4 ms·

I'm fully in favour of MSF's stance, asylum seekers must have their rights recognised. These people are fleeing war and, adding to be forced to remain in overcr

by hayao 10y ago

I'm fully in favour of MSF's stance, asylum seekers must have their rights recognised. These people are fleeing war and, adding to be forced to remain in overcrowded camps in dire conditions, they're even deprived of legal representation. It's a country's duty to receive refugees, according to the 1951 Refugee Convention and to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights[1]. EU's action gives the precedence for other states to refuse refugees access to their own safety. [1] - http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf

ThomPete 10y ago
It's not that simple. Fleeing to a nearby country is one thing. Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore. The irony is that it's those with most money who can afford to move the furthest away from the refugee camps and many of those who do are men, leaving their family behind hoping to be able to get them to the country they end up in 60% according to some are migrants not refugees. The problem is that the outer borders doesn't work and so once you are inside it's very easy to move around as there have been practically no border control inside the EU. This is changing now.
- thesimon 10y ago
  >60% according to some are migrants not refugees. "according to some" Wow, I was never convinced more.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees/ https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees...
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  You buy the propaganda line then? Are the other 40% IS in your book? By your argument we should just let them all sleep in a ditch next to the border of the country they fled, because that's good enough? That is more or less what is happening now. Tell me. If Britain were engaged in a shooting war, would you consider the Isle of Man safe? Or would you go further?
  - sorenjan 10y ago
    What's your take on the camps in France [0] filled with migrants trying to get to Britain? Which wars in France are they fleeing? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Jungle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Jungle
    - madaxe_again 10y ago
      People are trying to flee to somewhere familiar, be it because of language or brand presence. Additionally, many report they want to join family (cousins etc) already in the uk through legal means. I'm sure there are charlatans among them - but we are enacting collective punishment currently, which was largely abolished centuries ago. What's your take on the 3000 refugee a year limit the uk is working to? (20,000 by 2020)
      - ThomPete 10y ago
        Somewhere familiar? How is Denmark or Sweden or Germany familiar to Syria? If you flee because of war you don't care where you go, you just want to get away from the war. Moving to Denmark or UK or Sweden is a completely different operation. Keep in mind that most people are left in the refugee camps near the conflict. For every person we have to take into our welfare system we are basically not able to provide for 10 if not hundreds of others in the actual area of the conflict. The idea with being an actual refugee is that you are supposed to go back once the conflict is over and rebuild your own country. Thats not the plan of those who move so far away. You are trying to turn something with a lot of gray areas into som black/white moral thing were the only right thing to do is help. Sweden said just come everyone everyone warned them. Now they have closed the borders and is sending 80.000 back. This is because they didn't realize that Denmark did which is you can't just take people in large quantity with such different cultures without it undermining the country they are migrating to. It's easy to play the good person when you don't have responsibility for a country.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    What propaganda? There are many refugee camps near the actual conflict areas. It's not cheap to get to Denmark, so only those with most money can do it, which means the rest are left in the actual refugee camps near the area they fled from. All you need to do is go and check out the refugee camps in ex. Denmark and you will find it to be mostly men, many of them married which mean they left their wife and or children behind. Think about that for a moment.
- dalke 10y ago
  "Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." That is because of how international travel works. Many of those people would love to hop on a plane, land in country X, and request refugee status. But the flight system is set up to prevent that. Only those with a visa (or visa waiver) are allowed on the plane. It used to be that refugees could travel by passenger ship. Look at the refugees from Germany who came to the US because of the second world war. Including the MS St. Louis where the refugees were denied entry to Cuba, Canada, and the United States. We have no real passenger fleets, so that is no longer possible. The only option left is to travel by land. "60% according to some are migrants not refugees." Do you have any references for that statement? Even if true, millions of people are refugees.
  - sorenjan 10y ago
    > "Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." > That is because of how international travel works. Refugees fleeing from war are forced to travel through the entire European continent to the northern countries with the most beneficial social security because of how international travel works? > "60% according to some are migrants not refugees." > Do you have any references for that statement? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12123684/Six-in-ten-migrants-not-entitled-to-asylum-says-EU-chief.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12123684...
    - dalke 10y ago
      That's one person, who in January referenced an internal report. Has that report since been published? Was he correct in that statement? That one report has been repeated many times, but repetition isn't verification. If I read https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 correctly, the 40% number refers specifically Syrian refugees. Quoting from it: > Iraqis and Afghans, it says, each represent around 24 percent of the mix, or just under 50 percent together. > In other words, almost 90 percent the people who arrived by sea in the EU in December came from countries gripped by war or emerged from a wider regional conflict. As to your other comment, when people flee they want to move some place where they have a future. Few want a future living in a refugee camp. Few want a future living as if they are second-class citizens and subject to xenophobia. I'm sure many would choose to go to the US even though the US does not offer "the most beneficial social security". Many have gone to Brazil.
- hayao 10y ago
  According to the Article 26 of the document I posted above, "each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances."; according to the second point of the Article 31 of that same document, "the Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    Yes which is all based on the premise that the outer borders works, which they don't. This is why several countries now have border patrols again.
DominikR 10y ago
Once they arrive in Turkey or Greece their lives are not threatened anymore. Where does it say that refugees can pick and choose wherever they'd like to live. Why don't you import them to San Francisco? I guess life is even better there than in some small German town. Or how about Monaco or Disney Land?
- hayao 10y ago
  According to the Article 26 of the document I posted above, "each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances."; according to the second point of the Article 31 of that same document, "the Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."

