Migrant Crisis

[peteblue]

As far as I'm aware, they'd only become migrants if they had become Turkish citizens beforehand.

They were no longer refugees. They were safe......therefore any further move was economic migrancy......

 

[GrandOldTeam]

As far as I'm aware, they'd only become migrants if they had become Turkish citizens beforehand.

Then your definition is confusing isn't it? Given they were living in Istanbul for over a year and so, weren't moving to avoid being killed;

That's confusing migrants with refugees - you can't really compare the two.

Migrants move voluntarily for a better life/job opportunities. Refugees move to avoid being killed.

No matter how tragic the end result, they wern't fleeing immediate danger. They were safe. They were moving for ec

 

[Blue 1]

There's plenty of British nationals living in the SW that can't even afford to rent those houses. Why should the taxpayers foot the bill for asylum seekers who won't be allowed to earn a wage over British nationals to line the pockets of those already holding the riches of Croesus?

Look after our own first & foremost. They already get a sh1te deal as it is.

Who said anything about paying the owners?

It wasn't a serious (well, not that serious) suggestion.

I'd be up for giving them to locals as well, although that's off topic. I've got mates in Cornwall in good, qualified jobs who have to sleep on mate's sofas because the can't afford their own place. It's [Poor language removed] down there.

 

[bflefc]

The alternative is that we unintentionally buy into a world view that sees people as a burden.

But that isn't what the vast majority of people, who are concerned at the level of migration and lack of controls (i.e. for identity checks and security) are saying. It's not that they see people as a burden, it's just the extent to which its already reached and the numbers continue to rise. A significant number of people have concerns that perhaps we need to consider if saturation point has been reached, or soon will be.

You can't just go on and on accepting hundreds of thousands of people, blithly ignorant to the second (and third etc) order effects.

 

[catcherintherye]

They were no longer refugees. They were safe......therefore any further move was economic migrancy......

Turkey is not a safe haven in any way, particularly for those from the Kurdish community.

 

[catcherintherye]

That's confusing migrants with refugees - you can't really compare the two.

Migrants move voluntarily for a better life/job opportunities. Refugees move to avoid being killed.

The problem is the two lines are often blurred. Or if you're being cynical the media refers to refugees as immigrants.

 

[bflefc]

Most people conflate the two, unfortunately. The "r" word has dropped from our lexicon somewhat of late, replaced by "asylum seeker". Usually prefixed by "bogus".

Or vice-versa.

 

[Blue 1]

Or vice-versa.

Nope.

 

[peteblue]

Turkey is not a safe haven in any way, particularly for those from the Kurdish community.

Those kids would still be alive.......

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

I'd like to know how many refugees are moving NE through Turkey, to Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan & beyond.....

 

[bflefc]

Nope.

I firmly disagree. There have been countless news reports over the past 2-3 weeks of "refugees" on boats, or in lorries, who were from countries such as Senegal, Guinee, Kuwait - i could go on. I would lay top dollar on those individuals seaching for a better life, rather than fleeing war or persecution. That isn;t for one moment suggesting that everything in the garden in rosy for everybody in Senegal, for example, but there is a distinct difference.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

I'd like to know how many refugees are moving NE through Turkey, to Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan & beyond.....

Would you wanna go there?

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Would you wanna go there?

I've got no pressing need to. It seems they don't want to go that way though. Wonder why they're all going NW into Western Europe? Can't be solely for the safety aspect, surely?

 

[peteblue]

I firmly disagree. There have been countless news reports over the past 2-3 weeks of "refugees" on boats, or in lorries, who were from countries such as Senegal, Guinee, Kuwait - i could go on. I would lay top dollar on those individuals seaching for a better life, rather than fleeing war or persecution. That isn;t for one moment suggesting that everything in the garden in rosy for everybody in Senegal, for example, but there is a distinct difference.

This is the issue at Calais. They are pure economic migrants. They are in France for heavens sake, one of the safest and nicest countries on the planet, but that's not good enough for them, they insist on causing mayhem to get to the UK...

 

[bflefc]

Case study here:

What are people's thoughts about this woman's right to continue travelling to Sweden, at which point she declared herself and applied for asylum? Why did she not do so earlier along her journey? Did she "choose" Sweden because it offered her a better opportunity for education and/or employment? If so, would that be fair on the young Swede who's place she took in university or in the workplace?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34120034