5 ms·

"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

by 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.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    There is nothing besides wanting to get to a better place (rather than fleeing from war) that makes people go all the way to Denmark. The fact is that the second you are in the nearest country where there is no conflict you are a refugee from the war, but the second you move further you are not more an actual refugee of war but rather a migrant. Now there are all sorts of reasons why we still accepts people as refugees rather than migrants but thats only because they didn't declare themselves refugees in some of the countries they came trough. They don't have to because of Schengen which allow for people to move freely within the EU. The out borders don't work, so as soon as you get in you can move quite freely. This is what is being changed now that many european countries are putting up border patrol forcing them further and further back to where they originated from. It's totally understandably why people want to move to a better place, just as it's perfectly understandable that countries don't want to let everyone in. Especially not the European wellfare systems which are quite lucrative. https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees/ https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees...
    - dalke 10y ago
      Yes, we're between a rock and a hard place. When experience says the Dublin Agreement starts to break own under high stress, who should suffer the most? The refugees? The border countries? I certainly have no answers, but I can empathize better with the refugees more than I can those who insist that refugees are stuck in the first place they arrive.
      - ThomPete 10y ago
        Of course you can empathize better with the refugees, most of us can. And so it's the job of the politicians to make sure a balance is struck. But you are doing it again. Assuming the problem is mostly a refugee problem. It's not it's a migration problem, thats the one thats hard to solve and which can't be solved by doing what sweden and germany did. Furthermore and as mentioned elsewhere. Many of these people are those with most resources, otherwise they wouldn't be able to actually make it so far. The real refugees, those who can't get away, them we are leaving with less resources because we end up spending money on those who come to the various european countries.

by dalke 10y ago

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.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  There is nothing besides wanting to get to a better place (rather than fleeing from war) that makes people go all the way to Denmark. The fact is that the second you are in the nearest country where there is no conflict you are a refugee from the war, but the second you move further you are not more an actual refugee of war but rather a migrant. Now there are all sorts of reasons why we still accepts people as refugees rather than migrants but thats only because they didn't declare themselves refugees in some of the countries they came trough. They don't have to because of Schengen which allow for people to move freely within the EU. The out borders don't work, so as soon as you get in you can move quite freely. This is what is being changed now that many european countries are putting up border patrol forcing them further and further back to where they originated from. It's totally understandably why people want to move to a better place, just as it's perfectly understandable that countries don't want to let everyone in. Especially not the European wellfare systems which are quite lucrative. https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees/ https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees...
  - dalke 10y ago
    Yes, we're between a rock and a hard place. When experience says the Dublin Agreement starts to break own under high stress, who should suffer the most? The refugees? The border countries? I certainly have no answers, but I can empathize better with the refugees more than I can those who insist that refugees are stuck in the first place they arrive.
    - ThomPete 10y ago
      Of course you can empathize better with the refugees, most of us can. And so it's the job of the politicians to make sure a balance is struck. But you are doing it again. Assuming the problem is mostly a refugee problem. It's not it's a migration problem, thats the one thats hard to solve and which can't be solved by doing what sweden and germany did. Furthermore and as mentioned elsewhere. Many of these people are those with most resources, otherwise they wouldn't be able to actually make it so far. The real refugees, those who can't get away, them we are leaving with less resources because we end up spending money on those who come to the various european countries.