Political refugees etc
Discussion
I think they do...
"An estimated 9 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of civil war in March 2011, taking refuge in neighbouring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), over 3 million have fled to Syria's immediate neighbours Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. 6.5 million are internally displaced within Syria. Meanwhile, under 150,000 Syrians have declared asylum in the European Union, while member states have pledged to resettle a further 33,000 Syrians. The vast majority of these resettlement spots – 28,500 or 85% – are pledged by Germany."
Source: http://syrianrefugees.eu/
"An estimated 9 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of civil war in March 2011, taking refuge in neighbouring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), over 3 million have fled to Syria's immediate neighbours Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. 6.5 million are internally displaced within Syria. Meanwhile, under 150,000 Syrians have declared asylum in the European Union, while member states have pledged to resettle a further 33,000 Syrians. The vast majority of these resettlement spots – 28,500 or 85% – are pledged by Germany."
Source: http://syrianrefugees.eu/
mikal83 said:
Why don't the Syrian refugees head east to Iran/Iraq/Pakistan etc. They speak Arabic, its closer and warmer than Sweden?
Ditto for the Sudanese. Head west to Nigeria, up to Chad etc. Cold nasty Europe.......???
Sorry to say but I would rather have ignorant people who make stupid ass comments move somewhere far away... Ditto for the Sudanese. Head west to Nigeria, up to Chad etc. Cold nasty Europe.......???
Please look up what language people speak in Pakistan and Iran - it is not arabic!!
While your at it please look up what being a refugee means...
Actually let me help you because you probably won't find it in the daily mail...
A refugee is someone who is forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persucation or natural disaster...
What is it that you don't like about refugees.?
The fact they don't have any possessions? Their skin colour? Their religion?
You do realise the nazis only wanted certain skin colour and religion in their country?
Put down the Daily Mail and turn off the TV. If you think Europe has problems, be glad you're not sorting out a bordering country with a real refugee crisis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syri...
http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/country.php?i...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syri...
http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/country.php?i...
I don't have an issue with their refugeeship, and there are millions of people with a valid claim. My problem is that they have an obligation under international law to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in.
http://www.unhcr.org/3ae68ccec.html
That's the way asylum is supposed to work.
The situation we have in Europe at the moment involves an awful lot of opportunism.
Here's what I'd suggest. All asylum seekers who are not claiming asylum in the first safe country they arrive in are deemed to be economic migrants and will be returned to their country of origin if it is possible to do so.
Anyone who does wish to claim asylum must do so as soon as they reach a safe country. That's going to mean a lot of refugees piling up in the poorer parts of the EU, but the EU has deep pockets and I think would be happy to pay to ensure basic standards of living (and that part is absolutely vital) within those countries while asylum claims are determined and the best place for them to settle (if at all) is decided, especially if it means less migration through the EU.
Asylum is supposed to be temporary after all, and as soon as their homeland is safe they're supposed to go back.
Any genuine asylum seeker will not be enraged by this arrangement as it's better than being shot at. Anyone who is an economic migrant will not be.
It's harsh, I know. But the global asylum system is not designed for what is effectively an entire country deciding that it doesn't like where it lives, and rather than trying to fix it, moves elsewhere. It's no wonder the Islamic State is finding it so easy to run riot through the Levant if there are no moderates left to counter it.
http://www.unhcr.org/3ae68ccec.html
That's the way asylum is supposed to work.
The situation we have in Europe at the moment involves an awful lot of opportunism.
Here's what I'd suggest. All asylum seekers who are not claiming asylum in the first safe country they arrive in are deemed to be economic migrants and will be returned to their country of origin if it is possible to do so.
Anyone who does wish to claim asylum must do so as soon as they reach a safe country. That's going to mean a lot of refugees piling up in the poorer parts of the EU, but the EU has deep pockets and I think would be happy to pay to ensure basic standards of living (and that part is absolutely vital) within those countries while asylum claims are determined and the best place for them to settle (if at all) is decided, especially if it means less migration through the EU.
Asylum is supposed to be temporary after all, and as soon as their homeland is safe they're supposed to go back.
Any genuine asylum seeker will not be enraged by this arrangement as it's better than being shot at. Anyone who is an economic migrant will not be.
It's harsh, I know. But the global asylum system is not designed for what is effectively an entire country deciding that it doesn't like where it lives, and rather than trying to fix it, moves elsewhere. It's no wonder the Islamic State is finding it so easy to run riot through the Levant if there are no moderates left to counter it.
They are not immigrants in the main. Most are refugees fleeing terror and subjugation in their war-torn homelands. They are seeking a country like ours because of our reputation for rule of law, stability, and peaceful co-existence with our neighbours. It may help to allay some your prejudices if you consider just how many of them actually speak our language as well as they do - often more fluently than some of us!
davepoth said:
Asylum is supposed to be temporary after all, and as soon as their homeland is safe they're supposed to go back.
Any genuine asylum seeker will not be enraged by this arrangement as it's better than being shot at. Anyone who is an economic migrant will not be.
It's harsh, I know. But the global asylum system is not designed for what is effectively an entire country deciding that it doesn't like where it lives, and rather than trying to fix it, moves elsewhere..
The process is being abused because there is not a coherent policy by the rest of the world. Germany breaks the ranks and invites 800k Syrian refugees - needs a young labour force and to make up the population decline. Yet expects the UK to do the same, different circumstances. Opportunist. The US/Saudi Arabian has not taken many, and they had their finger in the civil war somewhere.Any genuine asylum seeker will not be enraged by this arrangement as it's better than being shot at. Anyone who is an economic migrant will not be.
It's harsh, I know. But the global asylum system is not designed for what is effectively an entire country deciding that it doesn't like where it lives, and rather than trying to fix it, moves elsewhere..
Thorodin said:
They are not immigrants in the main. Most are refugees fleeing terror and subjugation in their war-torn homelands.
I'm not so sure that's true.I think many are just looking for a much better standard of living. Why live in relative poverty if you don't have to? I would be dragging my wife and kids away to a nice European country too, trust me.
Kawasicki said:
Thorodin said:
They are not immigrants in the main. Most are refugees fleeing terror and subjugation in their war-torn homelands.
I'm not so sure that's true.I think many are just looking for a much better standard of living. Why live in relative poverty if you don't have to? I would be dragging my wife and kids away to a nice European country too, trust me.
NicD said:
greygoose said:
Strange how hardly any Syrians turned up before civil war destroyed their country then.
How is that strange?greygoose said:
If they were just seeking a better standard of living then they would have been going to Europe for years, rather than waiting for a civil war to occur and decide now is the time to seek a better standard of living.
Syria was a good place to live, but the 4 years have destroyed nearly all that was good about Syria - and you have violent IS migrants into Syria, and they have declared their intentions to stay. Now the European opportunity for genuine refugees has been opened, I am not at all surprised they are taking it, and quickly before it disappears. On the subject of Syria then. Why don't they go to Iraq/Lebanon/Israel/Egypt etc. Stay in Turkey, head due north to the Caucuses maybe even Russia.....Ukraine, Poland etc. But on the TV today was a story about a young woman with a group trying to get to Sweden.....thru Bulgaria and up.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff