reptilescorpio
Member
Australian policies for those seeking refuge are barbaric and self serving, zero justification for the way politicians treat them. It's so damn hard to get through the media brainwashing too
I think the system itself (ie..catching the boats midway, denyind asylum to anyone who tries to get on the boats) is good and eventually it's inevitable Europe will have to copy it.
That said, I fail to see what's the point of then keeping those island camps in such shitty state. I mean, they shouldn't get luxuries, but basic human standards, health care etc should be provided.
Coincidentally, I read an article (in German) this morning where the Austrian foreign minister calls the "Australian model" of handling refugees (interning them on islands off the coast) a role model for Europe.
"The myth that there are "too many" refugees for western countries to handle is crazy - it all fails because nationalists and many conservatives don't want to share their riches"
What riches? my town for the last decade has been designated for asylum seeker dispersal... It's a shithole, it's poor, it never recovered from thatcher or the loss of industry and unemployment is high.
If the rich and middle class want to sate their belly feels then they can take them into their suburbia and ivory towers and they pay for it out of their own pockets.
The German official is acutely aware of this, but will escape any responsibility by shifting over the problem to the Mediterranean countries. We will in Sweden as well. When all border countries have implemented the Australian system with our implied consent, our officials will still try and condemn the system with fancy rhetoric. Please don't be fooled by our empty words, international observers.
What is it with this weird idea that one journalist and German refugee policy are somehow one and the same? Maybe the journalist (or the paper he's writing for) hates ertain aspects of German refugee policy as well? He's not responsible for that, you know. Even though he's stained by the mark of being German.
In what way does this excuse Australia's poor asylum policy?
Criticising one thing doesn't mean you are praising everything else.
Just saying that the German policy makers and public have no problem doing the same, as does every other country. If you can't see it, it doesn't matter.Lol, who gives a fuck about what Germany is doing when criticism is given? I know that my country can do better. We shouldn't be lax in our refugee intake processing, but we fucking suck at it right now, both in processing time and the quality of life given to those who are in processing centres. It's a disgrace, and the European issues don't make criticism from there invalid.
I think the system itself (ie..catching the boats midway, denyind asylum to anyone who tries to get on the boats) is good and eventually it's inevitable Europe will have to copy it.
That article is from 2014, by the way. Not that a whole lot has changed, at least as far as I know.
But doesn't Nauru want to close those camps?
Austria man...
Just saying that the German policy makers and public have no problem doing the same, as does every other country. If you can't see it, it doesn't matter.
Germany - and other EU countries - also dump the problem on other countries or look the other way. I don't see what Australia is doing as that unique in that way.
What are the wars currently going on near Australia?Australia is using what amounts to torture as a deterrent for possible people fleeing from war.
Nope, sorry, germany is not doing that. There is quite a lot wrong with what germany does for asylum seekers, but there is a conscious effort to allow asylum seeker to integrate and the chance to a normal life, despite the terrible and embarassing organisational mistakes.
What are the wars currently going on near Australia?
Very first post.A survey shows that 60% of the australian people want an even stricter system despite 90% of the arrivals end up being recognized as "real" refugees
That's what European countries are trying all the time and you can't deny someones asylum, when he is legitimate to have one.
.
How were these figures before this kind of check was implemented?Are you trying to say that these people don't have a valid claim to asylum? Because we already established that thats not the case:
Very first post.
Are you trying to say that these people don't have a valid claim to asylum? Because we already established that thats not the case:
Very first post.
How were these figures before this kind of check was implemented?
Of course it matters. If before 10% were actual refugees and now 90%, then that is a big improvement and actually a good policy to first check people before letting them into your country. However, the figures about this are totally unclear and I can't find an actual objective source for recent years. So maybe I'm totally wrong, that's why I'm asking.Does that matter? The article is two years old, so the figures already were like that back in 2014, and the situation for refugees hasn't improved since, which is not surprising given that the inhuman stance of the australian government and the indifference of the australian general public hasn't changed.
On average Australia accepts only 13.759 refugees each year while simultaneously accepting 190.000 immigrants, mostly specialists or wealthy people..
Coincidentally, I read an article (in German) this morning where the Austrian foreign minister calls the "Australian model" of handling refugees (interning them on islands off the coast) a role model for Europe.
I'd say the Handelsblatt is a reliable source.Of course it matters. If before 10% were actual refugees and now 90%, then that is a big improvement and actually a good policy to first check people before letting them into your country. However, the figures about this are totally unclear and I can't find an actual objective source for recent years. So maybe I'm totally wrong, that's why I'm asking.
