Didn't the US attack a MSF hospital in Afghanistan a couple of months ago?
Are they still taking US money?
Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
181–190 of 198 posts
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your take on the camps in France [0] filled with migrants trying to get to Britain? Which wars in France are they fleeing? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Jungle
People are trying to flee to somewhere familiar, be it because of language or brand presence. Additionally, many report they want to join family (cousins etc) already in the uk through legal means. I'm sure there are charlatans among them - but we are enacting collective punishment currently, which was largely abolished centuries ago. What's your take on the 3000 refugee a year limit the uk is working to? (20,000 by…
Somewhere familiar? How is Denmark or Sweden or Germany familiar to Syria?
If you flee because of war you don't care where you go, you just want to get away from the war. Moving to Denmark or UK or Sweden is a completely different operation.
Keep in mind that most people are left in the refugee camps near the conflict. For every person we have to take into our welfare system we are basically not able to provide for 10 if not hundreds of others in the actual area of the conflict.
The idea with being an actual refugee is that you are supposed to go back once the conflict is over and rebuild your own country. Thats not the plan of those who move so far away.
You are trying to turn something with a lot of gray areas into som black/white moral thing were the only right thing to do is help.
Sweden said just come everyone everyone warned them. Now they have closed the borders and is sending 80.000 back.
This is because they didn't realize that Denmark did which is you can't just take people in large quantity with such different cultures without it undermining the country they are migrating to.
It's easy to play the good person when you don't have responsibility for a country.
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people have legitimate concerns over mass migration. It's not all a bunch of xenophobes.
What are those legitimate concerns? Income depression? Housing scarcity? Migration hasn't done that, decades of broken robber-baron policy has.
Well, concern for the atheists is influx of deeply religious and conservative people. Do you know what happens to atheists in societies where many of people are coming from? Same for LGBT, woman rights etc.
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." > That is because of how international travel works. Refugees fleeing from war are forced to travel through the entire European continent to the northern countries with the most beneficial social security because of how international travel works? > "60% according to some are migrants not refugees." > Do you have…
That's one person, who in January referenced an internal report. Has that report since been published? Was he correct in that statement? That one report has been repeated many times, but repetition isn't verification. If I read https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 correctly, the 40% number refers specifically Syrian refugees. Quoting from it: > Iraqis and Afghans, it says, each represent around 24 percent of the m…
There is nothing besides wanting to get to a better place (rather than fleeing from war) that makes people go all the way to Denmark.
The fact is that the second you are in the nearest country where there is no conflict you are a refugee from the war, but the second you move further you are not more an actual refugee of war but rather a migrant.
Now there are all sorts of reasons why we still accepts people as refugees rather than migrants but thats only because they didn't declare themselves refugees in some of the countries they came trough.
They don't have to because of Schengen which allow for people to move freely within the EU. The out borders don't work, so as soon as you get in you can move quite freely. This is what is being changed now that many european countries are putting up border patrol forcing them further and further back to where they originated from.
It's totally understandably why people want to move to a better place, just as it's perfectly understandable that countries don't want to let everyone in. Especially not the European wellfare systems which are quite lucrative.
https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees...
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that simple. Fleeing to a nearby country is one thing. Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore. The irony is that it's those with most money who can afford to move the furthest away from the refugee camps and many of those who do are men, leaving their family behind hoping to be able to get them to the country they end up in 60% according to some a…
>60% according to some are migrants not refugees. "according to some" Wow, I was never convinced more.
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that simple. Fleeing to a nearby country is one thing. Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore. The irony is that it's those with most money who can afford to move the furthest away from the refugee camps and many of those who do are men, leaving their family behind hoping to be able to get them to the country they end up in 60% according to some a…
According to the Article 26 of the document I posted above, "each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances."; according to the second point of the Article 31 of that same document, "the Contracting States shall not apply to th…
Yes which is all based on the premise that the outer borders works, which they don't. This is why several countries now have border patrols again.
