Clashes as France demolishes refugee camp at Calais - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Fourier;49839796]They are not going to get spread out so your "relative numbers" doesn't hold out. They will accumulate somewhere. There will be separation. Natives and "new ones". "no-go zones" are formed where even police doesn't want to go. This is not racist thing, this is just how human nature works.[/QUOTE] I'd say that's more of a fault for some European countries not accepting any refugees at all. That and all of the actual economic migrants masquerading as Syrian refugees wanting to go to welfare countries (not necessarily because they want to be lazy mind you, but rather because they want the best life they can get).

[QUOTE=Cypher_09;49839481]We have the NHS and a crazy slack benefits system.[/QUOTE] I'm guessing it also has to do with english being taught all around the globe so they'll at least have the the slightest idea what people are saying in england, as opposed to german, french, italian, spanish and all the other languages

[QUOTE=Dr.C;49840734]I'm guessing it also has to do with english being taught all around the globe so they'll at least have the the slightest idea what people are saying in england, as opposed to german, french, italian, spanish and all the other languages[/QUOTE] They can get by perfectly fine using English in Germany or any other close-by country. They wouldn't walk thousands of miles for the language. A lot of refugees are already ~not bad~ at German, for example.

I'm glad they're doing things at Calais, not that they haven't but this is a step up. Migrants continually raid trucks each night and attempt to stow away to the UK and always get caught, if a driver tries to stop them they can and do get violent, recently they've started going after the normal port that handles just cars and people, not just the freight terminals.

People say they've let too much in, not that anyone had a choice, this isn't theme hospital where you can just turn people away, people will and do find a way to their destinations whether it is life or death, none of us could have handled this any better. It's a global crisis and it's only the start.

[QUOTE=Faunze;49840830]People say they've let too much in, not that anyone had a choice, this isn't theme hospital where you can just turn people away, people will and do find a way to their destinations whether it is life or death, none of us could have handled this any better. It's a global crisis and it's only the start.[/QUOTE] The Soviet Union used to keep in almost 300 million people, we can't keep a few million out. I'm not saying that we should necessarily do it, I'm just saying that it's possible and rather easy actually.

This is nothing more than an invasion of economic migrants that france does not have the balls to deport because of eu interference

[QUOTE=Sgt.Kickass;49839196]The European Union fucked up things really bad right from the start.They acted too slow,communications between the member-states was shit and they took in more than we could help.Not to mention the "economic" migrants that flowed en masse,that certainly didn´t help.And also those meetings to discuss the crisis which were nothing but a waste of precious time to avert this.[/QUOTE] you realise that the calais migrant problem has been happening since 2001, and has been an ongoing problem for the past 15 years this is literally nothing to do with the current 'refugee crisis', or the EU, other than the fact that it concerns migrants/refugees. [editline]1st March 2016[/editline] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_migrant_crisis_(1999%E2%80%93present)[/url] please read up before anyone else makes any really silly posts

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49843521]you realise that the calais migrant problem has been happening since 2001, and has been an ongoing problem for the past 15 years this is literally nothing to do with the current 'refugee crisis', or the EU, other than the fact that it concerns migrants/refugees. [editline]1st March 2016[/editline] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_migrant_crisis_(1999%E2%80%93present)[/url] please read up before anyone else makes any really silly posts[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]However, it was not until 2015 that the number of migrants reached its highest level.[/QUOTE] You should read the links you post yourself sometime. And are you seriously denying that it's a crisis? Lmfao

[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;49844271]You should read the links you post yourself sometime. And are you seriously denying that it's a crisis? Lmfao[/QUOTE] no, i'm quoting it because it's literally the name of the event, or to give it the full name 'European Migrant Crisis' or 'European Refugee Crisis' the fact that everyone is kneejerking and saying doom and gloom over an area that has known to be a problem for almost two decades perhaps instead of shitposting you could have noticed that i was responding to a guy saying that the EU wasted precious time that could have been used to avert this, when calais has been a problem for nearly 17 years lmfao [editline]1st March 2016[/editline] actually you're right, the EU wasted precious time they could have spent making a fucking time machine to prevent the calais migrant crisis before it happened lmao

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49840351]I'd say that's more of a fault for some European countries not accepting any refugees at all. That and all of the actual economic migrants masquerading as Syrian refugees wanting to go to welfare countries (not necessarily because they want to be lazy mind you, but rather because they want the best life they can get).[/QUOTE] Actual economic migrants masquerading is main problem I think, many people from no-war zones come and taking place of actual war-zone migrants. Real refugee: 1. experienced trauma from war 2. happy to have food and be alive 3. probably not causing any problems, see point 2. Economic migrant: 1. didn't experience trauma from war 2. want more money, better job 3. probably 'spoiled', see point 1. 4. probably causing problems, see point 3. By 'spoiled' I mean spoiled relatively to real war-torn refugee

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49843521]you realise that the calais migrant problem has been happening since 2001, and has been an ongoing problem for the past 15 years this is literally nothing to do with the current 'refugee crisis', or the EU, other than the fact that it concerns migrants/refugees. [editline]1st March 2016[/editline] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_migrant_crisis_(1999%E2%80%93present)[/url] please read up before anyone else makes any really silly posts[/QUOTE] I meant the refugee crisis happening [B]now[/B] idiot.Not the Calais situation.

