Italy turns away ship of 600 illegal migrants

[Korasta]

Now, are we talking actual immigrants, or refugees? The tabloids love mixing the two together.

[Ifreann]

Turn them away.

I hope you know that the boats the refugees arrive on are not that sea-worthy. Also, where are they to go? There homes are either destroyed or being used as a command post by either the Syrian Rebels or Assad's forces. And they can't go back unless they want to be killed in the cross-fire.

The refugees are on the Aquarius, a boat owned by SOS Méditerranée, a German charity.

[Ifreann]

Now, are we talking actual immigrants, or refugees? The tabloids love mixing the two together.

Can't really tell until they're brought ashore and assessed.

[The Republic of Fore]

Turn them away.

I hope you know that the boats the refugees arrive on are not that sea-worthy. Also, where are they to go? There homes are either destroyed or being used as a command post by either the Syrian Rebels or Assad's forces. And they can't go back unless they want to be killed in the cross-fire.

That isn't our problem. You don't get to break the law just because you have a sob story. This isn't the court of Judge Kennesaw mountain.

[The Republic of Fore]

That isn't our concern. Don't want to die at sea? Don't get in a boat. Quite simple.

It is the concern of any nearby vessels. Law of the sea.

So take them back to where they came from.

[Ifreann]

It is the concern of any nearby vessels. Law of the sea.

So take them back to where they came from.

The Aquarius came from Sicily.

[The Republic of Fore]

So take them back to where they came from.

The Aquarius came from Sicily.

The refugees didn't. Send them back to Africa where they belong.

[Dylar]

I hope you know that the boats the refugees arrive on are not that sea-worthy. Also, where are they to go? There homes are either destroyed or being used as a command post by either the Syrian Rebels or Assad's forces. And they can't go back unless they want to be killed in the cross-fire.

That isn't our problem. You don't get to break the law just because you have a sob story. This isn't the court of Judge Kennesaw mountain.

What law are they breaking? They're not crossing the border illegally so that they could live in the country of their choice for the rest of their lives. They're being let into a country to live in for a period of time until the fighting stops. iirc a lot of refugees aren't big fans of Western countries, but they understand that it's really the only place left to go where it's safer than their home country

[New yugoslavaia]

That isn't our problem. You don't get to break the law just because you have a sob story. This isn't the court of Judge Kennesaw mountain.

What law are they breaking? They're not crossing the border illegally so that they could live in the country of their choice for the rest of their lives. They're being let into a country to live in for a period of time until the fighting stops. iirc a lot of refugees aren't big fans of Western countries, but they understand that it's really the only place left to go where it's safer than their home country

Yeah, I was thinking that. If they're refugees then that means they have to go back when Syria's ok again. And if they don't like the west they will probably will go back.

[The Republic of Fore]

That isn't our problem. You don't get to break the law just because you have a sob story. This isn't the court of Judge Kennesaw mountain.

What law are they breaking? They're not crossing the border illegally so that they could live in the country of their choice for the rest of their lives. They're being let into a country to live in for a period of time until the fighting stops. iirc a lot of refugees aren't big fans of Western countries, but they understand that it's really the only place left to go where it's safer than their home country

I admit I'm not an expert on immigration laws, but I'm fairly certainly trying to enter a country after being told not to do so is a crime. Italy turned them away, so regardless of reason they shouldn't set foot in the country. Even if that means rounding them up and loading them on another boat.

[The Republic of Fore]

What law are they breaking? They're not crossing the border illegally so that they could live in the country of their choice for the rest of their lives. They're being let into a country to live in for a period of time until the fighting stops. iirc a lot of refugees aren't big fans of Western countries, but they understand that it's really the only place left to go where it's safer than their home country

Yeah, I was thinking that. If they're refugees then that means they have to go back when Syria's ok again. And if they don't like the west they will probably will go back.

Or we could just send them back now. Much easier.

[Dylar]

What law are they breaking? They're not crossing the border illegally so that they could live in the country of their choice for the rest of their lives. They're being let into a country to live in for a period of time until the fighting stops. iirc a lot of refugees aren't big fans of Western countries, but they understand that it's really the only place left to go where it's safer than their home country

I admit I'm not an expert on immigration laws, but I'm fairly certainly trying to enter a country after being told not to do so is a crime. Italy turned them away, so regardless of reason they shouldn't set foot in the country. Even if that means rounding them up and loading them on another boat.

Italy turned away any newer refugees coming in as they are running out of resources, which probably means they're gonna keep their fill of refugees until the conflicts are over.

[New yugoslavaia]

Yeah, I was thinking that. If they're refugees then that means they have to go back when Syria's ok again. And if they don't like the west they will probably will go back.

Or we could just send them back now. Much easier.

Yeah, we could. But also let's make sure we at least fix the middle east so they won't have a reason to emigrat en mass.

[Dylar]

Yeah, I was thinking that. If they're refugees then that means they have to go back when Syria's ok again. And if they don't like the west they will probably will go back.

Or we could just send them back now. Much easier.

Sure, we'll just send women and children back into the frays of battle where their surely to be killed. And if the cross-fire doesn't kill them, then starvation from lack of food supplies and disease from lack of clean, running water will. Good thinking.../s

[Luminesa]

Veterans and workers have paid their dues, a boat full of Africans hasn't exactly done the same to earn the same compassion.

