9 ms·

I'm risking getting downvoted to oblivion here, but as an EU citizen I strongly believe that the core reason we have this crisis in the first place (as opposed

I'm risking getting downvoted to oblivion here, but as an EU citizen I strongly believe that the core reason we have this crisis in the first place (as opposed to something controlled) is nonexistent border protection from southern countries like Italy, Greece. Never have I heard of them employing border patrols to veer off illegal boats. I am by no means denying the need for help for actual war victims, if I could say that, but current situation not only allows for, but actually encourages everyone seeking "better life" (and having financial means to do that) to come over. We call those [economic] immigrants and have rules. Now its wild west. And in the news reports I usually see people toying with iPhone 5/6 and wearing [designer] jeans/jackets. These may not even be the majority and quite probably a lot of those people are with a pair of shoes, some clothing and a mobile phone and food for a week is not included in the list of possessions. I am all for growing a pair and actually declaring what is a war zone. Working with UN/NATO to establish a peace there. We (EU first, UN later) can and should establish "refugee camps" and TEMPORARILY accept people fleeing from previously declared war zones. After the conflict has been resolved, the very same refugees should be helped to get back to their homes. For everyone else we have rather clear rules on how immigration works. Because unless we do that fast we are sending the signal that EU is accepting everyone, giving homes and income. And in several years the crisis will be unmanageable. Oh, and do not think that USA is the other end of the world - you are already struggling with illegal immigrants from the south. Now just imagine the effect if whole countries decided it was worth a shot at least attempting to "find better life"?

