Refugees "flooding" Europe !NEW POLL!

[Grytviken]

Before the website went down last night, the poll was in favour of 'There is no issue' and 'Help as many of them as you can'.

When i wake up this morning it's in favour of 'Send them all home' which was by far the minority last night. The site was down till at least midnight GMT last night.

Would I be right in assuming that since the site came back up our friends from the US have recently contributed their views on Refugees 'flooding' Europe? xD

No, I think you guys are doing the humane thing by taking in the refugees. That doesn't change the fact that Europe  is a castrated communist socialist fairyland. Are they refugees who are eventually going to move back to their home countries or elsewhere or are you just keeping them in temporary slum camps?? The US takes in way more immigrants than Europe every year and even our illegals get welfare and free housing.

[Vovka]

The US takes in way more immigrants than Europe every year and even our illegals get welfare and free housing.

Russia has gone further!!! and in Russia illegals built houses for free! 
Russia has always been a step ahead 

[Grytviken]

Russia has gone further!!! and in Russia illegals built houses for free! 
Russia has always been a step ahead 

i'd go just for the bread and vodka. whatever cardboard box hut Putin would let me build would just be the cherry on top.

[Lars]

Too many humans? In Macau there are 18.000 people per square km, your region has a staggering 70. Mountains or not, surely there is no space issue. In any case, this entire matter is not about "importing immigrants". You don't order some non western individuals by phone. This matter is about thousands of refugees showing up at the border of Europe that have been running from potential death, destruction of livelihoods or active combat.

Well, Macau must be  overcrowded as hell.
There are already too many people  here, this region  is  one of the most populated areas of the alps. 
You can't build everywhere you want in the mountains, some places are more exposed to landslides, floodings and avalanches, in some cases  you have to put  barriers, nets and dig, the process can be damn expensive.
I don't want this region to become anything  like the north-west of italy, especially like  parts of Lombardy-Piedmont , buildings and  cement everywhere,  simply horrible.

Plus,   the forests here must not be cut down any more, there has been already enough deforestation, and sometimes for retarded reasons like creating even more skiing facilities,  the real way of skiing is Freeriding-off-piste skiing and  not over some artificially created track with its snow flattened by the snowcat machine.  The destruction of the mountain environment to create-promote  tourism.

I guess I should have used the word "accepting" instead of “importing”, If it was for me I'd help only the educated, skilled refugees and their families,  if there are enough resources, the others should be sent back.   

"Fuck off, we're full" 

(click to show/hide)

What are you on about? Italy has not at all been carrying much weight concerning immigration. In fact, Italy takes on very little asylum seekers. I won't argue that many asylum seekers enter the EU through Italy, but that is a very small issue. The important part is where they apply for asylum and where they need to be fed, housed and educated. Those entering through Italy usually go straight on to Northern Europe. Only 8.2 of Italy's population is foreign born. Of these only 50% is born outside of the EU, so 4.1% of your country consists of people born outside of the EU. The EU wide average for this number is 6.3%, with Italy being one of the lowest scorers. The German percentage is 7.8% and the Swedish percentage is 9.2%.

Here is the table.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Germany#Comparison_with_other_European_Union_countries

Here is the number of asylum applications to all EU countries in 2013. If you divide this by population it becomes very clear that Italy is getting the easy end. You get all the young people too.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/1/12/Number_of_%28non-EU%29_asylum_applicants_in_the_EU_and_EFTA_Member_States%2C_by_age_distribution%2C_2014_%28%C2%B9%29_YB15_III.png

One of the problems may be that most of the immigrants are concentrated in the north and center of Italy, the south has  few of them, and i doubt many immigrants want to live in southern italy, at the same time the north can't take a lot more people.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Grytviken]

Someone delete my post... don't know why.... strange, because it exists in my profile, even the topic was in "Show new replies to your posts."

They left mostly for work (because we have shitty, corrupt and thievish government), not because of war. Also if foreign body, so-called EU imposes accepting people then I say no. I don't want here replays from London2005 or Madrit2004.

I don't want more and more this click in Europe. We have enough of our own problems.

All this situation is caused by USA, so they should take the refugees.

Yes it's all the USA's fault. We forced them to kill each other and fight over who's imaginary god is superior. Islam is the religion of peace remember? Surely it must be our fault, how could someone from such a peaceful religion ever randomly kill and massacre civilians and launder all the aid money we gave them for guns and missiles instead of food and jobs.

[darmaster]

What are you on about? Italy has not at all been carrying much weight concerning immigration. In fact, Italy takes on very little asylum seekers. I won't argue that many asylum seekers enter the EU through Italy, but that is a very small issue. The important part is where they apply for asylum and where they need to be fed, housed and educated. Those entering through Italy usually go straight on to Northern Europe. Only 8.2 of Italy's population is foreign born. Of these only 50% is born outside of the EU, so 4.1% of your country consists of people born outside of the EU. The EU wide average for this number is 6.3%, with Italy being one of the lowest scorers. The German percentage is 7.8% and the Swedish percentage is 9.2%.

