EU Immigration Crisis Megathread

[Liep]

Refugees have cleared the highways and things are back to normal.

I like this picture from yesterday:

[Admiral Yi]

Man, there must be zero Syrian kids who are not cute.

[Valmy]

Man, there must be zero Syrian kids who are not cute.

Who wouldn't want such adorable children in your European country?

[alfred russel]

Man, there must be zero Syrian kids who are not cute.

Who wouldn't want such adorable children in your European country?

Statements along these lines in a puppy store are how guys get stuck with a bunch of old dogs tying them down.

I saw a headline that we are going to accept 10,000 refugees or something like that. We should offer to accept 200,000 or some other giant number, just because we are a big country and can absorb them easily and we can feel superior to the europeans. 

[Eddie Teach]

I saw a headline that we are going to accept 10,000 refugees or something like that. We should offer to accept 200,000 or some other giant number, just because we are a big country and can absorb them easily and we can feel superior to the europeans.

It's bad politics. Would turn the immigration debate away from Mexicans to Muslims.

[Habbaku]

I am reading this book now.

http://smile.amazon.com/Invasion-Europe-Barbarians-J-Bury/dp/0393003884/

"The classic study of the Roman Empire's gradual collapse in the face of barbarian migrations. The barbarians were a scattered assortment of peoples, from the migratory Huns of Central Asia to the Franks of Gaul to the Goths and Vandals of the Germanic forest. Rather than regarding Rome as a foe, many barbarians viewed the Empire as a great institution, one in which their people had a natural place."

Peter Heather's book on the same subject is definitely worth reading.

[alfred russel]

I saw a headline that we are going to accept 10,000 refugees or something like that. We should offer to accept 200,000 or some other giant number, just because we are a big country and can absorb them easily and we can feel superior to the europeans.

It's bad politics. Would turn the immigration debate away from Mexicans to Muslims.

I doubt it, even trump was not against it. Especially if put in terms of the christian genocide.

[garbon]

I am reading this book now.

http://smile.amazon.com/Invasion-Europe-Barbarians-J-Bury/dp/0393003884/

"The classic study of the Roman Empire's gradual collapse in the face of barbarian migrations. The barbarians were a scattered assortment of peoples, from the migratory Huns of Central Asia to the Franks of Gaul to the Goths and Vandals of the Germanic forest. Rather than regarding Rome as a foe, many barbarians viewed the Empire as a great institution, one in which their people had a natural place."

Peter Heather's book on the same subject is definitely worth reading.

Which one? I seem to recall he's written several on the same subject.

[Martim Silva]

I am reading this book now.

http://smile.amazon.com/Invasion-Europe-Barbarians-J-Bury/dp/0393003884/

"The classic study of the Roman Empire's gradual collapse in the face of barbarian migrations. The barbarians were a scattered assortment of peoples, from the migratory Huns of Central Asia to the Franks of Gaul to the Goths and Vandals of the Germanic forest. Rather than regarding Rome as a foe, many barbarians viewed the Empire as a great institution, one in which their people had a natural place."

Also, the Barbarians too came to the Empire as war refugees, and were let in under the gaze of the legions due to humanitarian considerations and with arguments of assimilation.

Sounds familiar?

http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=morris&book=roman&story=goths

In the year 375 A.D. there existed a great Gothic kingdom in the north, extending from the Baltic to [326] the Black Sea, under the rule of an able monarch named Hermanric, who had conquered and combined numerous tribes into a single nation. On this nation, just as assassination removed the Gothic conqueror, descended a vast and frightful horde from northern Asia, the mighty invasion of the Huns, which was to shake to its heart the empire of Rome.

The Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths) were conquered by this savage horde. The Visigoths (Western Goths), stricken with mortal fear, hurried to the Danube and implored the Romans to save them from annihilation. For many miles along the banks of the river extended the panic-stricken multitude, with outstretched arms and pathetic lamentations, praying for permission to cross. If settled on the waste lands of Thrace they would pledge themselves to be faithful subjects of Rome, to obey its laws and guard its limits.

Sympathy and pity counseled the emperor to grant the request. Political considerations bade him refuse. To admit such a host of warlike barbarians to the empire was full of danger. Finally they were permitted to cross, under two stringent conditions: they must deliver up their arms, and they must yield their children, who were to be taken to Asia, educated, and held as hostages. Such was the first fatal step in the overthrow of Rome.

The task of crossing was a difficult one. The Danube there was more than a mile wide, and had been swollen with rains. A large fleet of boats and vessels was provided, but it took many days and nights to transport the mighty host, and numbers [327] of them were swept away and drowned by the rapid current. Probably the whole multitude numbered nearly a million, of whom two hundred thousand were warriors.

Guess that the main difference is that, while most barbarians were indeed women and children, the majority of migrants now coming to Europe are actually young adult men - the media just focuses on the very few children to arise pity, as showing the real influx - a huge mass of able-bodied men who left their families behind - would probably not spark the same feelings of pity amongs the populations of Europe (and what kind of men just abandons his family if he is indeed a refugee?)

