Guest Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 The Hungarian PM says that this is a German problem and he's getting lambasted by some - including Andy Burnham. Is he right? Merkel says she'll accept all the Syrians who get there but isn't transporting them directly from Syria or camps to Germany. The Migrants don't seem to be just wanting to get out of the war torn countries - they are going through peaceful countries in order to get to Germany, France and England. Surely that brings their argument into question. Should those migrants instead stand up to Isis and fight for their countries - would any less die? So what's your answer?
EastAnglianFox Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Until the source of the problem is dealt with, they will keep coming.
Merging Cultures Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Set up enough refugee camps around the relevant countries to process people quickly and efficiently. There shouldn't be a reason why people need to get on a boat and risk their lives to enter a country illegally. I've seen camps all over the world and the global community is getting much better at setting them up than they were even just a few years ago. They are still not the nicest place to live, they can still be improved, but refugees should have to be processed through one before they can be settled elsewhere.
The Railway Man Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 No idea, what a mess. Countries should always take people fleeing conflicts but if we do take all these in you just encourage more to come and play into the hands of the people trafickers who are among the mosr evil people on the planet. The other problem is Europe simply can't continue to asorb people at the rate it is doing, we already have huge social unrest in many countries and horrific employment rates in the South. Islam is also an elephant in the room here, with what has happened in Europe over the last decade or two countries simply won't want the problems that come with large numbers of Islamic migration.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 A lot of the people you're talking about look and sound like refugees to me from the experiences they've had and what they're prepared to go through to escape. I've also seen a lot of footage which suggests many of them haven't been as welcome in the countries they're travelling through to get to Germany as you suggest. Also to add I would find it very difficult to suggest they should "stand up to Isis" given the relative luxury in which we live. I have no idea what that would entail physically, mentally or emotionally. I can see the overwhelming desire would be to get away and try to ensure their women and children are safe. Many of those escaping from Syria probably know little about the deaths of those that have already left, but can certainly see plenty of death all around them.
EastAnglianFox Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Also once here you would have to be seriously naive to think they would just integrate into society and fully respect our values and traditions etc. Look how they are acting in the train stations/Calais etc, they are safe from war already yet still behaving with a mass sense of entitlement.
Guest Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Also to add I would find it very difficult to suggest they should "stand up to Isis" given the relative luxury in which we live. I have no idea what that would entail physically, mentally or emotionally. I can see the overwhelming desire would be to get away and try to ensure their women and children are safe. Many of those escaping from Syria probably know little about the deaths of those that have already left, but can certainly see plenty of death all around them. I didn't intend to suggest it's easy. It wasn't easy for Britain to stand up to the Nazis in WW2, It wasn't easy for people in Balkan countries to stand up to the evil there. It isn't easy for many people in Africa to stand up to the attackers there but this is what so many people do. They fight for their own country, to have it how they wish. Many of these people and their families are dying as they run away, the picture of that young kid on the Turkish beach today was horrible. It's being used by many to suggest England should take in 100's of 1000's of refugees. Perhaps that's right but would it have been any worse for that child's parents to fight for what they wanted in Syria?
ScouseFox Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 I didn't intend to suggest it's easy. It wasn't easy for Britain to stand up to the Nazis in WW2, It wasn't easy for people in Balkan countries to stand up to the evil there. It isn't easy for many people in Africa to stand up to the attackers there but this is what so many people do. They fight for their own country, to have it how they wish. Many of these people and their families are dying as they run away, the picture of that young kid on the Turkish beach today was horrible. It's being used by many to suggest England should take in 100's of 1000's of refugees. Perhaps that's right but would it have been any worse for that child's parents to fight for what they wanted in Syria? I'm not 100% sure but I'd imagine the thought process is; stand up to Isis, certain and probably incredibly torturous death for me and everyone I've ever met. or try and get to a nicer country, small chance of upsetting circumstances panning out, also chance of happier and more comfortable life for everyone I know. you choose.
