Greece dumps refugees in Ocean tells Turkey Deal with it

[The Republic of Fore]

Agreements can be broken at any time. Just because I said I'd do something ten years ago doesn't mean I'm bound to it the rest of my life. If the EU wants to remove Greece, they're free to do so. But they won't. So why shouldn't Greece treat refugees how it chooses? If there's no punishment, then there's no reason not to break the law.

Except that in this case you didn't just say something, you signed a friggin' contract with full legal terms and conditions. Breaking the contract can bring consequences to you, just like violating international law in real life. EU can choose to cut the enormous aid it sent to Greece, and the Greek economy, already on life support, will go into an even deeper crisis.

But there's no real proof the EU will actually do anything more than, as Jimmy Carrey would say it "Piss and moan like an impotent jerk".

[Picairn]

Because laws can be changed. If Greece doesn't want to take refugees then that's their business.

And what about the international laws which Greece has signed and ratified?

[Novus America]

Why shouldn't Greece abide by their own domestic laws?

Because laws can be changed. If Greece doesn't want to take refugees then that's their business.

When you sign a treaty, violating it becomes the business of all members of the treaty, by default.

[Gravlen]

Why shouldn't Greece abide by their own domestic laws?

Because laws can be changed.

That makes no sense. Should the police be free to murder people - illegally - because "laws can be changed"?

If Greece doesn't want to take refugees then that's their business.

Greek lawmakers have not said Greece doesn't want to take refugees. If they had, they would have changed the laws, which they haven't done. Is Greece not a country which claims to be a democracy and respect the rule of law?

Also, it is the business of the greeks who have filed lawsuits against the government for their violation of Greek law.

[The Lone Alliance]

Agreements can be broken at any time. Just because I said I'd do something ten years ago doesn't mean I'm bound to it the rest of my life. If the EU wants to remove Greece, they're free to do so. But they won't. So why shouldn't Greece treat refugees how it chooses? If there's no punishment, then there's no reason not to break the law.

Except that in this case you didn't just say something, you signed a friggin' contract with full legal terms and conditions. Breaking the contract can bring consequences to you, just like violating international law in real life. EU can choose to cut the enormous aid it sent to Greece, and the Greek economy, already on life support, will go into an even deeper crisis.

Europe won't because Europe knows that one day they do might have to do the same as Greece.

And furthermore that really won't do much to help the migrants, if anything it'll make things worse, Greek anger might just lead to people committing acts of violence then, what are you going to do then, invade Greece?

Do you really think that bankrupting Greece will somehow improve conditions for migrants trying to sneak into Greece? Cause negative reinforcement always leads to positive outcomes right?

There's no happy solution here. Somebody is always going to get screwed here.

[The Republic of Fore]

Because laws can be changed. If Greece doesn't want to take refugees then that's their business.

And what about the international laws which Greece has signed and ratified?

See answer A. Worthless pieces of paper don't outweigh national sovereignty. Especially when the punishment for breaking them is just whining and moaning.

[Purpelia]

Because laws can be changed. If Greece doesn't want to take refugees then that's their business.

And what about the international laws which Greece has signed and ratified?

When it comes to self preservation it is time to dump treaties and leave conventions and do what must be done. This is a necessary and good step toward that.

[The Republic of Fore]

Because laws can be changed.

That makes no sense. Should the police be free to murder people - illegally - because "laws can be changed"?

If Greece doesn't want to take refugees then that's their business.

Greek lawmakers have not said Greece doesn't want to take refugees. If they had, they would have changed the laws, which they haven't done. Is Greece not a country which claims to be a democracy and respect the rule of law?

Also, it is the business of the greeks who have filed lawsuits against the government for their violation of Greek law.

Police don't murder people. If you want to avoid being killed by police you can try this revolutionary new thing called "listening". And clearly they don't want to take refugees or they wouldn't have dumped them in the ocean. And great, toss those lawsuits then change the laws. If the citizens don't like it they're free to leave. Nobody owes migrants anything.

[Gravlen]

And what about the international laws which Greece has signed and ratified?

See answer A. Worthless pieces of paper don't outweigh national sovereignty. Especially when the punishment for breaking them is just whining and moaning.

You keep using that term. I don't think it means what you think it means.

[North German Realm]

And what about the international laws which Greece has signed and ratified?