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they want a life like they had at home, before the war started. Makes sense to me. I mean, I would prefer that over living in a refugee camp for 15 years and being treated as a second-class citizen, with no future. "To live" is more than just existing. You'll note that the Syrian refugees are also going to places which don't list all the befits you described, like Brazil. Then again, there aren't many opportunitie…
Do refugees speak better German and Swedish then Portuguese?
The important question is can refugees communicate better in Germany and Sweden than in Brazil?
One option is German or Swedish. It's very unlikely that a refugee will know either language.
A large percentage of Germans and Swedes know English. If a refugee also knows English, that's one language possibility.
Also, French is another widely spoken second language in Syria, though less common than English. (Remember, Syria was a French Mandate.)
There is an existing minority population in both those countries which speaks Arabic. If a refugee also knows Arabic, that's another possibility.
On the other hand, in Brazil, fewer people know English (5% says https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-s... , compared to 64% for Germany and 86% for Sweden).
And far fewer Brazilians know Arabic, or refugees know Portuguese. (I don't know the mutual overlap in French.)
In any case, you can see it's much more likely that a refugee from Syria can communicate in either Germany or Sweden than in Brazil, even without knowing German or Swedish.
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not "some cash" - it's free lifetime income, healthcare, housing, guaranteed additional income for family members, proper schooling for children etc. It's not greedy to try to obtain these with some risk and a $5k investment, but just wanting these is not a good enough reason for EU taxpayers to pay for millions of migrants - especially when there are many more needy who cannot afford to travel to Europe.
> It's not "some cash" - it's free lifetime income, healthcare, housing, guaranteed additional income for family members, proper schooling for children etc. None of those (aside healthcare) are the rights of someone given asylum, while you are waiting for support you 'may' be given housing and financial support. There is no "free lifetime income"
> None of those (aside healthcare) are the rights of someone given asylum, while you are waiting for support you 'may' be given housing and financial support. There is no "free lifetime income"
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. In Austria, where I live, as well as in Germany, asylum gets you access to the country's welfare system, which equates at least €827 monthly for single people (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedarfsorientierte_Mindestsich...) and includes healthcare and additional benefits like I wrote. Once granted asylum, people are allowed to work, but due to extremely poor education and language barriers, most cannot or will not find jobs and end up in the welfare system forever. Typically, they are granted citizenship after 6 years (https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/26/Se...).
My main issue with this is not the fact that these are given to people with asylum (even though they get preferential treatment compared to EU citizens from other countries, who need to work for 12 months before having access to the welfare system), but that asylum was granted to far too many people who didn't deserve it. War refugees are "displaced people" and would normally receive temporary asylum-like status and return to their countries after the war. Civil war is not a reason for being granted asylum according to the Geneva Convention. Besides that, 2/3 of the refugees coming to Austria are not from war zones.
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#189Earlier 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.
What? Germany alone got over a million of refugees in 2015 alone.
Correct. Also, let's not forget the Ukraine crisis, which brought ~900.000 refugees to neighboring countries (Poland and Russia mostly).
Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's one person, who in January referenced an internal report. Has that report since been published? Was he correct in that statement? That one report has been repeated many times, but repetition isn't verification. If I read https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 correctly, the 40% number refers specifically Syrian refugees. Quoting from it: > Iraqis and Afghans, it says, each represent around 24 percent of the m…
There is nothing besides wanting to get to a better place (rather than fleeing from war) that makes people go all the way to Denmark. The fact is that the second you are in the nearest country where there is no conflict you are a refugee from the war, but the second you move further you are not more an actual refugee of war but rather a migrant. Now there are all sorts of reasons why we still accepts people as refuge…
Yes, we're between a rock and a hard place.
When experience says the Dublin Agreement starts to break own under high stress, who should suffer the most? The refugees? The border countries?
I certainly have no answers, but I can empathize better with the refugees more than I can those who insist that refugees are stuck in the first place they arrive.