thescriptkiddie 11y ago
Ignoring the crisis wouldn't make it go away. Maybe it is possible to keep the refugees out, but that doesn't help them. The whole world has an obligation to help these people.
- maxims 11y ago
  No one has an obligation to help any one else. You come into this world alone, and you will leave this world alone.
  - dan00 11y ago
    Yes, but if you help other people, then you might realize that you aren't that alone.
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  well if whole world has this obligation, I please our US friends to accept a mere million or two of these refugees. just for next 20 years. surely a drop in the ocean, especially since all this mess is directly caused by US war failures in neighboring Iraq, and refusing to wipe off ISIS to oblivion
jackvalentine 11y ago
> And in the news reports I usually see people toying with iPhone 5/6 and wearing [designer] jeans/jackets. Do luxury products somehow protect you from bullets, bombs and murderous barbarians?
- mverwijs 11y ago
  The point is, however, that a phone is not a luxury item. This article[1], in Dutch, explains that in order to get anywhere a phone is a necessity. Maps, GPS and communication. And not just texts (SMS), but photos and WhatsApp-groups to organize shelter, food. Translation-device. It is NOT a luxury device. [1] http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/4130918/2015/08/28/De-mobiele-telefoon-is-een-basisbehoefte-voor-een-vluchteling.dhtml http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/4130918...
  - Yetanfou 11y ago
    A smartphone, maybe. An iPhone? Never. That is - whether you like it or not - a luxury device, priced as such. If it is phone, GPS, maps and translation you want you can just get whatever Android is on sale - for a sixth to a tenth of the price of the luxury iPhone.
- pkolaczk 11y ago
  Good point. I have nothing against temporary accepting people coming from dangerous places, regardless of their financial status. However not all of them come from war zones. Some come from relatively safe places like Turkey (I do have friends in Turkey who chose to live there and while the average income there may be in fact lower than in EU, people do normally live there, have jobs, families, houses etc.). And many are not interested in staying in poorer European countries like Greece or Hungary but they say it openly: "we want to Germany". In these cases, standard immigration rules should apply.
- tormeh 11y ago
  Luxury products adds legitimacy to their claim to refugee status, if anything.
prawn 11y ago
I have a nice phone and clothes, but if my family were in danger, I would do whatever I could to get them to a safer place, including somewhere far from where they were currently in danger. I empathise with anyone fleeing danger, whatever model of phone they have.
linhchi 11y ago
a billionaire wants to buy an island to temporarily host refugees: http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2015/09/04/egyptian-billionaire-offers-to-buy-mediterranean-island-for-refugees/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2015/09/04/egypti...
zerr 11y ago
I've said it before - eco-migrants should be taken care similarly to warzone migrants. I wouldn't say that dying slowly - "living" a low quality of life in poverty is much better than dying in a war... It is a natural human behavior to seek a better life and it is a good thing. The movement/relocation is a basic human right.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  The problem is what happens when economic migration intersects with modern democracy and welfare states. Because of the state, migrants (who should be a net positive due to comparative advantage) suddenly become an economic drain and can harm the people in the society they enter. This happens both by taking resources from workers via the welfare state and by voting for harmful policies (though this last part usually happens much later). The best solution to this is of course ending the welfare state and permanent disenfranchisement, not threatening migrants and their potential employers with violence. But far too many people are more about their pet political ideals than about refugees.
  - pron 11y ago
    That's been done in late 19th-century America, and the result was mass exploitation of immigrants and increased violence. In fact, regulation in the US (unlike in Europe) started as a response to what happened then (the US population cried for more regulation to save them from the Robber Barons). Of course, it was also a time of great economic growth but also third-world-like inequality. So what you're suggesting isn't a "solution" but merely one approach that may result in an outcome that would be good for some and bad for others -- just like most approaches -- and is based on some values and not others. I think that most people in the West prefer the current, perhaps more subdued reality than the constant struggles of the Gilded Age. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      Meanwhile the people not in the west get to suffer dire poverty and war. But I guess those folks don't count. I think that most white people in the south also preferred the current, perhaps more subdued reality of segregation to the constant struggles of integration and economic competition with "those people". Is that a valid argument against eliminating mandatory discrimination?
guard-of-terra 11y ago
I strongly believe that the core reason EU has this crisis is because they agreed to bomb Libya. One would imagine you'll figure out where it will go after looking at Iraq results.
endymi0n 11y ago
Sirens go off, soldiers with tanks arrive at the main road of your town. You have to leave your home NOW. What device would you take with you to reconnect with your friends and family somewhere else, later, in safety? Do you really think middle class people in other countries still communicate with bush drums? Smart Guy.
lordnacho 11y ago
"Temporary" can mean decades. How many wars have had a predictable timeframe? As a child of refugees and having hung around quite a lot of immigrants, I think the biggest impediment to building a new life is the idea that you're going back. I hear this story all the time, from some kid whose parents insist they learn the old language and act like people from the old country, because in just a few years they'll be moving back there. Of course the "kid" will be in his 20s, having grown up in prosperous Scandinavia. At the same time, you piss off the natives if you act like you are not sincerely trying to integrate. I don't think it happens a lot, but every time you hear a story about some foreigner taking advantage of the system, it makes it harder for all of them. Eg a friend of mine was translating for some newcomers from some Russian-speaking country. They were basically shopping for a free house, discussing whether they could get a better place, and openly planning their next trip home to old country, from which they were ostensibly fleeing. The smartest thing to do as an immigrant is to immediately learn the language and try to find something to do. Get new friends who are local, and don't long for the old country. Having millions of people living in temporary camps is a waste of millions of lives. Now I do think there's a lot of pressure on the border countries, since they're taking a disproportionate amount of people. What should be done is once the UN decides a country is a war zone, everyone from there should be able to enter a lottery to be resettled elsewhere. They have to make a commitment to learn the new language, and not to come back for a long time.
