Italy Shuts Ports to Migrant Ship

[DennisNedry]

Spain have now agreed to let the ship dock, however is this the start of a series of 'stand offs' between Italian ports and migrant rescue ships?

 

Fair play Salvini, at least he's true to his political message and acting with conviction. 

 

I'm largely behind the decision to be honest. The people on board were sub-Saharan Africans, so purely economic migrants with no right to be in Europe. Italy has been abandoned by the EU and been forced to absorb huge amounts of migrants with little help, they had to stand up for themselves sooner or later. Just a shame the boat wasn't towed back to Libya.

 

What do we think then chaps/chappettes?

[Strokes]

6 minutes ago, DennisNedry said:

Spain have now agreed to let the ship dock, however is this the start of a series of 'stand offs' between Italian ports and migrant rescue ships?

 

Fair play Salvini, at least he's true to his political message and acting with conviction. 

 

I'm largely behind the decision to be honest. The people on board were sub-Saharan Africans, so purely economic migrants with no right to be in Europe. Italy has been abandoned by the EU and been forced to absorb huge amounts of migrants with little help, they had to stand up for themselves sooner or later. Just a shame the boat wasn't towed back to Libya.

 

What do we think then chaps/chappettes?

If they aren’t needed why should Italy let them in? Absolutely the right decision and fair play to them.

[bovril]

Just now, Strokes said:

If they aren’t needed why should Italy let them in? Absolutely the right decision and fair play to them.

I lived in Italy for three years and I'm pretty sure that I wasn't "needed". 

[VLC86]

1 minute ago, bovril said:

I lived in Italy for three years and I'm pretty sure that I wasn't "needed". 

At the same time though if you have lived there you must have seen the extent to which this is becoming a problem.

 

The place I stayed was pretty much as far from the sea as you can get but you could still see the impact.

[bovril]

Just now, Costock_Fox said:

At the same time though if you have lived there you must have seen the extent to which this is becoming a problem.

 

The place I stayed was pretty much as far from the sea as you can get but you could still see the impact.

Yes I could. I saw it way back in 2009 in Palermo and people buried their heads in the sand for years. I just hate this "if you're not needed don't come here" stuff. Life would be pretty dull if we were only allowed to move where we were needed. 

[Strokes]

13 minutes ago, bovril said:

I lived in Italy for three years and I'm pretty sure that I wasn't "needed". 

If Italy didn’t want you there, then they should have been allowed to turn you around. I suspect if you had needed to apply for a visa it would have been accepted due to what you can offer but the country should have the right to put its citizens above anyone else.

[bovril]

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

If Italy didn’t want you there, then they should have been allowed to turn you around. I suspect if you had needed to apply for a visa it would have been accepted due to what you can offer but the country should have the right to put its citizens above anyone else.

Fair points, though you're moving the goalposts a bit me duck. Wanted and needed are slightly different. If I want to move to a place I genuinely don't care what I'm offering the country, life's too short. 

I doubt I would've got that visa by the way...

Edited 11 June 2018 by bovril

[Strokes]

3 minutes ago, bovril said:

Fair points, though you're moving the goalposts a bit me duck. Wanted and needed are slightly different. If I want to move to a place I genuinely don't care what I'm offering the country, life's too short. 

I doubt I would've got that visa by the way...

 

Fair enough, perhaps my original post was not worded in the best way. My intent was more of want, than need.

[VLC86]

42 minutes ago, bovril said:

Yes I could. I saw it way back in 2009 in Palermo and people buried their heads in the sand for years. I just hate this "if you're not needed don't come here" stuff. Life would be pretty dull if we were only allowed to move where we were needed. 

True mate.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, DennisNedry said:

Spain have now agreed to let the ship dock, however is this the start of a series of 'stand offs' between Italian ports and migrant rescue ships?

 

Fair play Salvini, at least he's true to his political message and acting with conviction. 

 

I'm largely behind the decision to be honest. The people on board were sub-Saharan Africans, so purely economic migrants with no right to be in Europe. Italy has been abandoned by the EU and been forced to absorb huge amounts of migrants with little help, they had to stand up for themselves sooner or later. Just a shame the boat wasn't towed back to Libya.

 

What do we think then chaps/chappettes?

Way overdue IMO. I'm actually all for immigration but there must be limits and there must be a system in place to control and register exactly who is coming into our continent.

[Captain...]

10 hours ago, Strokes said:

country should have the right to put its citizens above anyone else.

Even if it means leaving hundreds in a boat to die? 

 

Something may may need to be done but I don’t agree with risking human lives to achieve it.

 

The latest I have read is that they are still in Italian waters unable to make the 3 day trip to Spain because they have no water or supplies and they have people in need of urgent medical attention including pregnant women and young children.

 

It’s all well and good agreeing with the principle but the reality is there are still hundreds of lives at risk in that boat.

Edited 12 June 2018 by Captain...

[breadandcheese]

Isn't it now more likely that Spain will become the destination of choice for the migrant boats?

 

Give it six months and this scene will be repeated as the Spanish public become hardened against the boatloads arriving.

[ozleicester]

Shameful, refugees should be helped

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Captain... said:

Even if it means leaving hundreds in a boat to die? 

 

Something may may need to be done but I don’t agree with risking human lives to achieve it.

 

The latest I have read is that they are still in Italian waters unable to make the 3 day trip to Spain because they have no water or supplies and they have people in need of urgent medical attention including pregnant women and young children.

 

It’s all well and good agreeing with the principle but the reality is there are still hundreds of lives at risk in that boat.

 

 

Sounds as if they might be heading to Corsica now (Corsica has offered), due to the dangers implicit in a 3-day voyage to Valencia in those conditions.

