21–28 of 28 posts
For people who know the history and believe in human stupidity to repeat its mistakes, there is much to reflect. There are people who think that, whatever happens, they will be on the safe side, but you never know how things might evolve and one day you might be on the "unsafe" side.
So pour as much money as necessary into establishing proper facilities in the nearby countries. Greece could do with the capital injection, and if not I bet other countries would gladly bid for the opportunity of an industry on this scale. That would be equally Samaritan and actually have a chance of being efficient, for many reasons.
- More cost-effective
- Save the refugees a grueling trip and eliminate black market people traffickers
- A facility in a neighboring country actually stands a chance of determining the status of each refugee, as they will more easily be able to research local conditions
- People who aren't actually refugees will have to first make it to the actual crisis zone, making it more difficult to fake refugee status
- Refugees will be able to more easily return to their homes when/if the security situation is resolved
In my opinion, this system could easily be enforced by adopting a policy where each refugee must register at a entry point near each crisis area. Here they will be fingerprinted and have their case registered in the system.
Now, anyone that turns up anywhere inside Europe is summarily sent back to any of the entry points to start the process properly. As soon as this gets known among refugees (which will be within days), no more people will trek a thousand kilometers or pay criminals to transport them, since they will be sent back anyway.
Tl;dr the author transported illegal refugees to Sweden, despite suspecting it to be illegal; is somehow upset for being sued
"Illegal refugees". What a lovely phrase you've come up with. I'm sure people will stop fleeing a war if you tell them that it's illegal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe there are other reasons that people didn't want a refugee shelter popping up next door to them, like crime and overcrowding. If she wants to help she can follow the law and do it without forcing everyone in her neighborhood to participate in a refugee transportation and housing operation.
She gave five or six people a ride, served them coffee, and then sent them on their way. Hardly a refugee shelter!
I live in Denmark, and unfortnately this story is true. It seems like we have learnt nothing since World War II
Fellow dane here. I think the direction the mainstream political parties are moving is a national shame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You missed the largest point, it makes them dependent on the easy handouts and kills their instincts.
Are you genuinely arguing against helping people in need?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You missed the largest point, it makes them dependent on the easy handouts and kills their instincts.
And you think human beings should be acting on instincts, or what? Where are you going with this analogy, besides comparing people to animals in a zoo?
I also never compared people to animals in a zoo. That would imply we have control over said people. Instead, we have people from a foreign land who are here for free stuff (Aka wild animal coming up to you in national park).
I'm suggesting that maybe if we don't give them free stuff, they will go home and stop trying to get free stuff from us. Every time you give these people free stuff, it encourages them more. Every time you feed the bear in the woods, it encourages bears to accost people on the trail. Did not know this needed such an explanation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you think human beings should be acting on instincts, or what? Where are you going with this analogy, besides comparing people to animals in a zoo?
Humans do act on instincts, what do you think hormones are? Humans are not special, we're animals too. I also never compared people to animals in a zoo. That would imply we have control over said people. Instead, we have people from a foreign land who are here for free stuff (Aka wild animal coming up to you in national park). I'm suggesting that maybe if we don't give them free stuff, they will go home and stop tryi…
You said "it kills their instincts" as a reason not to feed animals. Regardless of the fact that humans also have instincts, why is "it kills their instincts" a reason not to feed people? That's what I was asking. Our society is not ruled by instinct, and should not be.
> I'm suggesting that maybe if we don't give them free stuff, they will go home
It's like you don't know what a refugee is. Their home is gone. A major city was just destroyed.