The EU Referendum

[rigsby]

People fleeing a warzone will leave by whatever methods are accessible to them, often they will be taking the same route as people travelling for other reasons. 'So every person, regardless of motive, or reason, who is in a boat from Turkey to Greece is an illegal' is not true. Those travelling to leave a warzone are refugees and not illegal. For all refugees to claim that status in the first country they land is not practical as then only countries with southern coastal regions would have any responsibility for ME refugees.
country illegally'

'the term 'economic migrant' is the PC way of saying illegal Immigrant who has avoided boarder controls and entered a - that again is not exclusively true as most economic migrants are legal. The numbers for illegal immigration is tiny compared to the numbers for legal immigration and most of the 'legals' are here to work and therefore economic migrants.

Why bother to lie.

You can't just decide you fancy living somewhere else and claim to be a legal migrant you have to apply through the correct channels if you avoid border controls your illegal.

You can only claim refugee status in the first country you land in. Because you think that's not 'practical' has nothing to do with international law

None of the migrants we are talking about are legal because they are from outside to EU

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Migration, illegal or genuine refugee is not the be all and end all of the exit argument. It has a high scare (rightly?) factor. The economy & political focus ought to be the central points; with a British (or Engalnd/Wales/NI) exit will our economical growth continue & will the lesser burden of not paying Brussells counter any negative aspects? I believe so.
The political dream of the EU is just a dream and not realistic for many years and leaving the EU will help them, and us achieve our own social norms.
I do support the idea of an EU, and socialism, and a free for all and everything NHS etc BUT all are unrealistic, utopian dreams while people are what they are.
Very, very Long term the answer is education, about life, history, religion, moral responsibility, social stuff, health, law etc.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Economic migrants, because that's the term that was used in the post that your replying to, are not refugees. Just thought I'd point that out for you as you seem to be confusing the two.

Also, are you saying that despite their reason for leaving their homeland, regardless of where that should be, that their destination of choice should accept them out of compassion?

No confusion on my part.

In fact I was going to suggest the use of the BBC's preferred terminology of migrants rather than refugees (but it was rather late at night),since as we know, not all economic migrants are refugees.

Certainly migrants is a much less loaded term than illegal economic migrants,which is the phrase that Rigsby favours.

No "coloured" jokes please.:smile:

In answer to your question (as I've stated before) there should be a EU quota system for migrants,IMO.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Why bother to lie.

You can't just decide you fancy living somewhere else and claim to be a legal migrant you have to apply through the correct channels if you avoid border controls your illegal.

You can only claim refugee status in the first country you land in. Because you think that's not 'practical' has nothing to do with international law

None of the migrants we are talking about are legal because they are from outside to EU

I'm talking about what you wrote in isolation, not read the rest of the thread so what I wrote stands in those terms.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Why bother to lie.

You can't just decide you fancy living somewhere else and claim to be a legal migrant you have to apply through the correct channels if you avoid border controls your illegal.

You can only claim refugee status in the first country you land in. Because you think that's not 'practical' has nothing to do with international law

None of the migrants we are talking about are legal because they are from outside to EU

That is certainly the case at the moment, ie the Dublin Regulation.

(Should might be a better word to use than can here though).

In any case,I'd expect that law to be changed by EU ministers in fairly short order,however.

Btw,MG is quite right to say that the migrant crisis has really very little to do with the EU referendum,since the UK is,of course,not signed up to Schengen.

Unfortunately for all you Kippers.:winking:

Doesn't stop you using it as a scare story though.

 

[mrsblue]

People fleeing a warzone will leave by whatever methods are accessible to them, often they will be taking the same route as people travelling for other reasons. 'So every person, regardless of motive, or reason, who is in a boat from Turkey to Greece is an illegal' is not true. Those travelling to leave a warzone are refugees and not illegal. For all refugees to claim that status in the first country they land is not practical as then only countries with southern coastal regions would have any responsibility for ME refugees.


'the term 'economic migrant' is the PC way of saying illegal Immigrant who has avoided boarder controls and entered a country illegally' - that again is not exclusively true as most economic migrants are legal. The numbers for illegal immigration is tiny compared to the numbers for legal immigration and most of the 'legals' are here to work and therefore economic migrants.

Warzone hmmm,

Yes war zones are not pretty BUT 99.70% of those in Syria will not be killed or injured(non fighters),considering the average Syrian is totally skint poor and virtually destitute,who are the people marching to Europe,you know the one's with money.

The EU IMO is finished as an experiment,Sheghan look's dead and buried then add the treatment of Greece and other countries by the driving force being Germany and you realise the EU is falling apart at the seams.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Warzone hmmm,

Yes war zones are not pretty BUT 99.70% of those in Syria will not be killed or injured(non fighters),considering the average Syrian is totally skint poor and virtually destitute,who are the people marching to Europe,you know the one's with money.

The EU IMO is finished as an experiment,Sheghan look's dead and buried then add the treatment of Greece and other countries by the driving force being Germany and you realise the EU is falling apart at the seams.

On 17 August 2015, the United Nations put out an estimate of 250,000 that had died in the war.[4]

In my mind that would lead to lots of refugees as that saves lives. You have a different view on that.

 

[mrsblue]

On 17 August 2015, the United Nations put out an estimate of 250,000 that had died in the war.[4]

In my mind that would lead to lots of refugees as that saves lives. You have a different view on that.

150,000 have been fighting,100,000 have been civilians.

