Planet Rugby Forum

Tunisia would have saved them fuel and untilmatly the charity money.

Wherever in the Mediterranean this boat is at the moment, the coast of North Africa is where it should be going. There are plenty of safe ports there.

Algeria is lovely at this time of year.

Why not restock it and refuel it so it can make it to Portsmouth? They're all probably heading that way anyway.

They have to go back

so a block of 500 mil people, enjoying levels of prosperity and security unprecedented in history, is afraid of a few pregnant women

shameful

Akkerman wrote:so a block of 500 mil people, enjoying levels of prosperity and security unprecedented in history, is afraid of a few pregnant women

shameful

you dont want migrants....stop fcukin up our countries

Akkerman wrote:so a block of 500 mil people, enjoying levels of prosperity and security unprecedented in history, is afraid of a few pregnant women

shameful

We don't want to strip poor countries of their middle classes.


Shameful.

Akkerman wrote:so a block of 500 mil people, enjoying levels of prosperity and security unprecedented in history, is afraid of a few pregnant women

shameful

Take the pregnant women and kids send back the 550 or so men, the ones taken in can apply for family reunion.

send them back is the only way


Just encourages more to make the journey otherwise. They get thrown out on to the med in ships that wont last the journey but the smugglers know they will be picked up..... some of the time

nardol wrote:send them back is the only way

But it's not the only way. Which North African country will have them? Will they simply form an orderly queue to disembark and think "ah well I tried"?

You can't underestimate the desperation of these people. They'd sooner throw themselves overboard and try to swim to Europe than simply go back home.

assfly wrote:

nardol wrote:send them back is the only way

But it's not the only way. Which North African country will have them? Will they simply form an orderly queue to disembark and think "ah well I tried"?

You can't underestimate the desperation of these people. They'd sooner throw themselves overboard and try to swim to Europe than simply go back home.

They're the rich from their countries , they've found 1,000's of dollars to get on the boat, their desperation is "value for money" mainly.

A country has the right to control its border and let in who it wants.

Italy has the right to not want to import predominantly Muslim countries social issues.

bimboman wrote:They're the rich from their countries , they've found 1,000's of dollars to get on the boat, their desperation is "value for money" mainly.

Their wealth is entirely subjective. Most have probably poured their life savings into one change of getting to Europe.

nardol wrote:A country has the right to control its border and let in who it wants.

Italy has the right to not want to import predominantly Muslim countries social issues.

I agree, but when they're a few miles off the coast of Italy then it's too late.

Italy are in the very unfortunate position that by not agreeing to take the migrants they could be potentially ending their lives.

just push them back to the coast they came from.

Would kill the people smugglers business model.

Their wealth is entirely subjective. Most have probably poured their life savings into one change of getting to Europe.

And that's still subjective locally with massive finacial and educated resource leaving their home poor countries. This isn't in the main about "victims".

guy smiley wrote:Italian ships will be used to transfer the refugees from the Aquarius to Spain... fitting, as Italy bears responsibility after barring the ship while it was at sea.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... ken-spain/

Interesting, especially this part:

The development comes a day after the new Spanish government headed by Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez offered to allow the Aquarius to dock in Valencia, insisting it was an "obligation" to do so.

Moral, ethical or political obligation?

assfly wrote:

guy smiley wrote:Italian ships will be used to transfer the refugees from the Aquarius to Spain... fitting, as Italy bears responsibility after barring the ship while it was at sea.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... ken-spain/

Interesting, especially this part:

The development comes a day after the new Spanish government headed by Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez offered to allow the Aquarius to dock in Valencia, insisting it was an "obligation" to do so.

Moral, ethical or political obligation?

Either way he's potentially not helping Spain.

Perhaps Spain have a problem with children stuck on balconies.

nardol wrote:just push them back to the coast they came from.

Would kill the people smugglers business model.

and some of the people on the boat?

Frodder wrote:

nardol wrote:just push them back to the coast they came from.

Would kill the people smugglers business model.

and some of the people on the boat?

There will come a point when refusing entry will be the option taken.

bimboman wrote:

assfly wrote:

nardol wrote:send them back is the only way

But it's not the only way. Which North African country will have them? Will they simply form an orderly queue to disembark and think "ah well I tried"?

You can't underestimate the desperation of these people. They'd sooner throw themselves overboard and try to swim to Europe than simply go back home.

They're the rich from their countries , they've found 1,000's of dollars to get on the boat, their desperation is "value for money" mainly.

Many have stumped up a couple of thousand in cash for the smugglers to move them. No question of that. Usually the money is gathered up from extended family and pooled for a young man to travel. By definition these are not the neediest people in the regions they leave behind.

