Immigration What should Europeans do with illegal immigrants?

[LeBrok]

Australia, you say?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_Australia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_detention_in_Australia

There are no refugees coming to Australia because they are immeadiately sent back or put in jail.
If boat refugees would arrive to the US or Canada they would do exactly the same.

This conversation was about economic benefits of immigrants to the country, not about procedural acceptance or not. If you want to voice your opinion about immigration being good or bad for these 3 countries, that would be a proper answer to my post.

So if you are telling what Europeans should do, you're a bloody hypocrit.

Once again, the issue of my complete agreement or disliking of Canadian immigration policy is not in question here, neither anyone asked me about my opinion on it. I can also accept your opinion or suggestions about my government immigration policy. The argument at hand was if immigrants are beneficial or not.

There was only one instance of people on boat reaching Canada from Sri Lanka, that I remember, they were all processed and accepted I believe. Otherwise there are many individual case of people coming to Canada to claim asylum. They are all processed, rather lengthy process takes few years, with many people not being accepted and deported. Similar to processes in many European countries. Process is generally speaking fine. The problem Europe's facing is extraordinary volume of refugees, which can't be processed in normal way or even given temporary accommodation. The problem is not illegal refugee or two, the problem is the huge volume that broke the system. And this needs to be addressed and solution found. What would you do?

 

[epoch]

I never saw your statistics, try posting again. Look at US, Canada and Australia how successful immigrant countries are. What would be a better statistic than the whole successful country built by immigrants?

Who said enforcing regulations and running whole process lawfully shouldn't be done? Vast majority of migrants in these cosmopolitan cities are legal. I'm sure you can go to New York and buy an apartment there to stay on visa. You don't need to be US citizen.



There were wars for many reasons, but the fact is that there were fewer restrictions to settle. The point was about law not about feelings.

Immigration laws already exist. The problem is that Europe is not ready, in many ways, for the volume of refugees. That creates the mess, bad treatment of people, crime and the paranoia. The solution must be found to this crisis. What is yours?
I'm suspecting that by calling it colonization, you hate the idea of immigration at any degree, right?

Listen, I'm not going to repeat it all. I already explained in previous posts. Scroll back. Make some effort.

EDIT: We just proved that racism is also rampant in Canada. Now how come Canada, the US and Australia are such immigration successes whereas immigrants in Europe remain unemployed? What is the difference? Those 3 were colonized by Europeans. But that can't be the reason because that woudl be a racist conclusion. Henceforth the only other difference, to wit your 3 success stories all reduced the original population to a tiny and sorry minority, must be the cause.

 

[Yetos]

If anything is going to finish Europe, its hysteria, populism and creeping fascism (UKIP in the UK, Front National in France), not immigration. You're talking about human beings, not some kind of zombie apocalypse or a hostile force of "colonizers" that is out to take away your land. I find personally that it tells volumes that you get the biggest riots in those parts of Germany that are amongst those with the smallest percentage of immigrants.

Mind you, I'm not saying that they should all come to Germany. But you should consider that Oriental Christians (and other religious minorities, for example the Mandaeans and the Yazidi) have no future in the Near East. They won't be able to return for the foreseeable future. And this is something that can be blamed entirely on the so-called "Coalition of the willing" that happily marched into Iraq (on the whim of a blatant lie), without any plan for the "after", without any care for the potential consequences. So, in my opinion, I see these countries as more in the duty to take these people.

and why Taranis?

I am not saying that Yezidis are angels or devils, but what we did (as Europe) to prevent their genocide?
we are sticked in economical affairs, which indeed is the big problem, but what we do to avoid the possible genocide of Yezidis,
I think our leaders can easily become muslims if money given to them,
and I support every soul that wants to get away from hell, but not this way,
this is not escape from hell, it is a slave market, only the price is not paid by buyer/owner, but by slave,

 

[Yetos]

You would have Sunni/Shia war sooner or later, whether it was ISIS, al-Qaeda or other organization running the show. Hatred was already there, religious fundamentalism was already there, you had Kurds dreaming about independence already there. Iraq war was just an accelerator.

