Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
scribblet

Europe and Mass Migration

Recommended Posts

The situation in Europe is heating up as Greeks are demanding that the migrants be removed from the over crowded islands.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7916431/amp/Thousands-Greek-protesters-demand-asylum-seekers-removed-islands.html

Italy is telling 500,000 illegal migrants to 'pack your bags).  The island,  had to stop being “the refugee camp of Europe,” Salvini told reporters.

So Europe is overwhelmed yet the U.N. tells us all to be prepared to accept 'climate refugees', so exactly who decides if they are 'climate refugees' and how many more can Europe in particular take before society disintegrates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, scribblet said:

so exactly who decides if they are 'climate refugees' and

The refugees themselves will decide when the land they are on has become inhospitable to human life.

11 minutes ago, scribblet said:

before society disintegrates.

Almost a foregone conclusion since we are doing so little to mitigate the effects of climate change.  Its not just people trying to find a place to live, but the economic cost of climate change that will contribute to collapse of society as we know it.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are doing plenty, it just has no effect because we cannot change the weather/climate.  We can clean up pollution, recycle etc. But it won't change anything.

If 10s of millions decide to take advantage the west will not cope, society will break down, Europe is allready facing that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dialamah said:

The refugees themselves will decide 

The refugees decide!  See, no need for any review of refugee claims!  What a shit show.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shady said:

The refugees decide!  See, no need for any review of refugee claims!  What a shit show.

Everything is an individual decision. Welcome to liberals lala land.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Shady said:

The refugees decide!  See, no need for any review of refugee claims!  

Yes, they move .... it's not like we can stop them from moving from wherever they are, eh?  We can try to stop them at the border, assuming we have the resources to do so.  But at some point, if there's enough movement, we'll lose.  

20 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Everything is an individual decision.

I thought conservatives support the right of people to make decisions independent of government intervention.  No?

Quote

Welcome to liberals lala land.

Anywhere is better than the shifting illogic of conservative ideology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dialamah said:

I thought conservatives support the right of people to make decisions independent of government intervention.  No?

Not really, conservatives in general are very anti drugs and promiscuity/abortion.

Anywhere is better than the shifting illogic of conservative ideology.

You sound very tribal, and only seeing through the lens of your ideology.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dialamah said:

The refugees themselves will decide when the land they are on has become inhospitable to human life.

Ah, so they decide themselves if they are qualified to live in another country and can't be removed.

7 hours ago, dialamah said:

Almost a foregone conclusion since we are doing so little to mitigate the effects of climate change.  Its not just people trying to find a place to live, but the economic cost of climate change that will contribute to collapse of society as we know it.

WE, as in the west, are the only people who ARE doing anything to mitigate climate change. Meanwhile the third world is building hundreds of coal fired power plants as fast as they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, scribblet said:

We are doing plenty, it just has no effect because we cannot change the weather/climate.  We can clean up pollution, recycle etc. But it won't change anything.

If 10s of millions decide to take advantage the west will not cope, society will break down, Europe is allready facing that. 

I've posted this before, but it seems apropo.

For the US, that surge of Hondurans is a wavelet in an incoming tide; for Europe, 2015 was mere prelude. Yet this autumn’s caravan may further entrench an effective protocol. Populous, organised assaults on borders can overcome physical barriers and overwhelm bureaucracies. Migrants trying to get into Ceuta and Melilla have had remarkable success with storming the fences simultaneously. Should they take their cue from the Hondurans, canny migrants currently chafing in Libya might all hit the Med in a flotilla on the same afternoon.

Millions if not billions of decent, ordinary people in need of food, clean water, shelter and medical care are bound to constitute a form of moral blackmail. They will all have heartbreaking stories.