But when I was living in Italy, criminal networks had developed the whole routine to a point where you could travel now and pay later. Many of the street hawkers you see in Italian cities carrying tat and sprinting off whenever the cops turn up are such guys. A lot of them in Florence were from Senegal. From the moment they arrive on Italian soil they are effectively the property of the bad guys and have to work their debt off over several years. It's an extremely unpleasant and violent underworld by all accounts. Penalties are harsh for those that don't sell enough. But so long as the arrivals are able to enter the country and sell stuff, the crooks will make their money and the whole circle will keep turning. Very, very, very few of them get through the other end and then manage to integrate themselves into local life effectively. I knew only three. Big tough ombres that bar/club owners liked to have on their doors. The rest were just fodder for rackets run by organised crime.

Of course, this is news to precisely no one who's paid attention. I mentioned a year or two ago how wiretaps on criminal figures in Rome had revealed that organised crime now sees people smuggling as the central plank of their business. Incredibly, it's overtaken the trafficking and selling of drugs in terms of profitability. Their 'people' have key positions in ports and landing sites across southern Italy and Sicily where they manage arrivals into the networks. This is a jaw dropping revelation that reveals just how serious the issue is. And Merkel's open-doors policy showered these networks with unimaginable quantities of cash and resources. Not just in Italy but all around Europe. No one did more to boost organised crime. The problem is not going to go away until the flow of human cargo is properly stemmed. I have no difficulty understanding how politicians determined to stamp this stuff out have been voted into office in Italy where the issue is so intricately bound up with organised crime. Whether the new politicians can change anything in the long term is a whole other question though.

hermes-trismegistus wrote:

bimboman wrote:

assfly wrote:

nardol wrote:send them back is the only way

But it's not the only way. Which North African country will have them? Will they simply form an orderly queue to disembark and think "ah well I tried"?

You can't underestimate the desperation of these people. They'd sooner throw themselves overboard and try to swim to Europe than simply go back home.

They're the rich from their countries , they've found 1,000's of dollars to get on the boat, their desperation is "value for money" mainly.

Many have stumped up a couple of thousand in cash for the smugglers to move them. No question of that. Usually the money is gathered up from extended family and pooled for a young man to travel. By definition these are not the neediest people in the regions they leave behind.

But when I was living in Italy, criminal networks had developed the whole routine to a point where you could travel now and pay later. Many of the street hawkers you see in Italian cities carrying tat and sprinting off whenever the cops turn up are such guys. A lot of them in Florence were from Senegal. From the moment they arrive on Italian soil they are effectively the property of the bad guys and have to work their debt off over several years. It's an extremely unpleasant and violent underworld by all accounts. Penalties are harsh for those that don't sell enough. But so long as the arrivals are able to enter the country and sell stuff, the crooks will make their money and the whole circle will keep turning. Very, very, very few of them get through the other end and then manage to integrate themselves into local life effectively. I knew only three. Big tough ombres that bar/club owners liked to have on their doors. The rest were just fodder for rackets run by organised crime.

Of course, this is news to precisely no one who's paid attention. I mentioned a year or two ago how wiretaps on criminal figures in Rome had revealed that organised crime now sees people smuggling as the central plank of their business. Incredibly, it's overtaken the trafficking and selling of drugs in terms of profitability. Their 'people' have key positions in ports and landing sites across southern Italy and Sicily where they manage arrivals into the networks. This is a jaw dropping revelation that reveals just how serious the issue is. And Merkel's open-doors policy showered these networks with unimaginable quantities of cash and resources. Not just in Italy but all around Europe. No one did more to boost organised crime. The problem is not going to go away until the flow of human cargo is properly stemmed. I have no difficulty understanding how politicians determined to stamp this stuff out have been voted into office in Italy where the issue is so intricately bound up with organised crime. Whether the new politicians can change anything in the long term is a whole other question though.

Thanks for that - interesting and alarming.

Interesting post hermes-trismegistus

nardol wrote:just push them back to the coast they came from.

Would kill the people smugglers business model.

This to me is the practical and long term solution. If countries decide on a policy of assisting poor migrants it has to be done fairly and from the place of origin, with proper documentation and checks.

beachboy wrote:This to me is the practical and long term solution. If countries decide on a policy of assisting poor migrants it has to be done fairly and from the place of origin, with proper documentation and checks.

How can something be a practical solution if it will likely lead to the deaths of men, women and children?

Feel sorry for the kids, but the adults know the risks of crossing. We have no legal obligation to accept these illegal immigrants (that's what they are, they're not refugees), and no moral obligation either.

Good on Italy for saying 'non'!

I think the best way to tackle it without a humanitarian disaster is to firstly arrest all the NGO crews out in the Med helping them, secondly arrest and execute any of the people smugglers who are caught. Then no harm comes to the migrants, and they can stay in Africa.

englishchief wrote:Feel sorry for the kids, but the adults know the risks of crossing. We have no legal obligation to accept these illegal immigrants (that's what they are, they're not refugees), and no moral obligation either.

Good on Italy for saying 'non'!

I think the best way to tackle it without a humanitarian disaster is to firstly arrest all the NGO crews out in the Med helping them, secondly arrest and execute any of the people smugglers who are caught. Then no harm comes to the migrants, and they can stay in Africa.