 

It's true that Europe cannot just offer open-door immigration to anyone and needs to adopt policies to reduce the flow of economic migrants (except refugees fleeing war or whatever). That's happened to some extent with much smaller flows due to agreements with countries like Turkey and Libya, which take more now. But abandoning people in the Med in a desperate situation is not the answer (even if they've arranged to be in that position). If someone gets in trouble in the sea off our beaches through their own recklessness, we wouldn't say: "their fault, leave them to it". At the least, people in distress need to be rescued, basic needs looked after - and then repatriation remains an option, depending on policy and circumstances.

[Finnegan]

11 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Shameful, refugees should be helped

 

They're being helped, they're going to Spain. 

 

Do you think it's particularly fair that Italy and Greece are expected to take them all because they're closer, by the accident of geography? 

 

Regardless of the fact they're two of the EUs most struggling countries financially? 

 

[Redouane]

13 hours ago, DennisNedry said:

Spain have now agreed to let the ship dock, however is this the start of a series of 'stand offs' between Italian ports and migrant rescue ships?

 

Fair play Salvini, at least he's true to his political message and acting with conviction. 

 

I'm largely behind the decision to be honest. The people on board were sub-Saharan Africans, so purely economic migrants with no right to be in Europe. Italy has been abandoned by the EU and been forced to absorb huge amounts of migrants with little help, they had to stand up for themselves sooner or later. Just a shame the boat wasn't towed back to Libya.

 

What do we think then chaps/chappettes?

I don't know if you're aware, but most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa is riddled with conflict. Also, who gave YOU the right to decide who has has the right to come to Europe? 

[breadandcheese]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Sounds as if they might be heading to Corsica now (Corsica has offered), due to the dangers implicit in a 3-day voyage to Valencia in those conditions.

 

It's true that Europe cannot just offer open-door immigration to anyone and needs to adopt policies to reduce the flow of economic migrants (except refugees fleeing war or whatever). That's happened to some extent with much smaller flows due to agreements with countries like Turkey and Libya, which take more now. But abandoning people in the Med in a desperate situation is not the answer (even if they've arranged to be in that position). If someone gets in trouble in the sea off our beaches through their own recklessness, we wouldn't say: "their fault, leave them to it". At the least, people in distress need to be rescued, basic needs looked after - and then repatriation remains an option, depending on policy and circumstances.

You're correct but the reality is not as easy as that. There are systems for repatriation of economic migrants but they break down when the system is played. It takes time to process all the migrants, which could easily be running at 1,000 new immigrants per week. Add to that the complications of ways to delay your stay and avoid deportation, for example having no identifying  papers and claiming you do no know what country you are from, thus making repatriation impossible.

 

I don't have any answers but the ideal and the reality are clashing.

[breadandcheese]

33 minutes ago, Redouane said:

I don't know if you're aware, but most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa is riddled with conflict. Also, who gave YOU the right to decide who has has the right to come to Europe? 

Exploring this argument, should there be any limit on the number of Sub-Saharan Africans migrating to EU?

Edited 12 June 2018 by breadandcheese

[Buce]

22 minutes ago, Redouane said:

I don't know if you're aware, but most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa is riddled with conflict. Also, who gave YOU the right to decide who has has the right to come to Europe? 

 

As a European, he has as much right to an opinion as anyone else.

Edited 12 June 2018 by Buce

[DennisNedry]

29 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Shameful, refugees should be helped

12 minutes ago, Redouane said:

I don't know if you're aware, but most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa is riddled with conflict. Also, who gave YOU the right to decide who has has the right to come to Europe? 

 

I can see the point with say, Syria or Libya, because Europe contributed to the crisis in these countries with poor foreign policy. The conflicts in Africa are nothing to do with us. The majority of these people are simply trying to escape being poor and seeking a better life in Europe (who can blame them?). But if they are are allowed into Europe - surely any citizen in any country in the world has the right to come here no questions asked?

 

I would ask why middle Eastern countries don't accept and help migrants (there'd be less of a culture shock there too), but that's probably going off track a bit.

[davieG]

22 minutes ago, Redouane said:

I don't know if you're aware, but most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa is riddled with conflict. Also, who gave YOU the right to decide who has has the right to come to Europe? 

I thought they were just giving an opinion not making a decision, surely everyone has a right to express their opinion?

[Guest Foxin_mad]

I think personally having these rescue ships from the NGOs is kind of magnifying the problem. If you got on a ramshackle boat knowing it was likely to sink and that you would not be rescued I think it may make a few people change their minds; but to get a ramshackle boat and know that a western charity will rescue you straight to the nearest port I feel encourages more to take the journey. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

21 minutes ago, Redouane said:

Also, who gave YOU the right to decide who has has the right to come to Europe? 

He (presumably) pays into a tax system that helps to fund the EU and indirectly the countries that are being affected, which at least gives him the right to an opinion.  

[Buce]

13 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I think personally having these rescue ships from the NGOs is kind of magnifying the problem. If you got on a ramshackle boat knowing it was likely to sink and that you would not be rescued I think it may make a few people change their minds; but to get a ramshackle boat and know that a western charity will rescue you straight to the nearest port I feel encourages more to take the journey. 

 

So, basically, you're saying let them drown as a warning to others?

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

12 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

He (presumably) pays into a tax system that helps to fund the EU and indirectly the countries that are being affected, which at least gives him the right to an opinion.  

Meh.   Taxes arent really a choice are they?

If someones opinion is to leave a load of people stranded on a boat in need of medical att. etc. I dont really respect their opinion

 

The problem needs a solution, but that is not a solution

Edited 12 June 2018 by AlloverthefloorYesNdidi