War is dirty no question but the reality is civilian deaths have in real terms been light with the odds stacked into those not being killed.

Not playing down the brutality of war but they are the facts.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

150,000 have been fighting,100,000 have been civilians.

War is dirty no question but the reality is civilian deaths have in real terms been light with the odds stacked into those not being killed.

Not playing down the brutality of war but they are the facts.

By distinguishing two types of death are you implying that what you are classing as non civilian deaths in someway don't count towards the conclusion that there are legitimate refugees from Syria?
The fact that many of those will have been forced to fight is the obvious start point.
When there were terrorist attacks in Paris I didn't hear of many people shrugging their shoulders and talking about the low casualty rate per head of population.
250,000 people dead. Brutal dictatorship. Popular uprising which has been hijacked by Islamic extremists. So the civilians and many of those fighting to prevent the deaths of family members in retaliation for refusing to fight.

If you don't recognise Syrian refugees then I'd suggest you don't recognise the term refugee at all.

 

[mrsblue]

By distinguishing two types of death are you implying that what you are classing as non civilian deaths in someway don't count towards the conclusion that there are legitimate refugees from Syria?
The fact that many of those will have been forced to fight is the obvious start point.
When there were terrorist attacks in Paris I didn't hear of many people shrugging their shoulders and talking about the low casualty rate per head of population.
250,000 people dead. Brutal dictatorship. Popular uprising which has been hijacked by Islamic extremists. So the civilians and many of those fighting to prevent the deaths of family members in retaliation for refusing to fight.

If you don't recognise Syrian refugees then I'd suggest you don't recognise the term refugee at all.

If England was at war and around 1 million men of fighting age left this country,they would be classed as cowards or deserters.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

If England was at war and around 1 million men of fighting age left this country,they would be classed as cowards or deserters.

We don't live under a dictatorship....

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Your refusal to admit that there are thousands of illegal economic migrants using the Syrian crisis to enter Europe, Is the real reason the refugees will now be let down.

If like some of us stated on here they took genuine cases from camps in Jordan etc, then we would never have had people drowning in winter seas as we have seen today. Instead we had you screaming racist and xenophobe at our obvious and fair solutions to the problem.

Its people like you and your blind political thinking that has killed those people this week so its you that should feel shameful.

Not at all.I'm happy to conceed the point.

What I do,however, intensly dislike, or what you call my "refusal to admit," is your inflamatory terminolgy,"illegal economic migrants" indeed.:nope:

Shame on you!

 

[Bielzibubz]

Not at all.I'm happy to conceed the point.

What I do,however, intensly dislike, or what you call my "refusal to admit," is your inflamatory terminolgy,"illegal economic migrants" indeed.:nope:

Shame on you!

But that is exactly what they are you plum. They are not fleeing war torn Syria, Iraq or anywhere else in the ME for that matter. If they are not fleeing persecution and war but are rather from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Senigal etc etc and are coming to Western Europe for a better life and standard of living and in doing so avoiding the usual and legal visa/work permit/border control routes by using the ME refugee routes they are economic migrants and illegals. Dress it up all you like with 'terminology'. They are the facts whether you like it or not.

 

[callan]

We don't live under a dictatorship....

We could be living under a dictatorship if our grand fathers had adopted the same approach as all the single males fleeing Syria.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

We would be living under a dictatorship if our grand fathers had adopted the same approach as all the single males fleeing Syria.

In opposing Hitler? Completely different situation - they were opposing a foreign invader. Assad is part of a well entrenched regime that has been bombing his own people for years - the popular revolt has battled him for years and more or less been beaten till terrorists and extremists saught to exploit the vacuum.

For anyone to claim that Syrians don't deserve refugee status is proposterous

 

[callan]

In opposing Hitler? Completely different situation - they were opposing a foreign invader. Assad is part of a well entrenched regime that has been bombing his own people for years - the popular revolt has battled him for years and more or less been beaten till terrorists and extremists saught to exploit the vacuum.

For anyone to claim that Syrians don't deserve refugee status is proposterous

You probably didn't mean to, but the above are excellent reasons to stay and fight.

As for foreign invaders....are Isis all Syrian?

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

You probably didn't mean to, but the above are excellent reasons to stay and fight.

As for foreign invaders....are Isis all Syrian?

Fighting oppression is obviously a noble act.
If not Syria, where would you see refugees as being legitimate?

 

[callan]

Fighting oppression is obviously a noble act.
If not Syria, where would you see refugees as being legitimate?

I haven't suggested that they are not 'legitimate'...you came up with that on your own.

I have merely pointed out that if the young males who fought oppression in Europe had run away or sought refuge elsewhere....then it is possible that we would be living under a dictatorship and not enjoying the freedom we do today.

As you say fighting oppression is a noble cause, isn't it a shame that these young male Syrians think differently to us?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I haven't suggested that they are not 'legitimate'...you came up with that on your own.

I have merely pointed out that if the young males who fought oppression in Europe had run away or sought refuge elsewhere....then it is possible that we would be living under a dictatorship and not enjoying the freedom we do today.

As you say fighting oppression is a noble cause, isn't it a shame that these young male Syrians think differently to us?

So it's all their fault that there's a power vacuum in Syria,which IS have stepped into?

 

[callan]

So it's all their fault that there's a power vacuum in Syria,which IS have stepped into?

Have I said that?

I was simply agreeing with AAS's view that fighting oppression is a noble thing....it just seems a pity that there is a significant amount of young male Syrians who think differently.