What about the migrants from the Middle East and South East Asia? Do they also have to stay in Africa?

Good on Italy for saying 'non'

englishchief wrote:They have to go back

assfly wrote:

beachboy wrote:This to me is the practical and long term solution. If countries decide on a policy of assisting poor migrants it has to be done fairly and from the place of origin, with proper documentation and checks.

How can something be a practical solution if it will likely lead to the deaths of men, women and children?

It is a Catch 22. Surely by allowing the people smuggling boats to land/be accepted on the European coastline you are encouraging (hundreds of) thousands of people to make perilous journeys to the Med and then to take a highly risky sea journey. That is surely a lot worse. Those that are keen to help together with governments could rather encourage people to apply via an office in their home country with lower entry criteria where the proper criminal/war crime checks can be done and the not so strong or wealthy would have a chance. That would be a better solution to control entry and give some the chance to better their lives.

“The most common nationalities among the arrivals to Italy were from Bangladesh, Nigeria and Guinea,’’ Frontex said.

Frontex is the european border patrol agency.

englishchief wrote:“The most common nationalities among the arrivals to Italy were from Bangladesh, Nigeria and Guinea,’’ Frontex said.

Frontex is the european border patrol agency.

If only there was a wealthy, sparsely populated country somewhere close to the mid point between these countries, that could be reached by land, that possibly even shared the dominant form of Religion in all of those countries, and had topography and minerals conducive to building.


oh, wait a minute......

beachboy wrote:It is a Catch 22. Surely by allowing the people smuggling boats to land/be accepted on the European coastline you are encouraging (hundreds of) thousands of people to make perilous journeys to the Med and then to take a highly risky sea journey. That is surely a lot worse. Those that are keen to help together with governments could rather encourage people to apply via an office in their home country with lower entry criteria where the proper criminal/war crime checks can be done and the not so strong or wealthy would have a chance. That would be a better solution to control entry and give some the chance to better their lives.

You have a very idealistic view of the world. It just simply doesn't work that way.

Humans make these incredible journeys not because they can or want to, it's because they are willing to risk their lives (and their family's lives) to improve their situation. I can't even contemplate what sort of mindset you have to be in to make that decision.

For me, the only solution is to work with these countries to tighten their borders and - as an end goal - help improve their situations so that the people don't want to leave, or at least the cost will appear to outweigh the benefits.

guy smiley wrote:As usual, the consensus (or that of the vocal minority who frequent these threads more than the more reasonable posters) seems to be to continue to demonise asylum seekers... people in the main fleeing from some form of tyranny or violence.

What Hermes' post suggests your ire could be more productively aimed at organised crime structures who are really doing the damage in this situation, world wide.

And at politicians announcing open door policies with very little thought for the consequences of their actions; actions which have, in Hermes' words "showered these networks with unimaginable quantities of cash and resources".

Akkerman wrote:

Good on Italy for saying 'non'

Yep. Learning a foreign language is very important these days.

guy smiley wrote:As usual, the consensus (or that of the vocal minority who frequent these threads more than the more reasonable posters) seems to be to continue to demonise asylum seekers... people in the main fleeing from some form of tyranny or violence.

What Hermes' post suggests your ire could be more productively aimed at organised crime structures who are really doing the damage in this situation, world wide.

This x 1000

assfly wrote:

englishchief wrote:Feel sorry for the kids, but the adults know the risks of crossing. We have no legal obligation to accept these illegal immigrants (that's what they are, they're not refugees), and no moral obligation either.

Good on Italy for saying 'non'!

I think the best way to tackle it without a humanitarian disaster is to firstly arrest all the NGO crews out in the Med helping them, secondly arrest and execute any of the people smugglers who are caught. Then no harm comes to the migrants, and they can stay in Africa.

What about the migrants from the Middle East and South East Asia? Do they also have to stay in Africa?

Stay in Africa are the operative words.
If they travelled half way around the world from SE Asia or went south after leaving ME, to end up in Africa, I see no problem in forcing them to stay there.

Leinster in London wrote:Stay in Africa are the operative words.
If they travelled half way around the world from SE Asia or went south after leaving ME, to end up in Africa, I see no problem in forcing them to stay there.

Thankfully most of the people who make these decisions have more humanity than you do.

I'm sure if you were born into the situations these people are, you would also do everything in your power to improve your situation.

assfly wrote:

Leinster in London wrote:Stay in Africa are the operative words.
If they travelled half way around the world from SE Asia or went south after leaving ME, to end up in Africa, I see no problem in forcing them to stay there.

Thankfully most of the people who make these decisions have more humanity than you do.

I'm sure if you were born into the situations these people are, you would also do everything in your power to improve your situation.

Ok, give me a number, and confirm to me that if we move absolutely everyone out of the shithole they came from, then the same shithole will not have been created here.

Having sympathy doesn't mean you ignore the reality of the constraints of infrastructure.