See answer A. Worthless pieces of paper don't outweigh national sovereignty. Especially when the punishment for breaking them is just whining and moaning.

Worthless pieces of paper that you have already signed, you mean. Which is why they aren't against a country's National Sovereignty. The Nation has already accepted that as part of its laws -making it sovereign in their implementation. Though you are right on one account. There should be harsh punishments for violating international law.

[Gravlen]

That makes no sense. Should the police be free to murder people - illegally - because "laws can be changed"?


Greek lawmakers have not said Greece doesn't want to take refugees. If they had, they would have changed the laws, which they haven't done. Is Greece not a country which claims to be a democracy and respect the rule of law?

Also, it is the business of the greeks who have filed lawsuits against the government for their violation of Greek law.

Police don't murder people.

Sure they do. Here's an example of that.

If you want to avoid being killed by police you can try this revolutionary new thing called "listening".

Suuure. Tell that to Philando Castile. He listened and did everything by the book.

That drivel aside, you failed to answer my question.

And clearly they don't want to take refugees or they wouldn't have dumped them in the ocean.

Yet it is not legal to do so, and the democratically elected representatives have said they want to take refugees. That some people go rogue doesn't change that.

Is your argument that my examples above show that the US clearly don't want black people to live?

And great, toss those lawsuits then change the laws. If the citizens don't like it they're free to leave. Nobody owes migrants anything.

Yes, they do. They owe both the migrants and the citizens a respect for the rule of law.

[Great Mann]

And what about the international laws which Greece has signed and ratified?

See answer A. Worthless pieces of paper don't outweigh national sovereignty. Especially when the punishment for breaking them is just whining and moaning.

There are arguments to be made on breaking previously signed and/or ratified international treaties in extreme crises or when the collective interests of a country’s people outweighs the provisions set out by a treaty or more. However I do not believe this is worth breaking international law for, and Greece should be punished to dissuade non-compliance with the relevant international laws, but also aided as to help lessen the chances of such a thing happening again. In my opinion, rather than leaving thousands and thousands of refugees to sit around in Greece and other under-strain countries, the international community needs to come together to put a swift and decisive end to the causes of this crisis. Assad must go, the islamists must go, the Libyan civil war must be resolved (preferably under a capable leader rather than a faux “democracy”), and so on. Once peoples’ homes are sufficiently safe to return, then all who do not apply for permanent residence must be aided in their return to their countries of origin.

I am vehemently opposed to Turkey’s “safe zone” bullshit, BTW, and fully support fucking the AKP government over for their continued attempts at ethnic cleansing of the Kurdish nation, but that’s besides the topic. These people just need to return home, and as soon as humanly possible, therefore eliminating the causes of such violations of international law.

[Novus America]

That makes no sense. Should the police be free to murder people - illegally - because "laws can be changed"?


Greek lawmakers have not said Greece doesn't want to take refugees. If they had, they would have changed the laws, which they haven't done. Is Greece not a country which claims to be a democracy and respect the rule of law?

Also, it is the business of the greeks who have filed lawsuits against the government for their violation of Greek law.

Police don't murder people. If you want to avoid being killed by police you can try this revolutionary new thing called "listening". And clearly they don't want to take refugees or they wouldn't have dumped them in the ocean. And great, toss those lawsuits then change the laws. If the citizens don't like it they're free to leave. Nobody owes migrants anything.

Murder is an UNLAWFUL killing with malice. (If no malice manslaughter is still a crime) If the police kill people while breaking the law with malice, yeah that would be murder.
Police can commit murder, they do not have the legal right to just kill anyone.

Sure you could change the laws to make a certain unlawful killing lawful but that would not make it not murder now.
Until you change the laws, your are supposed to enforce them where they protect people.

Also treaties are again the collective responsibility of all members of the treaty, if you sign a treaty saying you owe them something now you do owe them, and it is not just a domestic matter any more.

Also we have good reasons why abandoning people at sea is bad, and why refugees get certain protections. Because if you end up on the wrong side of a ship wreck or refugee crisis you want to be protected too.

And even illegal immigrants, although not having the same rights as citizens, while they still should be deported in many cases, and it is perfectly fine to deport them, how they are deported should still be reasonably humane and not unreasonably dangerous.