Here is the table.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Germany#Comparison_with_other_European_Union_countries

Here is the number of asylum applications to all EU countries in 2013. If you divide this by population it becomes very clear that Italy is getting the easy end. You get all the young people too.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/1/12/Number_of_%28non-EU%29_asylum_applicants_in_the_EU_and_EFTA_Member_States%2C_by_age_distribution%2C_2014_%28%C2%B9%29_YB15_III.png

? I never said italy takes many asylum seekers, i said many asylum seekers go to italy and have to be dealt with by us. Most of them don't come obviously legally by through boats and 90% go to italy. Those who manage to get papers (the sort of good ones ) obviously are not aiming to stay in italy and get to "good" germany. We have to send back those we manage to get data from while the rest stays here as clandestines and take much longer to get data; in lybia there is a black market of clandestine arriving to lampedusa and europe never gave a single shit, actually criticized us.

[Lars]

? I never said italy takes many asylum seekers, i said many asylum seekers go to italy and have to be dealt with by us. Most of them don't come obviously legally by through boats and 90% go to italy. Those who manage to get papers (the sort of good ones ) obviously are not aiming to stay in italy and get to "good" germany. We have to send back those we manage to get data from while the rest stays here as clandestines and take much longer to get data; in lybia there is a black market of clandestine arriving to lampedusa and europe never gave a single shit, actually criticized us.

They did wot?! FØk em!
Maybe them navy boys should shoot one of  them boats if  it gets too close, warning shots first. They won't come back if they know they are gonna be sent to Davy Jones' s locker.


 

[darmaster]

They wouldn't know even if it happened, the market is too profitable for human traders and they desperately look for another chance in life since they're born into war and starvation; sinking boat is stupid especially since anybody of us in their position wouls do the same thing, but that said there ia a huge problem with immigrants and honestly I have no idea how could we possibly resolve this in a decent way

[Algarn]

France is today being one of the main destination of the immigrants, around 45% are from Africa, something like 15-20% is from EU, and the rest is from everywhere else. I never thought I'd agree with Xesta on one thing, but I fear that the National Front wins the elections, one day. And this is happening thanks to the immigration. There's like 10% of unemployment rate in France, but the things no one even thinks about, is that these immigrants mostly don't get jobs, and if they do, they're working for the minimal wage. Still, Marine le Pen managed (I think) to make the French think (around 33% of the French will vote for FN, and those who vote for the "republican right wing" are in fact sheep that want the immigrants out) that strangers are stealing the jobs. But besides that, immigrants that have the chance to have the French nationality are just getting put in some kind of modern ghettos, where any hope of having a better social condition at the price of hard work is destroyed. The politicians, both from left wing and right wing are just useless, only promises, or fake solutions, so people will just vote for FN, and shit will start hitting the fan.

My opinion on the matter thought, is that if anyone is actually willing to be a citizen, and to behave like one, should get the citizenship. A lot of immigrants want to be safe, to become French/English/German, etc, and to have their families to live far away from war and poverty, not to implement Sharia or whatever. That's just retarded propaganda from extreme right wings that want to access to the power. Anyone that isn't a brainwashed retard knows what's happening in Syria, Turkey, or in Africa, and seeing the answers and opinions I hear on that matter are just dreadful; and made me lose any kind of confidence in the future of France, and Europe more generally. And when it comes to space, I'd gladly put these "pure french blood" retards on the boats to Syria and keep the refugees/immigrants, so they actually see what is war. When you accept immigrants, there are always either educated people or people who are willing to integrate and whom children will be better citizen for sure than neo nazee supporters.

[Siiem]

Yes it's all the USA's fault. We forced them to kill each other and fight over who's imaginary god is superior. Islam is the religion of peace remember? Surely it must be our fault, how could someone from such a peaceful religion ever randomly kill and massacre civilians and launder all the aid money we gave them for guns and missiles instead of food and jobs.

To be fair Iran for instance looked quite different in the 70's until 'Murica and The Limeys started a certain CIA OP. Saddam would probably be the best solution as well. So yes, when it comes to muslim immigration, you were the problem.

[ecorcheur_brokar]

Not sure how will they act this time, but after war in Bosnia ended Germany is the only country that made an offer to refugees to come back to their own countries. My relatives in Austria and Switzerland are still there, those who were in Germany had to come back.

"Made an offer" or forced them to leave? Switzerland is definitly not trying to keep its refugee after a conflict has passed. But why would bosnians, kosovar, etc would want to go back to their no man's land when they can stay in Switzerland.
I think swiss would have no problem to welcome refugees if they were going back to their country once the wars were over, but this has never happened.