by hayao 10y ago

ThomPete 10y ago

It's not that simple. Fleeing to a nearby country is one thing. Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore. The irony is that it's those with most money who can afford to move the furthest away from the refugee camps and many of those who do are men, leaving their family behind hoping to be able to get them to the country they end up in 60% according to some are migrants not refugees. The problem is that the outer borders doesn't work and so once you are inside it's very easy to move around as there have been practically no border control inside the EU. This is changing now.

thesimon 10y ago
>60% according to some are migrants not refugees. "according to some" Wow, I was never convinced more.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees/ https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees...
madaxe_again 10y ago
You buy the propaganda line then? Are the other 40% IS in your book? By your argument we should just let them all sleep in a ditch next to the border of the country they fled, because that's good enough? That is more or less what is happening now. Tell me. If Britain were engaged in a shooting war, would you consider the Isle of Man safe? Or would you go further?
- sorenjan 10y ago
  What's your take on the camps in France [0] filled with migrants trying to get to Britain? Which wars in France are they fleeing? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Jungle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Jungle
  - madaxe_again 10y ago
    People are trying to flee to somewhere familiar, be it because of language or brand presence. Additionally, many report they want to join family (cousins etc) already in the uk through legal means. I'm sure there are charlatans among them - but we are enacting collective punishment currently, which was largely abolished centuries ago. What's your take on the 3000 refugee a year limit the uk is working to? (20,000 by 2020)
    - ThomPete 10y ago
      Somewhere familiar? How is Denmark or Sweden or Germany familiar to Syria? If you flee because of war you don't care where you go, you just want to get away from the war. Moving to Denmark or UK or Sweden is a completely different operation. Keep in mind that most people are left in the refugee camps near the conflict. For every person we have to take into our welfare system we are basically not able to provide for 10 if not hundreds of others in the actual area of the conflict. The idea with being an actual refugee is that you are supposed to go back once the conflict is over and rebuild your own country. Thats not the plan of those who move so far away. You are trying to turn something with a lot of gray areas into som black/white moral thing were the only right thing to do is help. Sweden said just come everyone everyone warned them. Now they have closed the borders and is sending 80.000 back. This is because they didn't realize that Denmark did which is you can't just take people in large quantity with such different cultures without it undermining the country they are migrating to. It's easy to play the good person when you don't have responsibility for a country.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  What propaganda? There are many refugee camps near the actual conflict areas. It's not cheap to get to Denmark, so only those with most money can do it, which means the rest are left in the actual refugee camps near the area they fled from. All you need to do is go and check out the refugee camps in ex. Denmark and you will find it to be mostly men, many of them married which mean they left their wife and or children behind. Think about that for a moment.
dalke 10y ago
"Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." That is because of how international travel works. Many of those people would love to hop on a plane, land in country X, and request refugee status. But the flight system is set up to prevent that. Only those with a visa (or visa waiver) are allowed on the plane. It used to be that refugees could travel by passenger ship. Look at the refugees from Germany who came to the US because of the second world war. Including the MS St. Louis where the refugees were denied entry to Cuba, Canada, and the United States. We have no real passenger fleets, so that is no longer possible. The only option left is to travel by land. "60% according to some are migrants not refugees." Do you have any references for that statement? Even if true, millions of people are refugees.
- sorenjan 10y ago
  > "Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." > That is because of how international travel works. Refugees fleeing from war are forced to travel through the entire European continent to the northern countries with the most beneficial social security because of how international travel works? > "60% according to some are migrants not refugees." > Do you have any references for that statement? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12123684/Six-in-ten-migrants-not-entitled-to-asylum-says-EU-chief.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12123684...
  - dalke 10y ago
    That's one person, who in January referenced an internal report. Has that report since been published? Was he correct in that statement? That one report has been repeated many times, but repetition isn't verification. If I read https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 correctly, the 40% number refers specifically Syrian refugees. Quoting from it: > Iraqis and Afghans, it says, each represent around 24 percent of the mix, or just under 50 percent together. > In other words, almost 90 percent the people who arrived by sea in the EU in December came from countries gripped by war or emerged from a wider regional conflict. As to your other comment, when people flee they want to move some place where they have a future. Few want a future living in a refugee camp. Few want a future living as if they are second-class citizens and subject to xenophobia. I'm sure many would choose to go to the US even though the US does not offer "the most beneficial social security". Many have gone to Brazil.
hayao 10y ago
According to the Article 26 of the document I posted above, "each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances."; according to the second point of the Article 31 of that same document, "the Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."
- ThomPete 10y ago
  Yes which is all based on the premise that the outer borders works, which they don't. This is why several countries now have border patrols again.

DominikR 10y ago

Once they arrive in Turkey or Greece their lives are not threatened anymore. Where does it say that refugees can pick and choose wherever they'd like to live. Why don't you import them to San Francisco? I guess life is even better there than in some small German town. Or how about Monaco or Disney Land?

hayao 10y ago
According to the Article 26 of the document I posted above, "each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances."; according to the second point of the Article 31 of that same document, "the Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."