NO,
soon we will have natives vs immigrants war in Europe, especially in some countries which you already know,

 

[Vallicanus]

Well, immigration to North America and Australia was a disaster for most of the native populations that had been there for thousands of years.

LeBrok does not consider these unfortunate indigenous people important in his theory of wonderful modern immigrant nations, as if the USA, for example, does not have enormous problems of racism and poverty.

Similarly to him indigenous Europeans are just a nuisance getting in the way of his migrant dream for Europe.

 

[Yetos]

GUYS

Deja vu said something which indeed made me wonder,

most immigrants are Muslims,
away from Syria, the rest are from areas like Pakistan or Africa were the war is not like with Syria,

THERE ARE 4 MUSLIM COUNTRIES IN EUROPE AND MANY SPOTS OF ISLAMIC EXISTANCE,

and I ask you?

DID ANY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ASK TO GO TO ALBANIA KOSSOVO BOSNIA TURKEY?
answer is NO

did you see or hear any illegal immigrant to ask to go to Greek Thrace, Bulgarian Thrace, Ukraine/Crimea Tatars, Kazan/white city Russia, Marselle France?
answer is NO

away from the problem of Syrria are also Jordania Azerbaizan etc etc
DID YOU HEAR ANY MUSLIM COUNTRY TO OFFER A HAND OF HELP AND RELIEF TO IMMIGRANTS
answer is NO,
Not even SAUDI which are the holy land of Islammade a camp to accomodate some
and last question

do you believe that illegal immigrants are so dump or silly that pay such money to 'traffickers'?
answer is NO


anyway I still support any soul that wants to leave war, especially from Syrria and Iraq, to save soul, but with terms to return when war is over,
but I do not support what is going on happening now

 

[bicicleur 2]

This conversation was about economic benefits of immigrants to the country, not about procedural acceptance or not. If you want to voice your opinion about immigration being good or bad for these 3 countries, that would be a proper answer to my post.


Once again, the issue of my complete agreement or disliking of Canadian immigration policy is not in question here, neither anyone asked me about my opinion on it. I can also accept your opinion or suggestions about my government immigration policy. The argument at hand was if immigrants are beneficial or not.

There was only one instance of people on boat reaching Canada from Sri Lanka, that I remember, they were all processed and accepted I believe. Otherwise there are many individual case of people coming to Canada to claim asylum. They are all processed, rather lengthy process takes few years, with many people not being accepted and deported. Similar to processes in many European countries. Process is generally speaking fine. The problem Europe's facing is extraordinary volume of refugees, which can't be processed in normal way or even given temporary accommodation. The problem is not illegal refugee or two, the problem is the huge volume that broke the system. And this needs to be addressed and solution found. What would you do?

well I understood wrong then, as almost anybody else in this thread

immigration can be usefull, if you can control who comes in or not
but being invaded by a large uncontrolable swarm is not

 

[bicicleur 2]

You would have Sunni/Shia war sooner or later, whether it was ISIS, al-Qaeda or other organization running the show. Hatred was already there, religious fundamentalism was already there, you had Kurds dreaming about independence already there. Iraq war was just an accelerator.

what are you going to do with you 'ally' Saudi-Arabia who is funding fundamentalists and preachers of hatred all over the world ?

what about Turkey, who plays a very dubious role and prefers to bomb the Kurds instead of ISIS ?

Bush Sr was a very wise man when he launched Desert Storm but didn't allow his troops to march to Bagdad.
his son, Bush Jr was probably the stupidest president in American history.

 

[Vallicanus]

GUYS

Deja vu said something which indeed made me wonder,

most immigrants are Muslims,
away from Syria, the rest are from areas like Pakistan or Africa were the war is not like with Syria,

THERE ARE 4 MUSLIM COUNTRIES IN EUROPE AND MANY SPOTS OF ISLAMIC EXISTANCE,

and I ask you?