This is the data from the UNHCR:

http://data.unhcr.org/mediterranean/regional.html#_ga=1.171704992.1447245490.1441933645

72% are adult men, 13% women and only 15% are children. You'd never tell by seeing the photos the press feeds you.

I saw a headline that we are going to accept 10,000 refugees or something like that. We should offer to accept 200,000 or some other giant number, just because we are a big country and can absorb them easily and we can feel superior to the europeans. 

Wow, Mr. Generous.

200,000? Really?

Germany is 28 times smaller than the US and has one quarter of the population of America, yet is expecting four times that 'giant number' of yours. This year.

To be on the same level, you should be offering shelter to 3.2 million in 2015, and expecting far greater numbers in the coming years.

That said, there seems to be an idea that there will be this number of migrants arriving and that's it. Wonder where people get that idea? Merkel and Holland have already warned this is a long-term problem. The numbers advanced are for this year alone. There will be many, many, many more arriving in the following years, and in growing numbers.

Over here, there is some disgust at the fact that the government indends to give the 'refugees' top housing for free - the likes of which the average citizen cannot even dream of. And the fact that the Church is doing its best to lodge the intended newly arrivals is not exactly nice, given that it did not show the same solidarity when many thousands of local families lost their homes, in the wake of the economic crisis.

That said, that will be quite a minor issue - regardless of what people want, these migrants want to go to lands where the welfare is great, so most will move to Germany, Sweden or other northern european place within a month, like it happened with the Kosovars during the 1999 crisis (we welcomed 2,000 refugees, just to find out that 30 days later only 5 of them remained here: the police tried to track the the rest, finding some 700, who had moved to Germany or Scandinavia; Seems they weren't interested at all in a 'safe place to live', just live from handouts in rich countries, something we are not wealthy enough to do).

Which is why the idea of 'European sharing of the burden' is a fallacy - no mater how they are split amongst the EU member-states, basically ALL of them will go to Germany and Northern Europe regardless.

And the media will brand any attempt to keep them in the other EU countries as oppressive racism.

[Admiral Yi]

Wow, Mr. Generous.

200,000? Really?

Germany is 28 times smaller than the US and has one quarter of the population of America, yet is expecting four times that 'giant number' of yours. This year.

To be on the same level, you should be offering shelter to 3.2 million in 2015, and expecting far greater numbers in the coming years.

Perhaps you are under the mistaken impression that these Syrians are the only migrants in the world.

[Martim Silva]

Perhaps you are under the mistaken impression that these Syrians are the only migrants in the world.

Mr. Yi, I am afraid you have your facts very twisted.

Firstly, Syrians are hardly the only population on the move - as you can see in the UNHCR site, official statistics say they are just half of the migrants arriving in Europe (and this does not say how many of these 'Syrians' are truly Syrian; our tv crews caught many people destroying their papers in the Serb forests (the names of other countries were clearly seen in the papers) and then say they are 'Syrians', so they can claim asylum.

Second, you seem to be under the impression the US is somehow anywhere near Germany when it comes to taking in refugees. That is very far from being the case.

Let's see the UN data before the crisis, with numbers from the end of 2012:

http://www.unhcr.org/51c071816.html



The US doesn't even show up on the graph.

(to be on the same level as Germany in 2012, the US would have to have an additional 2.3 million refugees enter its borders)

The Syria crisis turned Turkey into the major refugee-hosting nation (with an extra 1.59 million refugees), but the very large America just said it will take some 10,000.

Awesome.

[11B4V]

10k is too many

[Richard Hakluyt]

I am reading this book now.

http://smile.amazon.com/Invasion-Europe-Barbarians-J-Bury/dp/0393003884/

"The classic study of the Roman Empire's gradual collapse in the face of barbarian migrations. The barbarians were a scattered assortment of peoples, from the migratory Huns of Central Asia to the Franks of Gaul to the Goths and Vandals of the Germanic forest. Rather than regarding Rome as a foe, many barbarians viewed the Empire as a great institution, one in which their people had a natural place."

Peter Heather's book on the same subject is definitely worth reading.

I've just finished reading Peter Heather's book on the fall of the Roman Empire. It has a lurid cover so I nearly didn't buy it, an excellent read though with some interesting ideas, recommended.

[Martinus]

I saw a headline that we are going to accept 10,000 refugees or something like that. We should offer to accept 200,000 or some other giant number, just because we are a big country and can absorb them easily and we can feel superior to the europeans.

It's bad politics. Would turn the immigration debate away from Mexicans to Muslims.

I doubt it, even trump was not against it. Especially if put in terms of the christian genocide.

If only Mexicans were Christian...

[Tonitrus]

I saw a headline that we are going to accept 10,000 refugees or something like that. We should offer to accept 200,000 or some other giant number, just because we are a big country and can absorb them easily and we can feel superior to the europeans.

It's bad politics. Would turn the immigration debate away from Mexicans to Muslims.

I doubt it, even trump was not against it. Especially if put in terms of the christian genocide.

If only Mexicans were Christian...

They've been led astray by Santa Muerte.