The Railway Man Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 I'm not 100% sure but I'd imagine the thought process is; stand up to Isis, certain and probably incredibly torturous death for me and everyone I've ever met. or try and get to a nicer country, small chance of upsetting circumstances panning out, also chance of happier and more comfortable life for everyone I know. you choose. People have had the same choices throughout history and decided to fight still. You can't defeat evil by running away from it and people in the end can only free themselves.
Merging Cultures Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 I'm not 100% sure but I'd imagine the thought process is; stand up to Isis, certain and probably incredibly torturous death for me and everyone I've ever met. or try and get to a nicer country, small chance of upsetting circumstances panning out, also chance of happier and more comfortable life for everyone I know. you choose. Which should mean crossing the border into the nearest country. You don't then need to keep going, stop where you are and get processed properly. Anyone who goes over more than one country or gets on a boat and pitches up elsewhere should be immediately sent back to a processing center at a country bordering their home country. Receiving countries should agree with the UN how many refugees they will take, and then people are resettled based on that. This doesn't seem an oversimplification to me.
ChrisFilter Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 It's a refugee crisis. Not a migrant crisis. And we should welcome genuine asylum seekers with open arms. Even if you're right-wing, there's economic benefit to it hence Germany welcoming 750k and counting - they're not stupid.
Freesolo Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 The US should be taking part of the responsibility for this problem and taking in X amount of refuges since the seem to think they can cause every problem in the world and just walk away from it like it didn't happen. But its a election year so Non of the runners will touch, but Obama should be doing something to help
The Horse's Mouth Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Also once here you would have to be seriously naive to think they would just integrate into society and fully respect our values and traditions etc. Look how they are acting in the train stations/Calais etc, they are safe from war already yet still behaving with a mass sense of entitlement.
AndWhat? Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 The US should be taking part of the responsibility for this problem and taking in X amount of refuges since the seem to think they can cause every problem in the world and just walk away from it like it didn't happen. But its a election year so Non of the runners will touch, but Obama should be doing something to help USA has taken in something like 120 thousand refugees in the last year. We have taken in something like 30 thousand. We should be doing more for genuine refugees
Freesolo Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Which should mean crossing the border into the nearest country. You don't then need to keep going, stop where you are and get processed properly. Anyone who goes over more than one country or gets on a boat and pitches up elsewhere should be immediately sent back to a processing center at a country bordering their home country. Receiving countries should agree with the UN how many refugees they will take, and then people are resettled based on that. This doesn't seem an oversimplification to me. The only problem with this is that if the refuges/asylum seekers? are all coming through the same route then they will all end up having to register in the same country
johnny the fox Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 The Hungarian PM says that this is a German problem and he's getting lambasted by some - including Andy Burnham. Is he right? Merkel says she'll accept all the Syrians who get there but isn't transporting them directly from Syria or camps to Germany. The Migrants don't seem to be just wanting to get out of the war torn countries - they are going through peaceful countries in order to get to Germany, France and England. Surely that brings their argument into question. Should those migrants instead stand up to Isis and fight for their countries - would any less die? So what's your answer? This is the Schengen agreement disintegrating before our eyes... this is a perfect example of why the European project will fail..one size will never fit all. national self interest will trump any attempted super state common policy.. we have no idea who is coming and for what reason.. the failure to tackle the syria crisis 5 years ago by the worlds major players has caused this current situation.. our leaders have been asleep at the wheel.. it needs a emergency world summit to thrash out a solution..or it will only get worse, this is just the start.
The Railway Man Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 It's a refugee crisis. Not a migrant crisis. And we should welcome genuine asylum seekers with open arms. Even if you're right-wing, there's economic benefit to it hence Germany welcoming 750k and counting - they're not stupid. Not true, you are thinking of EU migrants, not EEA.
