Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[SirQuiamus]

Hey, what could possibly go wrong with having a kid as head of state?

*Biography of Valentinian III*

The main difference between antiquity and present day is that our average European head of state has as much political power as any five-year-old who isn't a head of state. So we might as well have a babby for president. (Or a doggy. Non-human animals also understand object permanence.)

[Vilanat]

So the Commission has unveiled its plan for dealing with refugees. . It would take in 20,000 refugees a year from refugees camp, triple the funds available to Frontex, send military to try to disrupt the smuggler network and, more importantly, dispatch refugees across the EU, rather than letting countries of entry (aka Italy, Spain and Greece) deal with most of them. The UK, as well as a few other countries are up in arm about it though.

They damn well should be.

Qatar, or shall i say, filthy rich, 2022 World Cup bribed host with a GDP per capita of $145K, has been so generous as to donate the UNHCR around 27 million USD from 2000 to 2014, of which 26.5M where allocated in 2014 alone and was thankfully willing to accept around 54 asylum seekers and 127 refugees so far (I saw claims that of which around half of the asylum seekers are actually from hamas leadership, a palestinian organization who's leaders were forced to flee Syria since they sided with the rebels there.). just to put things into perspective, so far more than 950 world cup slave workers died in qatar in 2012-2013 alone. thousands more are going to die until 2022. needless to say, qatar is in need of a constant stream of fresh workers.

Saudi Arabia, drowning in cash with GDP per capita of $53K and the third country in the world with most cash reserves (around 740 billions USD in cash reserves) was so generous as to donate an accumulated sum of around 170 million USD from 2000-2014, of which 92 million were donated in 2014 alone and was thankfully willing to accept no less than 99 asylum seekers and 565 refugees.

United Arab Emirates, that country which owns half of london, with a well respectful GDP per capita of $65K, donated around 60 millions USD from 2000-2014 and has so far accepted no less than 514 refugees and 117 asylum seekers.

Oman, a country with landmass larger than the UK and a population with mere 3.2 Million people and GDP per capita of $45K, is apparently so afraid it can't house more people in fear of running out of space that they have so far accepted no less than 149 refugees and 129 asylum seekers. donations from 2000 - 2014: 2.4 millions USD.

2014 had been a great year for the UNHCR from the middle east, and without 2014, the donation amounts from some of these countries are laughable. also important to note, that contrary to donations from western countries, the vast majority from the rich middle east countries donations are restricted, meaning they are for a single purpose and not freely spent. the UAE have contributed 30 millions in 2008 alone, yet only 54K of those were unrestricted. another thing to take into account is the money being spent on each country from the UNHCR. in 2015 the UAE branch will get a funding of 3 million to help its ~613 refugees. they got more money out of the UNHCR in a single year, than they donated in almost two decades!

And to get things into perspective:

Greece, or that country that has failing economy and considers dropping out of the EU, who's cash reserves are lower than Afghanistan, Guatemala and Bolivia, a GDP per capita of $25K and unemployment rate of around 25% (real rate probably much higher), has 43K asylum seekers, 3,485 refugees and had donated around 26 million from 2000-2014 (A mere million short of Qatar). the unrestricted donations from greece are possibly higher than Saudi arabia's (Didn't bother to calculate it precisely, but even if its not higher, its somewhat close).

We sit and discuss the dangers the syrians are facing when crossing Jordan, the desert of Sinai, Egypt, War torn Libya and paying thousands of dollars to cross the med sea just to get to a poorer country with less jobs opportunities and on top of that, an inability to communicate with the natives, while saudi arabia is less than just 100 KM from Syria, or around an hour and a half by car. they even share the same culture, speak the same language and are part of the same "Union" (The arab league). And why do people from iraq have to travel weeks if not months all the way to greece, or more dangerously through libya and the med sea to italy when a bus ride from baghdad to Doha takes 12 hours, or to the nearest saudi arabia's big city, 7 hours?