And Thomas Friedman has astutely characterised the West vs the rest as order vs disorder. But with over-stressed welfare systems, accelerating cultural upheaval and rising right-wing militancy, the lands of order can slide to chaos themselves. If in the next few decades we’re looking at migration on the scale I think we are, we may be required to develop a hard heart, or simply surrender to forces larger than we can control. I’m not sure which is worse. if we continue to confront the issue as a question of sympathy rather than existential self-interest, they will nearly all get in.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/the-march-of-the-migrants-poses-a-dilemma-for-america/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Scribblet

Based on every single post of yours I have read, I recommend to look through some self help books in a book store for something on 'how to be more optimistic' or 'how to stop hating', if such a book exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marocc said:

@Scribblet

Based on every single post of yours I have read, I recommend to look through some self help books in a book store for something on 'how to be more optimistic' or 'how to stop hating', if such a book exists.

I don't hate anyone, I would also advise you to take the advice of the mod. To not make it personal and quit imputing thoughts etc. To others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scribblet said:

I don't hate anyone, I would also advise you to take the advice of the mod. To not make it personal and quit imputing thoughts etc. To others.

Ah but that's the new favorite word for the left and its activists! There's no more disapproval or disagreement or even dislike! There's no judgement based on what you've seen and heard and experienced of a given group. There's no wariness or doubt or suspicion about a group's demonstrated behaviour, no prejudice. Either you fully approve of, like and admire a given group or you 'hate' them. Apparently the Left finds this a more useful pejorative to use for anyone who disagrees with them as it evokes a red faced angry/furious, raging person who isn't thinking logically. As opposed to someone who has considered the available information and made a decision as to what is in their own and their country's best interests.

Edited by Argus
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly,  disagree with a liberal and it's  hate and or racism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Exactly,  disagree with a liberal and it's  hate and or racism.

I wouldn't call someone who believes women should not leave the house without a burka - liberal.  She's just following the lead of others here who accuse anyone of disliking burkas and Islam of being "haters".  And apparently has nothing to add to the discussion except personal attacks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2020 at 1:51 PM, dialamah said:

Yes, they move .... it's not like we can stop them from moving from wherever they are, eh?  We can try to stop them at the border, assuming we have the resources to do so.  But at some point, if there's enough movement, we'll lose.

Countries have the right to secure their own territorial borders.  That's a basic tenet of sovereignty.  If people try to cross and that country doesn't want them to they can use force including military force if necessary.  Similarly, a poor old person in a wheelchair doesn't get to cross a police barrier just because they're a poor old person in a wheelchair.  Having sad circumstances doesn't automatically give you the right to break rules/laws.

On 1/23/2020 at 1:51 PM, dialamah said:

I thought conservatives support the right of people to make decisions independent of government intervention.  No?

People don't have a right to make up their own reality and their own facts and push it on other people to accept.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Countries have the right to secure their own territorial borders.  That's a basic tenet of sovereignty.  If people try to cross and that country doesn't want them to they can use force including military force if necessary.  Similarly, a poor old person in a wheelchair doesn't get to cross a police barrier just because they're a poor old person in a wheelchair.  Having sad circumstances doesn't automatically give you the right to break rules/laws.

I'm only talking about people's initial decision to start moving in search of a place to live.  In the case of climate refugees, they'll decide when the place they're at becomes too inhospitable, and they'll decide when to start looking for other places.  That is something we have no control over, nor do our governments.  We only have control over what we do if/when they get to our borders.  

Quote

People don't have a right to make up their own reality and their own facts and push it on other people to accept.

Ain't it funny how often people try to do just that though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

People don't have a right to make up their own reality and their own facts and push it on other people to accept.

Like a dog blaming a man of being too hirsute.

When the water starts rising and people have to move away, can they?

Hater actually is not something that refers only to hatred of people, but it also applies to hatred toward things. It's in the dictionary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Marocc said:

Like a dog blaming a man of being too hirsute.

When the water starts rising and people have to move away, can they?

Hater actually is not something that refers only to hatred of people, but it also applies to hatred toward things. It's in the dictionary.