[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;49844271]You should read the links you post yourself sometime. And are you seriously denying that it's a crisis? Lmfao[/QUOTE] Well both of you are right. While there is obviously a crisis right now, in france we've been hearing of the Calais camp (called "the jungle" here) in the media since like, forever. Every 2-3 years a major controversy happens there, makes it to the news, then everyone forgets about it until the next incident. While the massive immigration wave is making things 100x worse, there were already debates about demolishing the jungle 5 to 10 years ago. Iirc during the last elections in 2012 some candidates made promises over it, kinda like Obama with Guantánamo (I'm talking about the political impact in an election context). It was more of a right-wing thing tho

[QUOTE=Jordax;49839360]And some of them even go back to wherever they came from, since Finland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg aren't to their standards. This got to be the most picky and entitled bunch of ''''refugees'''' in history.[/QUOTE] [img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/Invasions_of_the_Roman_Empire_1.png/1280px-Invasions_of_the_Roman_Empire_1.png[/img] Being under your categories of "picky" and "entitled" doesn't unqualify someone as a refugee, and the act of seeking refuge can be defined as seeking a place where difficulty is avoided, and since Britain has more generous welfare than other countries, yes, they're still refugees, and yes they're still seeking refuge by definition. Put yourself in the mindset of a refugee that has just left Syria or Iraq, where a group of psychopathic extremists have been going town to town and mass murdering and raping the population as they see fit. Realistically, are you going to settle for being a refugee in Turkey or a refugee in France? For some people it boils down to whether or not they're [B]literally willing to risk chance of death[/B] on a capsized ship on a meditterean journey to go to France or not. But really, I have to step back, you really showed those war-stricken, financially challenged refugees just trying to seek a reasonable quality of life who's boss, right?

[QUOTE] But really, I have to step back, you really showed those war-stricken, financially challenged refugees just trying to seek a reasonable quality of life who's boss, right? [/QUOTE] They're not entitled to European welfare. They passed through safe countries. They are no longer fleeing imminent death, they're shopping around for the best social benefits.

tbh, I still don't understand how they cross from not a Schengen country into a Schengen country and do not get shot. Not to be like "oh they should all been shot", but just wondering, because security should be tight there, as things like drugs and illegal weapons and immigrants.

[QUOTE=Lurr;49845447]They're not entitled to European welfare. They passed through safe countries. They are no longer fleeing imminent death, they're shopping around for the best social benefits.[/QUOTE] [url=https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define+stricken&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=TfHVVv-IOMXTmwGhjIXwAQ#q=define+refugee]Yet, still refugees. [/url] [quote]They're not entitled to European welfare. [/quote] They are if we're harbouring them, which we are, because we have a basic moral compass. Refugees are moving en masse into mainland Europe and that's a fact, not a maybe, not a disease you can cure by closing borders and denying welfare. If a refugee starts dying on E.U soil are you going to deny them life saving treatment because you feel they're not entitled? [I]Are you entitled[/I] to make that decision between life and death, just because you think you're better in your country? [quote]They are no longer fleeing imminent death,[/quote] I've met a number of people in their 40's, 50's and older in the UK, where they have free access to the internet and all forms of media, who geniunely believed or still believe that ISIS was going to expand across the continent. You think that people in Syria who have personally witnessed how brutal the fighting and how inconclusive it looks, especially once the syrian rebels and government are taken into account, are really all going to think that Turkey is completely safe? Just take a look at the last 15 years of history in the middle east and how much anarchy there has been. Even once ISIS collapses, that won't be the end. It'll just splinter into more terroist cells. [quote]they're shopping around for the best social benefits.[/quote] They're migrating to a place with a far better quality of life having endured misery, blood and death in conflict. The choices to these people are obvious - many of them have experiencing poverty and dictatorship for decades. You can say its selfish that they're looking for the best quality of life in their situation and making life difficult for all the relatively rich normal people (so sad) ,and I can equally say its selfish to harbour all of the money we spend on welfare on purely ourselves. Human beings are human beings.