Freesolo Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 USA has taken in something like 120 thousand refugees in the last year. We have taken in something like 30 thousand. We should be doing more for genuine refugees I dont think they have taken that number from recent conflicts http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/06/16/414898818/of-4-million-syrian-refugees-the-u-s-has-taken-fewer-than-1-000
Bayfox Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Which should mean crossing the border into the nearest country. You don't then need to keep going, stop where you are and get processed properly. Anyone who goes over more than one country or gets on a boat and pitches up elsewhere should be immediately sent back to a processing center at a country bordering their home country. Receiving countries should agree with the UN how many refugees they will take, and then people are resettled based on that. This doesn't seem an oversimplification to me. Works for me, cuz unless they get a flight they ain't making the uk the 1st stop. But seriously the problem still remains, if europe starts taking everyone, then where does it stop, well it won't until someone, somewhere stands up to the likes of isis. This is surely starting to get to crisis point, yes you would thing they would be happy to get to places like turkey or hungary and stop, but they won't as they know that if they can make germany or england that they will be treated better and eventually have a better standard of life than they would in somewhere like Romania. In a last tongue in cheek comment I think the only answer is to balance migration out, if they lest in a family of 4 I would happily hand them my house my, business etc for government cash and they can fund my live in Ibiza, afterall the weather here is shit, the uk is the last place I'd want to get too.
Merging Cultures Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 The only problem with this is that if the refuges/asylum seekers? are all coming through the same route then they will all end up having to register in the same country Nope. The international community should agree quotas for refugees, and then take their share once the asylum seekers have been processed. This means that the first country that they arrive in and be processed, shouldn't and wouldn't take the burden for all refugees. If they are found to not be genuine refugees, they get sent back across the border.
ChrisFilter Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Not true, you are thinking of EU migrants, not EEA. That's a fairly crude view on things. And it's a longer-term pay-off.
Freesolo Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Nope. The international community should agree quotas for refugees, and then take their share once the asylum seekers have been processed. This means that the first country that they arrive in and be processed, shouldn't and wouldn't take the burden for all refugees. If they are found to not be genuine refugees, they get sent back across the border. No country wants to be be turned into a temporary refugee camp with millions of people being waiting to be settled somewhere
Freesolo Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Works for me, cuz unless they get a flight they ain't making the uk the 1st stop. But seriously the problem still remains, if europe starts taking everyone, then where does it stop, well it won't until someone, somewhere stands up to the likes of isis. This is surely starting to get to crisis point, yes you would thing they would be happy to get to places like turkey or hungary and stop, but they won't as they know that if they can make germany or england that they will be treated better and eventually have a better standard of life than they would in somewhere like Romania. In a last tongue in cheek comment I think the only answer is to balance migration out, if they lest in a family of 4 I would happily hand them my house my, business etc for government cash and they can fund my live in Ibiza, afterall the weather here is shit, the uk is the last place I'd want to get too. Would you not do the same if you where in their shoes?
Merging Cultures Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 Works for me, cuz unless they get a flight they ain't making the uk the 1st stop. But seriously the problem still remains, if europe starts taking everyone, then where does it stop, well it won't until someone, somewhere stands up to the likes of isis. This is surely starting to get to crisis point, yes you would thing they would be happy to get to places like turkey or hungary and stop, but they won't as they know that if they can make germany or england that they will be treated better and eventually have a better standard of life than they would in somewhere like Romania. In a last tongue in cheek comment I think the only answer is to balance migration out, if they lest in a family of 4 I would happily hand them my house my, business etc for government cash and they can fund my live in Ibiza, afterall the weather here is shit, the uk is the last place I'd want to get too. Europe doesn't need to take all the refugees in this system. I used to work for an organisation (www.worldrelief.org) that settled refugees in the US, the refugees didn't pitch up in a boat, or on a plane, they were sent from camps. Agree quotas and then share the refugees out based on that. If they arrive in the UK and do not have official refugee status, they should be sent back to a camp in a country bordering their home country. I understand why people would want to come to the UK and not other places, but it doesn't mean we should accept them all, nor that people should expect us to take them all.
The Railway Man Posted 3 September 2015 Posted 3 September 2015 That's a fairly crude view on things. And it's a longer-term pay-off. Just admit it was wrong.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.