I would think climate refugees would be more of a problem for very small countries.  If it's determined you're able to move to safely another area in your same country you will be denied refugee status.  Things like poverty, famine, and climate are also not one of the criteria where you can make a refugee claim under the UN convention.  Usually it has to do with political persecution of some kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I would think climate refugees would be more of a problem for very small countries.  If it's determined you're able to move to safely another area in your same country you will be denied refugee status.  Things like poverty, famine, and climate are also not one of the criteria where you can make a refugee claim under the UN convention.  Usually it has to do with political persecution of some kind.

I wonder of that will always be true, or if it matters in the long run.  Crop failures, drought, conflict over water, starvation and disease will make the UN definition of 'refugee' irrelevant to the people that have the ability to find a place that may allow them and their families to stay alive.  I won't be around to see it, about which I'm both disappointed and relieved, but I personally do not think Canada will survive as a separate country, and I don't think there's much we can do about that.  I think the immediate move of the States will be to simply take us over, as a 'friendly' invader, or not, because in some ways we are best placed to offer survival to humans and having our resources would allow the States to maintain power in the world.  I don't know what will happen in Europe, but given their proximity to the places which will suffer the most, I don't think it will be pretty.  I believe that the world will look very, very different in 200 years time.  Of course, I may be 100% wrong - I hope I am.  If I'm not, I hope the lessons we could learn stay with humans and that we do create a better, more humane society and a sustainable world.

Saw a comment the other day about what to call the generation being born now - a suggestion was "Generation Fucked".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Countries have the right to secure their own territorial borders.  That's a basic tenet of sovereignty.  If people try to cross and that country doesn't want them to they can use force including military force if necessary.  Similarly, a poor old person in a wheelchair doesn't get to cross a police barrier just because they're a poor old person in a wheelchair.  Having sad circumstances doesn't automatically give you the right to break rules/laws.

People don't have a right to make up their own reality and their own facts and push it on other people to accept.

Exactly, but then the U.N. thinks differently,  this is dated, but  here we have  the U.N. dictating who we can accept and who not to reject, but really, what's to stop people from massively invading other countries on the pretext that it's 'climate change'. 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/02/climate-change-will-create-worlds-biggest-refugee-crisis

What we need is a level of immigration that we can successfully cope with,  one that doesn't strain the infrastructure, e,g,  housing, on schools and health care,  which is allready happening. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2020 at 1:29 PM, QuebecOverCanada said:

Everything is an individual decision.

Yes, individual rights are now subject to the rulings of the government, especially when led by a strongman.  Welcome to conservative lala land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2020 at 4:35 PM, QuebecOverCanada said:

Not really, conservatives in general are very anti drugs and promiscuity/abortion.

Again, freedom is a problem. Unless it's a freedom we like... such as to pollute, increase CO2 and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not surprising as the conditions on the islands where thousands are, are terrible conditions, they cannot take any more and Islanders are protesting saying they ‘want their islands back’.  https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/politics-news-pmn/greek-island-residents-protest-over-migrant-camps-and-conditions

 

https://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/greece-wants-fence-to-keep-migrants-out/news-story/626ceedb978972fff4e1c40d87668467

Greece wants to install a floating barrier in the Aegean Sea to deter migrants arriving at its islands' shores through Turkey, government officials say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2020 at 7:39 AM, dialamah said:

I believe that the world will look very, very different in 200 years time. 

The world looks different every 200 years. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Likely the real reason Trudeau didn't close the US border is because it still allows people from the U.S. to illegally to cross into Canada at places like Roxham Rd.    If he'd said the border is completely closed,  Americans including potential illegals would assume that included them illegal entry point or not.

But that's not the real issue here. The problem is that he's still allowing illegal immigrants into Canada during a deadly pandemic which is unconscionable especially when his and the provincial gov'ts have told Canadian's to self quarantine, keep social distance and do everything they can to stop the spread of the disease including curbing travel for anything that isn't absolutely necessary.

So it's quite apparent he doesn't really give a shit about the rest of us or he wouldn't have this double standard for entry to Canada would he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...