- friendzis 11y ago
  You are right that conflicts may last decades. But that does not mean we can accept anyone, give them housing and leave it to magical integration. We absolutely need a "staging environment" where these people can stay safe, warm and fed and more importantly show willingness to both work and integrate. I'm not against accepting fleeing people that are willing to settle and accept new culture. But I think it is a bad idea to just take all these people, dump somewhere inside EU with documents and call it a day. Currently the problem is scale - current measures are not designed for such a scale and will fail
atmosx 11y ago
> I'm risking getting downvoted to oblivion here, but as an EU citizen I strongly believe that the core reason we have this crisis in the first place (as opposed to something controlled) is nonexistent border protection from southern countries like Italy, Greece. Never have I heard of them employing border patrols to veer off illegal boats. Did you ever look for any kind of information on the matter, or you just saw a commentary of some tv-persona who spends for breakfast a month's worth salary? Because if you did, you would have find very compelling answers. Why don't you come here and try to fend off 4.5 million people. What exactly would you have us do, shoot them on spot? Even to jail requires money and we're busy paying taxes (~70% of income is taxes in Greece right now). Greece and Italy are dealing with immigration waves for at least 15 years. You just had a GLANCE and went berserk before they even reached your country's borders. Did you give a sht until now, or you woke up today saw the TV news and got interested? Why don't to take a look at the news. See how Germany and Nordic countries dealt with Greek/Italian immigration problems all these years... See if you can spot some patterns there. > We call those [economic] immigrants and have rules. Now its wild west. And in the news reports I usually see people toying with iPhone 5/6 and wearing [designer] jeans/jackets. I'll will assume - given your views it's far-fetched, I know* - that you're not retarded. If you see iPhones en masse in immigrant pictures than you're looking at the wrong pictures. Let me help you[1]. > I am all for growing a pair and actually declaring what is a war zone. Working with UN/NATO to establish a peace there. Where? Do you think the EU (well Germany and the UK, the others don't count anyway) has a say in US vs Russian war? Because that's what this is all about. The way Germany treats Greece, is the exact way the US treats Germany. Less stunts, but the baseline is exactly the same, humiliations one after another (Snowden scandal, "fuck the EU" by Nuland and so forth). So, in the real world, there's little if anything the EU can do about this, except form picking up the pieces. I said this before, after the German-Greek showdown the EU is a finished project. It is a failure at so many levels that it's scary. I fear that first will come the break-up and then probably some sort of war... And it will be worse than the other two. [1] https://www.google.gr/search?q=migrant+flow+2015&espv=2&biw=1152&bih=587&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIw-WWlPv6xwIVAlcaCh0sbgSU#tbm=isch&q=migrant+crisis+in+europe+2015 https://www.google.gr/search?q=migrant+flow+2015&espv=2&biw=...
- DanBC 11y ago
EdiX 11y ago
> I'm risking getting downvoted to oblivion here, but as an EU citizen I strongly believe that the core reason we have this crisis in the first place (as opposed to something controlled) is nonexistent border protection from southern countries like Italy, Greece. Never have I heard of them employing border patrols to veer off illegal boats. AFAIK this is actually the opposite of truth, assuming the migrant/refugee crisis is our fault (and it wouldn't have just happened anyway because of war) it's because we have too much border protection. You see, the way this works, most of those smugglers just take the migrants/refugees all the way to the middle of the ocean, drop them on a raft, launch an SOS and head back to their origin port. Merchant and military marine that picks up the SOS is then required (by maritime law and, possibly, by human decency?) to go check it out and salvage the people there. Veering off boats is not an option because the boat usually veers off long before anyone gets there. Over the past two years most of those migrants/refugees have been rescued by a special military operation of border control that has used the names Operation Mare Nostrum, Operation Frontex Plus and currently goes as Operation Triton. This costs 2.9M€/mo. Arguably if we had less border control more brown people would die on rafts and maybe disincentivize the whole enterprise. Whether this is an acceptable solution I will leave for you to decide.
- friendzis 11y ago
  By "nonexistent border protection" I meant something more like "once you step on EU land, you are free to go anywhere". The very first signs of the bubble should have been indicators that it was time to do something different to "disincentivize the whole enterprise". Maybe fish them out of the water and transport back as soon as possible? It is not sustainable, but better than nothing to buy some time to prepare
  - EdiX 11y ago
    >By "nonexistent border protection" I meant something more like "once you step on EU land, you are free to go anywhere". The whole point of the EU and the Schengen treaty was to have less border protection between member states. Is your opinion that the European Union is detrimental? >Maybe fish them out of the water and transport back as soon as possible? We can't deport the refugees back to war zones because of the european court of human rights (and possibly human decency) and we can't deport migrants until they have been identified because sending them to a random country would be human trafficking (and of course it is in migrants best interest to render themselves hard to identify).
LoSboccacc 11y ago
> nonexistent border protection from southern countries like Italy, Greece. Never have I heard of them employing border patrols to veer off illegal boats Big fallacy here: Italy is forced to take on all migrants that even come close to Italian soil. We cannot respond with force (of course) and we cannot catch them all. We also are forced to evaluate all their asylum request fairly and we have to deal with loads of them that just refuse self identification making the process long and costly. > I am by no means denying the need for help for actual war victims 'War victims' is used by every single one of them because it's the only way in. Problem is, how do you grant asylum and which resource do you use for it? Current international agreements afaik puts all the costs on the landing nation. Problem is, they want southern country to have higher safety and better controls and all that, but noone wants to pay for it.