DID ANY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ASK TO GO TO ALBANIA KOSSOVO BOSNIA TURKEY?
answer is NO

did you see or hear any illegal immigrant to ask to go to Greek Thrace, Bulgarian Thrace, Ukraine/Crimea Tatars, Kazan/white city Russia, Marselle France?
answer is NO

away from the problem of Syrria are also Jordania Azerbaizan etc etc
DID YOU HEAR ANY MUSLIM COUNTRY TO OFFER A HAND OF HELP AND RELIEF TO IMMIGRANTS
answer is NO,
Not even SAUDI which are the holy land of Islammade a camp to accomodate some
and last question

do you believe that illegal immigrants are so dump or silly that pay such money to 'traffickers'?
answer is NO


anyway I still support any soul that wants to leave war, especially from Syrria and Iraq, to save soul, but with terms to return when war is over,
but I do not support what is going on happening now

Saudi Arabia would treat even Muslim migrants or refugees as second-class citizens or worse and not give them western-style benefits.

To be fair Turkey has taken many Syrian refugees. Lebanon too.

 

[Vallicanus]

what are you going to do with you 'ally' Saudi-Arabia who is funding fundamentalists and preachers of hatred all over the world ?

what about Turkey, who plays a very dubious role and prefers to bomb the Kurds instead of ISIS ?

Bush Sr was a very wise man when he launched Desert Storm but didn't allow his troops to march to Bagdad.
his son, Bush Jr was probably the stupidest president in American history.

I would give Israel more power to, how can we put this, calm the region down.

 

[Vallicanus]

well I understood wrong then, as almost anybody else in this thread

immigration can be usefull, if you can control who comes in or not
but being invaded by a large uncontrolable swarm is not

The Australian points system sounds good to me for selective immigration. We don't require more benefits-fodder in Europe, thanks.

However there is too much incompetence and corruption in southern Europe for this to ever be a serious option.

 

[Angela]

I won't respond to individual posts because, frankly, I wouldn't be able to control my temper. There is a difference between a legitimate concern for how much immigration an individual country can absorb at any particular time (sometimes based on economic conditions), what procedures should be set up, what criteria would be applied etc. There is a difference between legitimate refugees from genocide and economic refugees. The industrialized west can't absorb every single poor person in the world. The U.S. can't absorb every single poor Mexican or Central American who wants to immigrate here, particularly now.

Personally, I am beyond moved by the plight of the persecuted minorities in the Middle East, and am working with Catholic Charities both to aid them there and to see what can be done in terms of getting at least some of them assylum here on the grounds of religious persecution. From my knowledge of the people of the Christian communities in the Middle East and the Arab Christian communities already in the U.S. I don't foresee any insurmountable problems in assimilating them. Look at Ralph Nader, for goodness sakes. He's no raving jihadist.

As to the U.S. not being faced with the problems presented by arrivals by sea, you people are misinformed.

See the following about the Cuban boat people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_boatlift

Of course, the majority don't arrive that way. They either come by plane (people who have visas and just overstay) or by way of Mexico. Sometimes they have to cross water, the Rio Grande, but in summer it dries up to little more than a stream.

As to the plight of the American Indians, they suffered the same fate as indigenous peoples all over the world. It's nothing specifically to do with the U.S. or Canada. What happened to the San? What is happening to Amazonian Indians? It doesn't make it right of course. However, it isn't that in modern times both the U.S. and Canada haven't tried to aid these people. The problems have a great deal to do with cultural differences that guarantees of equal rights and even economic assistance won't cure.

Anyway, I won't be reading this thread anymore. Too much ethnic and religious hatred is being expressed. Very bad karma, guys.

 

[Kardu]

I have 3 big proofs that it works very well. They are US, Canada and Australia. All 3 are built by immigrants, all 3 very successful economically, and they continue accept flow of immigrants. So if it doesn't work in Holland or Denmark, it is not a problem with migrants but with a system, or perhaps racism of employers.