Yeah just send them back to those dictatorships and civil wars. Scandinavian countries shouldn't have taken in those people leaving Germany in the 1930s or did they pay their dues?

In the case of the Jews running from the Nazis, they would have been invariably killed if they remained in their countries because of who they were. However, after WW2, some of the countries involved stabilized and some Jews were able to go home.

In the case of these refugees, are we simply going to take every group of refugees until their countries of origin finally decide to get themselves straight? They’re not being genocided, their countries are being run by buffoons and greedy dictators who refuse to help their people. And while we can take some, it’s almost like hoping a temporary cover of gauze is going to stop a big, gaping wound in your stomach. What are you going to do when you run out of gauze? This is why we have to either provide services to help these people live dignified lives in their new homes, or we have to fix their homes so more people aren’t running away to escape the violence that caused the influx of refugees in the first place.

This isn’t just some feel-good issue where you can lift your head high and say, “I support these refugees!” This is a long-term issue that will require plenty of work and pain and planning. You have nothing to try and hold over anyone in this case, as you will also be responsible in some way with helping those who come here from overseas.

[New yugoslavaia]

Yeah just send them back to those dictatorships and civil wars. Scandinavian countries shouldn't have taken in those people leaving Germany in the 1930s or did they pay their dues?

In the case of the Jews running from the Nazis, they would have been invariably killed if they remained in their countries because of who they were. However, after WW2, some of the countries involved stabilized and some Jews were able to go home.

In the case of these refugees, are we simply going to take every group of refugees until their countries of origin finally decide to get themselves straight? They’re not being genocided, their countries are being run by buffoons and greedy dictators who refuse to help their people. And while we can take some, it’s almost like hoping a temporary cover of gauze is going to stop a big, gaping wound in your stomach. What are you going to do when you run out of gauze? This is why we have to either provide services to help these people live dignified lives in their new homes, or we have to fix their homes so more people aren’t running away to escape the violence that caused the influx of refugees in the first place.

This isn’t just some feel-good issue where you can lift your head high and say, “I support these refugees!” This is a long-term issue that will require plenty of work and pain and planning. You have nothing to try and hold over anyone in this case, as you will also be responsible in some way with helping those who come here from overseas.

I've been trying to say that we should try and fix where they come from so they don't have to leave and pester us.

[The Republic of Fore]

I admit I'm not an expert on immigration laws, but I'm fairly certainly trying to enter a country after being told not to do so is a crime. Italy turned them away, so regardless of reason they shouldn't set foot in the country. Even if that means rounding them up and loading them on another boat.

Italy turned away any newer refugees coming in as they are running out of resources, which probably means they're gonna keep their fill of refugees until the conflicts are over.

Good on them for knowing their limits, but this whole situation could have been avoided in the first place.

[Ifreann]

The Aquarius came from Sicily.

The refugees didn't. Send them back to Africa where they belong.

Principle of non refoulement.

[The Republic of Fore]

Or we could just send them back now. Much easier.

Sure, we'll just send women and children back into the frays of battle where their surely to be killed. And if the cross-fire doesn't kill them, then starvation from lack of food supplies and disease from lack of clean, running water will. Good thinking.../s

As I said before, not our problem.

[The Republic of Fore]

The refugees didn't. Send them back to Africa where they belong.

Principle of non refoulement.

Principle of not our problem.

[Vassenor]

Principle of non refoulement.

Principle of not our problem.

One is actually in the treaty that governs how refugees are treated. The other is a pretty big case of "not a racist but".

[Ifreann]

Principle of non refoulement.

Principle of not our problem.

You can't send people back to countries where they'll face oppression. And since they are, by definition, in your country for that to be a possibility, it is your problem.

[Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio]

The point is to ensure all children receive the same educational instruction on why intolerance, even religiously inspired, and so on are bad.
You aren't forcing children to log in to 4chan.
Parents forcing children to attend sermons on their inferiority or the inferiority of their peers, or on their inequality, and so on is psychological abuse.

Have you ever been to a sermon? Methinks not.

I had to attend sermons at a religious school which taught sexism and female inferiority, so it is not that far-fetched.

[Luminesa]

In the case of the Jews running from the Nazis, they would have been invariably killed if they remained in their countries because of who they were. However, after WW2, some of the countries involved stabilized and some Jews were able to go home.

In the case of these refugees, are we simply going to take every group of refugees until their countries of origin finally decide to get themselves straight? They’re not being genocided, their countries are being run by buffoons and greedy dictators who refuse to help their people. And while we can take some, it’s almost like hoping a temporary cover of gauze is going to stop a big, gaping wound in your stomach. What are you going to do when you run out of gauze? This is why we have to either provide services to help these people live dignified lives in their new homes, or we have to fix their homes so more people aren’t running away to escape the violence that caused the influx of refugees in the first place.

This isn’t just some feel-good issue where you can lift your head high and say, “I support these refugees!” This is a long-term issue that will require plenty of work and pain and planning. You have nothing to try and hold over anyone in this case, as you will also be responsible in some way with helping those who come here from overseas.

I've been trying to say that we should try and fix where they come from so they don't have to leave and pester us.

Not as much of a matter of “pestering” so much as their land would be stable and they would not feel a need to run away from their homeland to survive. This would also be a long-term investment, of course.

[Eastfield Lodge]

And do what? Blow up boats full of unarmed men women and children?

Turn them away.

But what's stopping them trying again? Only one sure-fire way to stop them landing, let's be honest.