thescriptkiddie 11y ago

Ignoring the crisis wouldn't make it go away. Maybe it is possible to keep the refugees out, but that doesn't help them. The whole world has an obligation to help these people.

maxims 11y ago
No one has an obligation to help any one else. You come into this world alone, and you will leave this world alone.
- dan00 11y ago
  Yes, but if you help other people, then you might realize that you aren't that alone.
saiya-jin 11y ago
well if whole world has this obligation, I please our US friends to accept a mere million or two of these refugees. just for next 20 years. surely a drop in the ocean, especially since all this mess is directly caused by US war failures in neighboring Iraq, and refusing to wipe off ISIS to oblivion

jackvalentine 11y ago

> And in the news reports I usually see people toying with iPhone 5/6 and wearing [designer] jeans/jackets. Do luxury products somehow protect you from bullets, bombs and murderous barbarians?

mverwijs 11y ago
The point is, however, that a phone is not a luxury item. This article[1], in Dutch, explains that in order to get anywhere a phone is a necessity. Maps, GPS and communication. And not just texts (SMS), but photos and WhatsApp-groups to organize shelter, food. Translation-device. It is NOT a luxury device. [1] http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/4130918/2015/08/28/De-mobiele-telefoon-is-een-basisbehoefte-voor-een-vluchteling.dhtml http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/4130918...
- Yetanfou 11y ago
  A smartphone, maybe. An iPhone? Never. That is - whether you like it or not - a luxury device, priced as such. If it is phone, GPS, maps and translation you want you can just get whatever Android is on sale - for a sixth to a tenth of the price of the luxury iPhone.
pkolaczk 11y ago
Good point. I have nothing against temporary accepting people coming from dangerous places, regardless of their financial status. However not all of them come from war zones. Some come from relatively safe places like Turkey (I do have friends in Turkey who chose to live there and while the average income there may be in fact lower than in EU, people do normally live there, have jobs, families, houses etc.). And many are not interested in staying in poorer European countries like Greece or Hungary but they say it openly: "we want to Germany". In these cases, standard immigration rules should apply.
tormeh 11y ago
Luxury products adds legitimacy to their claim to refugee status, if anything.

prawn 11y ago

I have a nice phone and clothes, but if my family were in danger, I would do whatever I could to get them to a safer place, including somewhere far from where they were currently in danger. I empathise with anyone fleeing danger, whatever model of phone they have.

linhchi 11y ago

a billionaire wants to buy an island to temporarily host refugees: http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2015/09/04/egyptian-billionaire-offers-to-buy-mediterranean-island-for-refugees/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2015/09/04/egypti...