[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;49845610][url=https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define+stricken&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=TfHVVv-IOMXTmwGhjIXwAQ#q=define+refugee]Yet, still refugees. [/url] They are if we're harbouring them, which we are, because we have a basic moral compass. Refugees are moving en masse into mainland Europe and that's a fact, not a maybe, not a disease you can cure by closing borders and denying welfare. If a refugee starts dying on E.U soil are you going to deny them life saving treatment because you feel they're not entitled? [I]Are you entitled[/I] to make that decision between life and death, just because you think you're better in your country? I've met a number of people in their 40's, 50's and older in the UK, where they have free access to the internet and all forms of media, who geniunely believed or still believe that ISIS was going to expand across the continent. You think that people in Syria who have personally witnessed how brutal the fighting and how inconclusive it looks, especially once the syrian rebels and government are taken into account, are really all going to think that Turkey is completely safe? They're migrating to a place with a far better quality of life having endured misery, blood and death in the middle east. The choices to these people are obvious - many of them have experienced poverty and dictatorship for decades. You can say its selfish that they're looking for the best quality of life in their situation and making life difficult for all the relatively rich normal people (so sad) ,and I can equally say its selfish to harbour all of the money we spend on welfare on purely ourselves. Human beings are human beings.[/QUOTE] Here is a comparison of a migrant and a refugee, from the UNHCR: [QUOTE]Migrants, especially economic migrants, choose to move in order to improve the future prospects of themselves and their families. Refugees have to move if they are to save their lives or preserve their freedom. [/QUOTE] Migrants travel to Europe for social benefits, because they are uncomfortable. Refugees flee to wherever is safe because, otherwise, they will die. Refugees are in countries like Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. Migrants are in countries like the UK and France. At that point they've even passed through several European countries, which you can not possibly say are dangerous (not that Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon are very dangerous)

[QUOTE=Lurr;49845679]Here is a comparison of a migrant and a refugee, from the UNHCR: Migrants travel to Europe for social benefits, because they are uncomfortable. Refugees flee to wherever is safe because, otherwise, they will die. Refugees are in countries like Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. Migrants are in countries like the UK and France. At that point they've even passed through several European countries, which you can not possibly say are dangerous (not that Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon are very dangerous)[/QUOTE] That's not a clear cut definition. I'm not saying that mainland europe has become dangerous, I'm pointing out the power of belief. A refugee can still be in Calais if they believe that the only way to truly preserve their lives and those of their families is to live in a place with certainty, far away from conflict and with the aid of effective welfare. In the past few weeks I've seen plenty of Europeans on this forum that geniunely think that well funded, well organised terroists that have mastered social engineering on the internet would seriously be stopped from making attacks by tougher E.U border controls on these migrants. An idea that is about as utterly fucking ridiculous as the plot of Pacific Rim, yet is widely believed and a strong motivator alone for people to want to stop immigration.

[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;49845745]That's not a clear cut definition. [/QUOTE] Seems pretty clear cut to me. [QUOTE]I'm not saying that mainland europe has become dangerous, I'm pointing out the power of belief. A refugee can still be in Calais if they believe that the only way to truly preserve their lives and those of their families is to live in a place with certainty, far away from conflict and with the aid of effective welfare. In the past few weeks I've seen plenty of Europeans on this forum that geniunely think that well funded, well organised terroists that have mastered social engineering on the internet would seriously be stopped from making attacks by tougher E.U border controls on these migrants. An idea that is about as utterly fucking ridiculous as the plot of Pacific Rim, yet is widely believed and a strong motivator alone for people to want to stop immigration. [/QUOTE] Belief means nothing. I can believe I'm a billionaire all I want but that doesn't make me a billionaire. [QUOTE]In the past few weeks I've seen plenty of Europeans on this forum that geniunely think that well funded, well organised terroists that have mastered social engineering on the internet would seriously be stopped from making attacks by tougher E.U border controls on these migrants[/QUOTE] They wouldn't be stopped but it sure would be harder for them.

[QUOTE=Lurr;49845846] Belief means nothing. I can believe I'm a billionaire all I want but that doesn't make me a billionaire. [/QUOTE] Being a billionare is defined by quantifiable amounts of money, being a refugee is defined by belief and emotion that it would be immoral and impractical to try to quantify. Immoral because you can't with certainty understand or evaluate the grief of these people and impractical because provisions designed on the basis of quantifying entitlement of only "true" refugees will still be flawed as migrants from countries unrelated to conflict will still pose as refugees because that's just how people behave. When reduced to "all or nothing", the only choice is to accomodate everyone because in the context of greater Europe as trying to turn everyone away wouldn't even work.

Jungle's been there for years, it's hardly going to have been a cakewalk to remove it.

Every time this kind of thing happens the humanitarian associations who try to push the "refugees are people too" must be having the worst time of their life dealing with PR because it portrays the people they're trying to help gain a better image as rampaging lunatics who set shit on fire and toss rocks at people when provoked. It's like that time a Roma guy was stopped by the police, threw a fit, was arrested and a bunch of Romas later showed up to loot stores. One of them event started cutting a tree with a chainsaw out of nowhere and when arrested he claimed he found the chainsaw embedded in the tree and wanted to finish the work.

A truckdriver i know got his truck smashed and got hit by a rock through the windshield. He's losing about 14 grand us dollars for this. And if he had hit one of them he would've been murdered or sent to prison.