When i see this hard data i just can't help but think why should the west be solely responsible for refugees and take bashing from the U.N  for "neglecting" to address the refugees from Iraq, libya and syria while the richest of the rich are comfortably shutting out their far culturally closer brethren?(/quote)

[Sergarr]

Obviously what EU should do is do this:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/10/eu-considers-military-attacks-on-targets-in-libya-to-stop-migrant-boats
...but not limited to Libya.

EU must "liberate" those countries that have too much money, but don't do enough good things with it, if EU wishes to deal with migrant problem.

[Sheb]

Leaving aside the issue that "Look, some other guys are not doing much good" isn't a really good argument, the fact is that we had over 200,000 coming in by sea in 2014. The issue is less about the 20,000 (Or one refugee for 25,000 people) that these country object to, but the 200,000 that are now the problem of Italy, Malta, Greece and a few other countries and that they don't want the share the burden.

[Vilanat]

Leaving aside the issue that "Look, some other guys are not doing much good" isn't a really good argument, the fact is that we had over 200,000 coming in by sea in 2014. The issue is less about the 20,000 (Or one refugee for 25,000 people) that these country object to, but the 200,000 that are now the problem of Italy, Malta, Greece and a few other countries and that they don't want the share the burden.

In this context its a perfectly sound and fitting argument and ironically, its the same argument that this commission is using to justify the distribution of the refugees across member states, only they are applying it just to the EU. refugees is a global problem, not a european problem and if the saudis wouldn't have threatened to behead all refugees entering its state, then most of these refugees would have probably just took a bus across the border to their cousins (literally cousins sometimes) rather than go all the way to a poorer, completely foreign, european state at a great risk of dying.

The world isn't fair could have been a good argument if i'd asked why the hell Qatar has more money than Greece but as an answer to my data/argument, its a poor one since i haven't shown a natural or chanced occurrence, but an action that can be swayed or reacted upon.

I personally don't think we should accept even a single refugee anymore unless he has a desired skill that could actually help us and can't be found in the local populace (And lets face it, the number of people with this status among those refugees is probably less than 1%), until some of these filthy rich countries step up and share the burden. and the real irony is that this burden is largely of their own making. aspiring for the right thing to do is to aspire for Qatar, the UAE, Oman and Saudi Arabia to accept those refugees. its the best possible option for those human beings and this is what Europe should be pushing for rather than try and solve this problem all by its own.

I also can't understand how some people happily accept their tax money being spent on financing a refugee office in the UAE or Saudi Arabia. it doesn't make you an immoral, greedy bastard if you object to financing a refugee office of an oil rich country with no refugees while some of your neighbours are struggling just to stay afloat.

[Sheb]

So your argument is that we shouldnt help Italy with its refugee problem as long as SA doesnt take in refugees? Id also love to see the source for that "behead all refugees" thing.

P.S. It should also be noted that Saudi Arabia for exemple does indeed grant refugees status to only a few hundred person, but is actually home to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, including a lot of Royngha from Burma as well as lots of Syrian and Iraqi who got in with Hajj or work visa and overstayed.

[Frumple]

Argument actually seems to be that since some moderately affluent foreign nations that are closer to the source nation are shitting on refugees, so should the EU. "I think we should act no better than the worst actor involved" is a helluva' humanitarian position.

[palsch]

About the UK being up in arms...

Under EU law the UK, Ireland and Denmark are exempt from the quota plan.

IMO we should be taking a share equal to the other well-off EU nations, but as far as the law goes our opt outs are pretty generous in this area.

[Vilanat]

Let me simplify that then: No, what i am saying is that the only way to really help italy and those refugees is by diverting them to SA (And other oil rich countries that yet to accept meaningful numbers) and pressure it to step up its effort to help and properly treat other human beings. on how to do it, well, there are smarter men than me, but i guess few obvious options could be: 1)SA needs stuff, Europe can prevent them from having stuff. 2)SA needs geopolitical assistance. Europe could prevent them from having it. 3)Europe could simply turn all those refugees back to libya. after a few turns, they and their friends will prefer walking to other places since paying thousands of dollars simply not worth a risky round trip across the med sea and SA would rather have immigrants than refugees in other neighbouring countries getting neglected and pissed off which will backfire on them eventually. (Which is a very relevant reason why they upped their donations to the UNHCR recently)