zerr 11y ago

I've said it before - eco-migrants should be taken care similarly to warzone migrants. I wouldn't say that dying slowly - "living" a low quality of life in poverty is much better than dying in a war... It is a natural human behavior to seek a better life and it is a good thing. The movement/relocation is a basic human right.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
The problem is what happens when economic migration intersects with modern democracy and welfare states. Because of the state, migrants (who should be a net positive due to comparative advantage) suddenly become an economic drain and can harm the people in the society they enter. This happens both by taking resources from workers via the welfare state and by voting for harmful policies (though this last part usually happens much later). The best solution to this is of course ending the welfare state and permanent disenfranchisement, not threatening migrants and their potential employers with violence. But far too many people are more about their pet political ideals than about refugees.
- pron 11y ago
  That's been done in late 19th-century America, and the result was mass exploitation of immigrants and increased violence. In fact, regulation in the US (unlike in Europe) started as a response to what happened then (the US population cried for more regulation to save them from the Robber Barons). Of course, it was also a time of great economic growth but also third-world-like inequality. So what you're suggesting isn't a "solution" but merely one approach that may result in an outcome that would be good for some and bad for others -- just like most approaches -- and is based on some values and not others. I think that most people in the West prefer the current, perhaps more subdued reality than the constant struggles of the Gilded Age. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    Meanwhile the people not in the west get to suffer dire poverty and war. But I guess those folks don't count. I think that most white people in the south also preferred the current, perhaps more subdued reality of segregation to the constant struggles of integration and economic competition with "those people". Is that a valid argument against eliminating mandatory discrimination?

guard-of-terra 11y ago

I strongly believe that the core reason EU has this crisis is because they agreed to bomb Libya. One would imagine you'll figure out where it will go after looking at Iraq results.

endymi0n 11y ago

Sirens go off, soldiers with tanks arrive at the main road of your town. You have to leave your home NOW. What device would you take with you to reconnect with your friends and family somewhere else, later, in safety? Do you really think middle class people in other countries still communicate with bush drums? Smart Guy.

lordnacho 11y ago

"Temporary" can mean decades. How many wars have had a predictable timeframe? As a child of refugees and having hung around quite a lot of immigrants, I think the biggest impediment to building a new life is the idea that you're going back. I hear this story all the time, from some kid whose parents insist they learn the old language and act like people from the old country, because in just a few years they'll be moving back there. Of course the "kid" will be in his 20s, having grown up in prosperous Scandinavia. At the same time, you piss off the natives if you act like you are not sincerely trying to integrate. I don't think it happens a lot, but every time you hear a story about some foreigner taking advantage of the system, it makes it harder for all of them. Eg a friend of mine was translating for some newcomers from some Russian-speaking country. They were basically shopping for a free house, discussing whether they could get a better place, and openly planning their next trip home to old country, from which they were ostensibly fleeing. The smartest thing to do as an immigrant is to immediately learn the language and try to find something to do. Get new friends who are local, and don't long for the old country. Having millions of people living in temporary camps is a waste of millions of lives. Now I do think there's a lot of pressure on the border countries, since they're taking a disproportionate amount of people. What should be done is once the UN decides a country is a war zone, everyone from there should be able to enter a lottery to be resettled elsewhere. They have to make a commitment to learn the new language, and not to come back for a long time.

