If you don’t let them in, then you don’t have to deport. It would save the EU so much time and resources.
Germanicus15BC on
Increase to 100%
TheAntiAirGuy on
Why can’t they just have an EU wide no tolerance policy.
Entering illegally, instant no-go. Use the official ways, earn your stay!
Actually fleeing from war and you’re from a neighbouring country or at least a country similarly culture wise? Stay as long as the war is going on and/or go through various integration steps to be able to apply for a citizship (only applies to the individual, family and friends don’t get a free pass)
[deleted] on
[removed]
Lower-Ad5976 on
what’s cooking 🤔
Egzo18 on
Popularity of right wing parties sponsored by china and russia: -50%
festerone2 on
*to start
[deleted] on
[deleted]
BellaRoselyn on
maybe should start with stopping those boat first.
secretsquirrelbiz on
I feel like sooner or later one western government or another is going to break the international law taboo that exists on deporting people without the consent of the country of origin and just do it, ie start putting people on flights or ships back to their last port of departure and leaving them there without any discussion or advance notice.
And as soon as one government does it and the sky doesn’t fall in its going to be on like donkey kong.
Rageoffreys on
It doesn’t really address the root cause though does it?
Take away the incentives, namely welfare & indefinite support for those here illegally, then the inflows will subside significantly.
Then those that still chose to come will understand that there no free lunch, and will be much more inclined to assimilate and contribute to society.
testing1567 on
How come the EU is allowed to do this and it gets generally praised here, but if the US does this, it’s called racist?
ExoticEntrance2092 on
I’ll believe that when I see it. Migrants don’t like to be deported, and the EU doesn’t like to force anyone to do anything.
Nearly all are arriving on boats that are rescued by European countries. A MUCH simpler solution would be to take any rescues to the nearest shore, instead of an additional 500-1000km to Europe.
Dildophosaurus on
… from 0 to 1!
Wambo74 on
Don’t look to Italy for example, look to Australia. I’m told they have a hard nosed immigration system that insures accepted immigrants are assets to their country, not liabilities. I could be wrong.
navynikkishaw23 on
It’s so complicated, because you don’t want your countries to be branded as places that aren’t migrant-friendly, but I think Europe is doing a cost-benefit analysis right now. In Germany, the AfD (who by the way are a literal neo-Nazi political party) rose so rapidly in numbers specifically in reaction to the influx of Syrian refugees in Germany under Angela Merkel. Merkel consistently said she felt morally obligated to allow so many migrants in because of Germany’s WW2 past, but it has led to something extremely dangerous- the sharp rise of far-right extremists and domestic terrorists. EU is probably asking themselves which is worse- be labeled as anti-migrant or risk additional increase of far-right extremists in their voting population.
17 Comments
If you don’t let them in, then you don’t have to deport. It would save the EU so much time and resources.
Increase to 100%
Why can’t they just have an EU wide no tolerance policy.
Entering illegally, instant no-go. Use the official ways, earn your stay!
Actually fleeing from war and you’re from a neighbouring country or at least a country similarly culture wise? Stay as long as the war is going on and/or go through various integration steps to be able to apply for a citizship (only applies to the individual, family and friends don’t get a free pass)
[removed]
what’s cooking 🤔
Popularity of right wing parties sponsored by china and russia: -50%
*to start
[deleted]
maybe should start with stopping those boat first.
I feel like sooner or later one western government or another is going to break the international law taboo that exists on deporting people without the consent of the country of origin and just do it, ie start putting people on flights or ships back to their last port of departure and leaving them there without any discussion or advance notice.
And as soon as one government does it and the sky doesn’t fall in its going to be on like donkey kong.
It doesn’t really address the root cause though does it?
Take away the incentives, namely welfare & indefinite support for those here illegally, then the inflows will subside significantly.
Then those that still chose to come will understand that there no free lunch, and will be much more inclined to assimilate and contribute to society.
How come the EU is allowed to do this and it gets generally praised here, but if the US does this, it’s called racist?
I’ll believe that when I see it. Migrants don’t like to be deported, and the EU doesn’t like to force anyone to do anything.
Nearly all are arriving on boats that are rescued by European countries. A MUCH simpler solution would be to take any rescues to the nearest shore, instead of an additional 500-1000km to Europe.
… from 0 to 1!
Don’t look to Italy for example, look to Australia. I’m told they have a hard nosed immigration system that insures accepted immigrants are assets to their country, not liabilities. I could be wrong.
It’s so complicated, because you don’t want your countries to be branded as places that aren’t migrant-friendly, but I think Europe is doing a cost-benefit analysis right now. In Germany, the AfD (who by the way are a literal neo-Nazi political party) rose so rapidly in numbers specifically in reaction to the influx of Syrian refugees in Germany under Angela Merkel. Merkel consistently said she felt morally obligated to allow so many migrants in because of Germany’s WW2 past, but it has led to something extremely dangerous- the sharp rise of far-right extremists and domestic terrorists. EU is probably asking themselves which is worse- be labeled as anti-migrant or risk additional increase of far-right extremists in their voting population.
Bout time you absolute morons.
10 years to late.