Couldn't find much beheading of refugees since they simply don't have much of those refugees anyway, but the refugees, which do not require direct quotes to grasp the theme because they are not trying to win an argument but rather stay alive, see these links down below and make the connection. also, what would you imagine be the punishment for obscure, non western people illegally entering Saudi Arabia? probably the first option is simply getting deported, probably after getting beaten up, yet, the risk of being charged with a made up accusation of "Drug trafficking", "Terrorism affiliation" or other such nonsense which could be resulted in getting beheaded to sway others from attempting entry is a very real one.
http://mic.com/articles/44303/a-shocking-look-at-the-way-saudi-arabia-deals-with-its-immigrants
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/03/24/403201/Two-more-beheaded-in-Saudi-Arabia

Argument actually seems to be that since some moderately affluent foreign nations that are closer to the source nation are shitting on refugees, so should the EU. "I think we should act no better than the worst actor involved" is a helluva' humanitarian position.

Well, momentarily, sort of. and since i don't give a damn about perceived shallow humanitarian positions, i have no problem with that. Europe can't handle this influx of immigrants for various reasons, some are social, some financial and some are security related, so for a very short period of time you act as "the worst actor involved" (Hardly so, since you don't behead them, simply refuse them of entry. not to mention we already have accepted a lot) until those hardly moderately affluent countries step up their game and the problem is properly addressed rather than get band aided. every country accepts refugees according to its social and financial ability (We wouldn't be foolish enough to force Sunni refugees on Iran, for example) and the burden is shared across the world. i think this is a much better solution than just sending them to lengthy and extremely risky quests which will eventually see them become unemployed angry mobs since europe can not and will not properly address so many of them.

[martinuzz]

The highest NATO general, the american Philip Breedlove (awesome name for a general lol), responded to Russian official's recent statement that Russia will install nuclear weapons in the Crimea, by calling it an unresponsible effort to force NATO to think twice about a response, if Russian agression would cause the conflict in Eastern Ukraine to re-escalate.

So mr. Putin is about to place nukes on a piece of land that is still considered illegally occupied by the U.N.
Nice dick move there.

Then again, after blatantly parading BUK rocket launchers on WW2 remembrance day in front of the international press, without any regard to the victims of the recent tragic event of the Malaysian Airliner getting shot by one over the Ukraine, or their families, dick moves seem to be business as usual for mr. Putin.

[Sergarr]

Blaming a vehicle for a crime is not what I would call "rational behavior".

Besides, the investigation is still underway, so you can't even be sure that it was BUK, heh.

[martinuzz]

Blaming a vehicle for a crime is not what I would call "rational behavior".

Besides, the investigation is still underway, so you can't even be sure that it was BUK, heh.

Both American as well as Russian investigations already concluded that it was indeed a BUK rocket. They're still arguing about where it was fired from though.

[miljan]

Irish police hold six republicans over 'plot to kill Charles' after bombs and guns are found close to where Prince will visit next week

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3080868/Irish-police-hold-six-republicans-plot-kill-Charles-bombs-guns-close-Prince-visit-week.html

[Sergarr]

Blaming a vehicle for a crime is not what I would call "rational behavior".

Besides, the investigation is still underway, so you can't even be sure that it was BUK, heh.

Both American as well as Russian investigations already concluded that it was indeed a BUK rocket. They're still arguing about where it was fired from though.

American? What the hell, I thought there was a Netherlands investigation, not an American one.

I guess there's no difference to you, given that NATO is practically all run by USA at this point, but still.

[miljan]

Blaming a vehicle for a crime is not what I would call "rational behavior".

Besides, the investigation is still underway, so you can't even be sure that it was BUK, heh.

Both American as well as Russian investigations already concluded that it was indeed a BUK rocket. They're still arguing about where it was fired from though.

No, that is not correct, as result will be finished by end of the year. And there are no american investigators on the case, so from where ever you got your info it is misinformation/propaganda