What those so called big proofs have in common? Ah, yes, they are heirs of one of the most powerful European empires in history and were built by the people of European descent. That's the secret of those countries' economical and political success.
Now go on, call me a racist.

 

[Vallicanus]

What those so called big proofs have in common? Ah, yes, they are heirs of one of the most powerful European empires in history and were built by the people of European descent. That's the secret of those countries' economical and political success.
Now go on, call me a racist.

Exactly, but thanks to a mountain of available natural resources and the marginalisation or extermination of the indigenous population.

 

[Yetos]

Anyway, I won't be reading this thread anymore. Too much ethnic and religious hatred is being expressed. Very bad karma, guys.

Julia,

I support any effort to save souls and stop war and return them home,

but this is not a good image,

early morning in the island of Lesvos, Mytilene town, a mall of greek industry, turism
how do you feel to drink your morning coffee and see this,

fights among illegal immigrants according religion and ethnicity,

<u>

they do not accept they are in a new country,

and I think a new immigration policy must run Europe


and I think Europe once more got unfortified, and unprepaired

 

[Vallicanus]

According to one TV report, Pakistanis were beating up Syrians because the Syrians were supposedly getting better treatment as actual refugees escaping war, not merely economic migrants.

 

[ΠΑΝΑΞ]

(Unfortunately I can not dwell on the issue as there not allows my English language efficiently, but I will mention briefly what I consider most important and perhaps not only the future but most now)


Political:
Europe is stiff or weak; -The Discussion of supranational governance within Europe seems to be necessary for critical and quick decisions, Euro- President, Euro-Prime Minister etc. - We want this? - This in turn is likely to trigger frightening changes such as leaving some members by the Union as the UK, but also the likely resumption -after decades? - the creation of Russia's approach conditions (?) with Europe;


Strategically:
The Mediterranean region is in flames, I fear that Syria will be dismembered and Turkey involved the mutilation, -a small gift from uncle sam, and a small cuff from the bear. (?)

Social:
The colonial rulers Europeans suffer from institutional inclusions syndromes in the "free world" them. - Finally we have to talk with Islam; or with the face to our mirror;

If you are Christian, Muslim, atheist or lefty, liberal, monarchist and all that you maybe be...
SAVE the PEOPLE.


-You Feel better. Whoever you are, whatever you are.

 

[Kardu]

Exactly, but thanks to a mountain of available natural resources and the marginalisation or extermination of the indigenous population.

Definitely, but I am not stating a moral judgement, just an observation of a historical facts and developments.
And if those indigenous people could they would do the same.

 

[LeBrok]

immigration can be usefull, if you can control who comes in or not
but being invaded by a large uncontrolable swarm is not

Exactly what I'm trying to address here. The scale of the problem needs a new solution and united action. I'm for doing it legally.

 

[LeBrok]

what are you going to do with you 'ally' Saudi-Arabia who is funding fundamentalists and preachers of hatred all over the world ?

I was always voicing that Islamic fundamentalist problem needs to be tackled at the source. This includes Saudi-Arabia rich influential families and their agendas, same goes to Iran arming Shia Muslims. Definitely Saudi Arabia should be sanctioned in many ways by international community. Oil embargo should be in place to hit their deep pockets till they start dealing with it internally, and lose ability to finance their radical clerics.

what about Turkey, who plays a very dubious role and prefers to bomb the Kurds instead of ISIS ?

We addressed it in Free Kurdistan tread.

Bush Sr was a very wise man when he launched Desert Storm but didn't allow his troops to march to Bagdad.

I never forgave him this stupid decision. This is why US lost trust of ordinary Iraqi people. Iraq also lost a chance for a better fresh start when radical Islam wasn't entrenched in society yet.

his son, Bush Jr was probably the stupidest president in American history.

I agree, and blindly romantic. Bad combination.