friendzis 11y ago
You are right that conflicts may last decades. But that does not mean we can accept anyone, give them housing and leave it to magical integration. We absolutely need a "staging environment" where these people can stay safe, warm and fed and more importantly show willingness to both work and integrate. I'm not against accepting fleeing people that are willing to settle and accept new culture. But I think it is a bad idea to just take all these people, dump somewhere inside EU with documents and call it a day. Currently the problem is scale - current measures are not designed for such a scale and will fail

atmosx 11y ago

> I'm risking getting downvoted to oblivion here, but as an EU citizen I strongly believe that the core reason we have this crisis in the first place (as opposed to something controlled) is nonexistent border protection from southern countries like Italy, Greece. Never have I heard of them employing border patrols to veer off illegal boats. Did you ever look for any kind of information on the matter, or you just saw a commentary of some tv-persona who spends for breakfast a month's worth salary? Because if you did, you would have find very compelling answers. Why don't you come here and try to fend off 4.5 million people. What exactly would you have us do, shoot them on spot? Even to jail requires money and we're busy paying taxes (~70% of income is taxes in Greece right now). Greece and Italy are dealing with immigration waves for at least 15 years. You just had a GLANCE and went berserk before they even reached your country's borders. Did you give a sht until now, or you woke up today saw the TV news and got interested? Why don't to take a look at the news. See how Germany and Nordic countries dealt with Greek/Italian immigration problems all these years... See if you can spot some patterns there. > We call those [economic] immigrants and have rules. Now its wild west. And in the news reports I usually see people toying with iPhone 5/6 and wearing [designer] jeans/jackets. I'll will assume - given your views it's far-fetched, I know* - that you're not retarded. If you see iPhones en masse in immigrant pictures than you're looking at the wrong pictures. Let me help you[1]. > I am all for growing a pair and actually declaring what is a war zone. Working with UN/NATO to establish a peace there. Where? Do you think the EU (well Germany and the UK, the others don't count anyway) has a say in US vs Russian war? Because that's what this is all about. The way Germany treats Greece, is the exact way the US treats Germany. Less stunts, but the baseline is exactly the same, humiliations one after another (Snowden scandal, "fuck the EU" by Nuland and so forth). So, in the real world, there's little if anything the EU can do about this, except form picking up the pieces. I said this before, after the German-Greek showdown the EU is a finished project. It is a failure at so many levels that it's scary. I fear that first will come the break-up and then probably some sort of war... And it will be worse than the other two. [1] https://www.google.gr/search?q=migrant+flow+2015&espv=2&biw=1152&bih=587&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIw-WWlPv6xwIVAlcaCh0sbgSU#tbm=isch&q=migrant+crisis+in+europe+2015 https://www.google.gr/search?q=migrant+flow+2015&espv=2&biw=...

DanBC 11y ago

EdiX 11y ago

friendzis 11y ago
By "nonexistent border protection" I meant something more like "once you step on EU land, you are free to go anywhere". The very first signs of the bubble should have been indicators that it was time to do something different to "disincentivize the whole enterprise". Maybe fish them out of the water and transport back as soon as possible? It is not sustainable, but better than nothing to buy some time to prepare
- EdiX 11y ago
  >By "nonexistent border protection" I meant something more like "once you step on EU land, you are free to go anywhere". The whole point of the EU and the Schengen treaty was to have less border protection between member states. Is your opinion that the European Union is detrimental? >Maybe fish them out of the water and transport back as soon as possible? We can't deport the refugees back to war zones because of the european court of human rights (and possibly human decency) and we can't deport migrants until they have been identified because sending them to a random country would be human trafficking (and of course it is in migrants best interest to render themselves hard to identify).

LoSboccacc 11y ago

> nonexistent border protection from southern countries like Italy, Greece. Never have I heard of them employing border patrols to veer off illegal boats Big fallacy here: Italy is forced to take on all migrants that even come close to Italian soil. We cannot respond with force (of course) and we cannot catch them all. We also are forced to evaluate all their asylum request fairly and we have to deal with loads of them that just refuse self identification making the process long and costly. > I am by no means denying the need for help for actual war victims 'War victims' is used by every single one of them because it's the only way in. Problem is, how do you grant asylum and which resource do you use for it? Current international agreements afaik puts all the costs on the landing nation. Problem is, they want southern country to have higher safety and better controls and all that, but noone wants to pay for it.