[Angantyr]

Yes it's all the USA's fault. We forced them to kill each other and fight over who's imaginary god is superior. Islam is the religion of peace remember? Surely it must be our fault, how could someone from such a peaceful religion ever randomly kill and massacre civilians and launder all the aid money we gave them for guns and missiles instead of food and jobs.

Yes, the US never sold any weapons or gave any military support or waged any wars in the region, right? The US didn't support the Shah of Iran, didn't support Saddam Hussein and gave him chemical weapons, didn't support the Taleban and doesn't continuously support Saudi Arabia or Israel, Turkey or Pakistan. Hasn't destroyed Iraq, created a humanitarian catastrophe and killed and dispossessed millions of people and destabilized the entire region.

It isn't only the fault of the US but in recent times the US and before it some European nations, particularly the UK ( and before them the Ottomans and the Safavids) has definitely helped fan the flames.

[Overdriven]

In the UK I think the issue is largely blown out of proportion. It's been particularly highlighted in recent weeks due to the issues in Calais. But a lot of media hype goes into painting the immigrants around Calais as a massive problem that needs to be stopped. However, if you look at relative numbers, the numbers of migrants trying to come through Calais is ultimately marginal compared to the numbers that actually cross over into Europe into other countries.

A lot of public opinion also views the migrants as 'economic migrants' as opposed to refugees. As in these are people who have willingly made the decision to make the journey to find a better job ect rather than for the sake of fleeing a war torn country. Typically in the media this is backed up by pictures of migrants in Calais in expensive track suits with iphones ect.

As a personal view I would be happy for more refugees to be taken on by the UK. We barely accept any actual refugees as it is. The problem is sifting those in actual urgent need, fleeing prosecution or people who have had their homes torn from them through war from those who have left a relatively good home simply to seek better prospects.

As it stands though the main problem for the UK is migration from within the EU rather than refugees or migrants from further afield and a lot of the concern about them is just hot air. The numbers coming from within the EU far outweigh those from outside. One of the reasons why the anti-EU argument has picked up pace here over the past few years as the only way to viably prevent migration form the EU is to leave the EU.

[Radament]

This is the situation in Italy.

They are not refugees like those in Macedonian border.
They come here because they heard it looks like Disneyland.
They demand documents , good food and why not some wine.
They pretend to have a lodge when we can barely contain them.
Some of them are smarter and want to go to Germany or France because Italy is becoming worse than Africa.
GG

[Casimir]

I don't think EU migration here is a problem, of course some of the fascists in the Troy and UKIP lot would like to believes so; their EU migration statistics happily ignore the fact that EU migrants overall add around £20Bn to the british economy, (according to the leading UCL researchers on migration and economics at least) rather than taking anything away.  I believe the anti EU / migration rhetoric in British politics is more based in islamaphobia, a fear of diluting 'British culture' (supposedly a multicultural one lol) and a disturbingly fascist streak which believes that 'British people' are some how more deserving than any others despite the fact that there remains a far bigger strain on our economy from corporate tax evasion and a largely unmotivated and lazy working / benefit class.

Migration is an economic straw-man and although welfare states across Europe are under strain at the moment this was and is due to the banking crisis, its effects are still making life harder for millions of people in Europe and straining national finances. But please, some relativity here is needed, the cost of living may have gone up, my old friends and beer may be more expensive but its not like we are starving to death or fighting each other in the streets for a bag of rice.  People talk of economic migrants coming here to Europe to seek a better life as if that is some sort of a crime, think about the millions that have left from Europe to go to America to do exactly the same and how you believe they should have been treated, should people coming here be treated better or worse?

I think we should try and remember that times really are not as bad as many politicians and media sources would like us to believe, they like to keep us on the edge of oblivion because its much easier for them to order their changes to our way of life if people believe the whole system is going to collapse, fear is and always has been the weapon of the elites.  Politicians have proven they are willing to let us make huge economic sacrifices when it comes to bailing out bankers (read: their friends) but when it comes to helping out starving migrants and asylum seekers its some kind of threat to our very existence, this is abhorrently reprehensible yet the British public (and apparently a few people here) seems to increasingly lap it up.

We all have to pay the price for what has been done before (both in our life times and beyond) and accept the fact that we live in a globalised world with all the benefits and dangers which that encompasses. I don't think this 'flood' will be the end of the world, it may very well change our little bit of it, but we have to decide if we want that change to be for the better or for the worse. History will judge us on how we deal with these challenges, on what choices we make as human beings towards the lives of others, and what sort of future we actually want Europe to stand for. Sacrifices may need to be made, but nothing great is every achieved without sacrifice and risk.