Depends on the way people are trying to get to Australia. I'd think that most ways into Australia for refugees are so dangerous that it would be irresponsible to not let them in.Nobody is excusing the abuse taking place, that needs to be fixed of course. But first checking people and then letting them into your country is not a bad policy.
I'd say, because it is so dangerous, we shouldn't encourage people to make that journey because they have a good chance of dying. Work with the UN and take in people through their programs and from their refugee centers mostly.Depends on the way people are trying to get to Australia. I'd think that most way into Australia for refugees are so dangerous that it would be irresponsible to not let them in.
If they're really not eligible for asylum you can send them back safely later.
I'd say, because it is so dangerous, we shouldn't encourage people to make that journey because they have a good chance of dying. Work with the UN and take in people through their programs and from their refugee centers mostly.
Seems the 90% is taken over the last 6 years at that time, so 2008-2014. Indeed a bit strange to then make that big a deal over that 10%.
The perverse irony in Australia is that the detention and torture of refugees has been outsourced to nearby countries because of the irrational fears racists in Australia have about refugees taking Australian jobs.
If you take in people from the UN refugee camps, you can transport them safely to your country and help them.If you don't want people to take the dangerous journey you either help improve the situation in their home, or help them get somewhere safely instead.
It's actually the fear of them living off of taxpayers money, being housed for free and not learning any English. It's the fear of "them taking all our money and hiding away from society, not contributing and smacking their heads on the ground 3 times a day" as I heard it put not two weeks ago.
I haven't heard anything about seekers getting jobs, all of the fear mongering I've heard is about them NOT getting jobs.
Just saying that the German policy makers and public have no problem doing the same, as does every other country. If you can't see it, it doesn't matter.
Germany - and other EU countries - also dump the problem on other countries or look the other way. I don't see what Australia is doing as that unique in that way.
So you are saying the Australian model is "to keep our selves out of concerns and rather bring people to the place, where they straight up die".Rescuing them is necessary of course, but then instead of just dropping those people on the the coast they just started from, they ferry them through the whole sea, right into EU.
It's not like Austria wants to starts torturing people. When they say they want to use australian model they simply mean "catching up boats in the sea, returning people to shore they've sailed from or into processing camps in island".
Of course you can. There's just no political will to do it. Unlike in australia, almost nobody who enters EU through sea has legitimate claim to asylum, since they either are from a safe country or have passed through multiple safe countries on their way.
What EU fleets need to start doing is to put people back into the shore they've started from or at most sail into island with processing camps. What they can't continue to do indefinitely is ferry people into mainland EU. Because in Greece the border is already closed down and Austria is willing to do the same with Italy.
And it's much easier to contain and control asylum seeker on the islands. It's pretty much impossible on the land. Terrorists can easily slip through and among those who get denied asylum over half never gets deported or simply vanish into underground.
Maybe I've just listened to a different diversity of racism than you have. There is no end to the excuses that come out of the mouths of people who have swallowed the arguments of fearmongering politicians.
Lol, who gives a fuck about what Germany is doing when criticism is given? I know that my country can do better. We shouldn't be lax in our refugee intake processing, but we fucking suck at it right now, both in processing time and the quality of life given to those who are in processing centres. It's a disgrace, and the European issues don't make criticism from there invalid.
Do you mean to refer to the general population with that statement?
Oh, there we are already. I'm out.
there's a nice minority going around...
This is a problem the whole world is failing to address right now. People trying to take the journey by boat would be a non-issue if they were all being adequately served by conventional means. But everyone's happy to cherry pick the best people and leave the rest twiddling their thumbs and waiting to die in a camp then get all angry and surprised when they try to take their fates back into their own hands.If you take in people from the UN refugee camps, you can transport them safely to your country and help them.
No need to apologize if it still applies. Some people just want to bury this under the carpet.What? How did that end up on my twitter feed than? Sorry for that, I didn't notice.
Because I'm an idiot
I was just wondering. No need to be cryptic or sarcastic about it lol
Oh, there we are already. I'm out
.
Don't ask questions only to leave the thread because you read something you hate. Question it, present your own arguments and say what you wish to say. These comments do nothing and are in bad taste.
Yep, putting all of them on islands, where innocents from child age are commiting suicide, is a better solution because some might be terrorists.You don't follow the news from Europe, don't you? Merely two days ago group of syrians (at least one of then a refugee) planning suicide bombings was arrested in Germany.
Of course most of migrants aren't terrorists. But we're talking about flood of millions of people streaming into EU in span of few years. You really don't think at least couple of them might be terrorists? Come on. If you want to sneak into EU and you're on various terror watch lists posing as refugee is easily your best bet.
What? How did that end up on my twitter feed than? Sorry for that, I didn't notice.
Because I'm an idiot