanted to improve their lives by going somewhere else. I have no problem sending those back where they came from.

War refugees don't choose for war, they are forced to flee in order to survive. They should be given a safe shelter.

Oh, I'm also all for flying all the facists that whine about refugees to Syria so they can trade houses with them.

 

[Nebor]

Correction, all you WANT to know if you're a right-wing extremist is what's above.

If you request asylum anywhere in the EU you cannot request it in any other country anymore. That country will process it, and not to EU standards but to whatever they want to do. Hungary declined 95% of all asylum requests last year, which means there'd be an extremely high chance they'd be deported back to Syria, where they would be killed by either Assad or IS. Serbia is more right-wing than even Nazi Germany was. Many Serbians see themselves as 'Ubermenschen', and everyone else (and especially Muslims) as Untermenschen. So why would you want to risk moving your kids to a country where they'll be about as safe as in between IS, Al Qaida or the Tea Party?

Economic refugees choose to go somewhere to gain wealth. They weren't in any risk, they just wanted to improve their lives by going somewhere else. I have no problem sending those back where they came from.

War refugees don't choose for war, they are forced to flee in order to survive. They should be given a safe shelter.

Oh, I'm also all for flying all the facists that whine about refugees to Syria so they can trade houses with them.

I don't care what kind of refugees they are, they don't belong in Europe.

I've sat on visa boards before where we had to review the case files of Afghans and vote on whether they should be given a visa to come to America. Denied all of them. Why in the world would I want to make America more like Afghanistan? Same goes for Syrians in Europe. Their fucked up religion is the cause of their problems, yet they have the nerve to show up begging on europes doorstep with hijabs on? Fuck 'em. They had great free healthcare under Assad, but they still supported a bunch of Islamist rebels.

 

[Murloc]

Mess in Libya indeed. The irony is Libya used to have a very strict border and Gadaffi used ask the Europeans for financial help due the huge cost of keeping migrants trying to cross Libya's border and enter Europe. NATO toppled Gaddaffi and now hundreds of thousands of migrants are pouring through Libya into Europe and its cushy health and welfare benefits.

Western Europe has only itself to blame for its eventual decline and collapse.

France began and the US and the NATO lackeys followed, and in the end the US was the one that spent the biggest portion of money on that bombing campaign.

Germany refused to participate.

And yet who's taking half of the total refugees in Europe now?

Here's how much money you wasted:
United Kingdom $336–$1,500 million USD
United States $896 – US$1,100 million
France $450 million EUR

NATO simply got tricked by the frog-eaters.
Also the UN mandate said no-fly zone, and yet tank columns were being bombed.

Don't mistake Gaddafi for a good guy, his requests for money were pure and simple extortion.

Maybe Western Europe will get up off of their collective @sses and do something about ISIS.

Myself as an American at this point don't care about them or their issues.

Did the conquest of Fallujah serve ANY purpose at all in a 10-year perspective?
Why would you want to repeat that if it doesn't fix the problem?

The price of military action is so high that it's better to just keep the refugees.

Also you can bomb the IS to smitheerens but then there's this list of other guys that need to be killed:
Ahrar ash-Sham
al-Nusra Front
Liwa al-Haqq
Sham Legion
Jund al-Aqsa
Jaysh al-Sunna
Ajnad al-Sham

And then the question is who's going to replace them given that christians and "moderates" have already escaped.

All you need to know about these "refugees" is that being safe in Serbia or Hungary isn't enough for them. They want to get to the UK or Germany or Scandinavia where they'll get the most handouts from the government.

Maybe after Trump builds our wall he can come up with some sort of EuroWall. By then I think Europe will be on an unalterable demographic course though. When you take a wealthy civilization with low birth rates, many already below replacement rates, and add in hundreds of thousands of immigrants that exist on the largesse of the wealthy government and have birth rates 5x higher than the original population, it doesn't take long for substantial demographic change to happen. And before you know it the same problems that their parents fled are now happening in their new home.

How do you wall the whole mediterranean?

Not possible.
The boats from Libya should be turned around. Australia started doing that and there were no consequences anyway.