Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

msf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 198 posts

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#91

Post by dracht »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #4
golergka wrote: post #2

> sending a message that caring for people forced from their homes is optional So, they're implying that it's mandatory? How come? Admitting foreign citizens, spending resources on them sounds like a definition of charity — how charity can not be optional?

How about Europe taking responsibility for their interventionist policies in the Middle East and their support for the US military agenda in the Middle East which created most of these problems in the first place?

Who is "Europe" in this case? I can tell you it was not idea of the European population to follow the US into a war based on wrongful information. So who should be taking responsibility?

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#92

Post by cjhpufe »

ris wrote: post #59
Freestyler_3 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because it is my heritage. My family history made it happen, and many families around us. I am a child of my mother and not a random baby thrown on a random spot on earth, I carry the burden of maintaining or improving the quality of life for my kids. - Doesn't mean that I do not wish that everyone in this world can have what I have, and I support helping others. - There are ways to come here and join our cultur…

You're stopping just short of claiming genetic superiority here.

I read it as a preference for one's own cultural heritage, rather than anything to do with genetics or race.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#93

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

hacksonx wrote: post #79

South Africa has received a huge influx of refugees overs the years from Zimbabwe, Mozambique & Nigeria. Even though the "people" have protested this and asked for the foreigners to be deported (Legal/Illegal) the government has not done that to humans. How a 3rd (2nd?) world country is able to accommodate people of such numbers while 1st world countries in Europe complain is beyond me.

And Jordan.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#94

Post by Drakim »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #8
Drakim wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, Europe is not one country. To hold the entirely of Europe responsible for what some countries do is just as absurd as holding all of Asia responsible for what China does. Secondly, many countries inside Europe have opposed US military actions in the Middle East.

> First of all, Europe is not one country. To hold the entirely of Europe responsible for what some countries do is just as absurd as holding all of Asia responsible for what China does. Germany, France and the UK (which actively supported interventions in the Middle East) contribute ~50% of the EU budget - it's silly to even suggest that these laws are being passed without their support. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org…

EU != Europe.

I live in Europe yet I'm not part of the European Union. Also, measuring by "budget", what's up with that? At least use population number or something that's semi reasonable.

It's roughly the same as thinking that the US == Continent America, and that Canada, Argentina and Mexico should be responsible for the actions of the US.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#95

Post by zrhtz »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #31
Freestyler_3 wrote: post #27

I do not wish harm for any innocent people. If they want they can get what we have in their own country, they need to make that possible though, if needed with our help. (I think there should be more focus on taking care of refugees and the like in the region... or at least more in countries that support their culture) Only when really necessary we need to take refugees into europe for protection, usually those are p…

>> "We make something good for our children and we -have- to share it with the whole world in our house?" You mean you got lucky to be born somewhere that isn't currently at war and now you feel entitled to what you were born into?

My old neighbor died some time ago. He was bedridden for several years and his wife dedicated all her time and money to provide care at home. When she had to get him to the hospital for a routine checkup, she had to call an ambulance because there was no other way to get him there. The ambulance drivers couldn't guarantee her that she wouldn't have to pay the bills for his transport. Two people who paid taxes their whole life, two people who paid health insurance their whole life.

Meanwhile ten thousands of refugees get these transports for free plus the state pays for interpreters during their hospital visit... tell me how this is fair without using your wishy washy talk about "entitledness" and "winning the birth lottery".

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#96

Post by cjhpufe »

jlg23 wrote: post #41
raverbashing wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, France opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2002. What do they get? Several terrorist actions in one year.

France also has a very bad track record in the Maghreb and lots of people who lived under French rule or lost people in their parents' generation are still alive. Given that France did not do much to make up for that, it is understandable that there still is a lot of hatred and they thus are an easy target. Concentrating a large, poor and badly educated 1st and 2nd generation of immigrants from those countries in neg…

That's no justification for acts of terrorism. The fault is with the individual terrorists, not the French en masse.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#97

Post by icebraining »

peteretep wrote: post #71
daleharvey wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are probably right, people are dying in their thousands to cross the med because they want some more cash ...

Why do you think they're crossing the med instead of staying in Turkey?

http://www.ibtimes.com/turkish-town-isis-crosshairs-kilis-re...

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#98

Post by jlg23 »

cjhpufe wrote: post #96
jlg23 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

France also has a very bad track record in the Maghreb and lots of people who lived under French rule or lost people in their parents' generation are still alive. Given that France did not do much to make up for that, it is understandable that there still is a lot of hatred and they thus are an easy target. Concentrating a large, poor and badly educated 1st and 2nd generation of immigrants from those countries in neg…

That's no justification for acts of terrorism. The fault is with the individual terrorists, not the French en masse.

I'm not trying to justify terrorism but highlight motivations for it.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#99

Post by dalke »

caoilte wrote: post #83
InclinedPlane wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Egypt, and Libya together have taken in a total of 6.7 million refugees. The EU has committed to taking on only 120k refugees.

It appears not to be fair to group Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait with the other states you have listed. while Turkey, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt have taken in around 5 million refugees, and boatloads of the destitute are making their way to Europe, the Gulf states have taken only a few hundred refugees, according to data from the UN's refugee agency (UNHCR). http://www.dw.com/en/arab-monarchies-turn-down-syrian-r…

I thought that was because Saudi Arabia doesn't call them refugees but "Arab brothers and sisters in distress". The number of such people is quite contentious, if https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrians_in_Saudi_Arabia is any evidence. There may be 500K such people "in distress."

FWIW, unlike the EU countries, Saudi Arabia isn't signatory to the United Nations Refugee Convention.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#100

Post by nxzero »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #48
jacquesm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Allowing them to choose which country they want to go to will end up burdening the richer European countries as they will undoubtedly be the final destination for most migrants. Fortunately those richer countries are better equipped to handle that burden (because they are rich). This is a complex problem and I really do not have any 5 minute solutions (I wish), but processing taking long seems to me a problem that…

>> "Fortunately those richer countries are better equipped to handle that burden (because they are rich)." I agree, but if you let people choose where they want to go and they mostly pick one of the rich countries it'll become unsustainable for them too which is why I think an even spread across the EU with countries taking in a share based on their wealth would work best. >> "processing taking long seems to me a pro…

You're missing the point of how refugees naturally select the country that's best able to deal with the issue.

Germany has an army, Greece does not. Turkey had an army, but the outcome of Turkey using it's army to end the war is not the one the refugees want. Point is to make refugees a natural point of pain as quickly as possible so that those impacted deal with the issue, not allow it to go on and on and on.

Even worse, if allowing countries to send refugees for a fee to another country becomes a thing, it might quickly turn into sending any unwanted individuals to a secured location in another country; which clearly is a horrible solution.

Post reply on HN