Italy moves to rescue 1,200 migrants on boats

[Social Media]

The Italian coastguard is carrying out two large-scale operations to rescue around 1,200 migrants from overcrowded boats off the coast of Sicily.

About 800 people are travelling on one of the fishing boats, while around 400 are on another.

The country's coastguard has already rescued around 2,000 people in other operations since Friday.

At least two people died during the weekend's boat crossings, German non-profit ResQship said.

Migrant arrivals to Italy have risen steeply compared with the same period last year, despite efforts by the right-wing coalition government to clamp down on irregular migration.

The boat carrying 400 people, which is believed to have set out from Tobruk in Libya, was still without help late on Monday evening, according to an unofficial hotline for migrants in distress, Alarm Phone.

[Hanaguma]

What a surprise, you do it once and suddenly it happens again.  How about taking them back to where they came from and leaving them on the shore there?  People who foolishly put themselves in danger should not be rewarded for their actions. 

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

How about taking them back to where they came from and leaving them on the shore there?  

Because, after centuries of Western imperialism, war and thievery, their countries have been left as ungovernable hellholes. So most likely they will try again.

[Hanaguma]

15 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Because, after centuries of Western imperialism, war and thievery, their countries have been left as ungovernable hellholes. So most likely they will try again.

Blah blah blah.  The story doesn't even say where the passengers were from, so how can you make that judgement? Plus, Italy hasn't been in the colonial business for a long while.  

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

What a surprise, you do it once and suddenly it happens again.  How about taking them back to where they came from and leaving them on the shore there?  People who foolishly put themselves in danger should not be rewarded for their actions. 

Foolishly?

 

Unless you have evidence of why they each took the actions they did take how do you determine they acted foolishly?

 

Or are you making a gross uninformed and pejorative generalization?

 

[still kicking]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

What a surprise, you do it once and suddenly it happens again.  How about taking them back to where they came from and leaving them on the shore there?  People who foolishly put themselves in danger should not be rewarded for their actions. 

What is it up to you? You live in Italy or Europe? 

[Bkk Brian]

Hopefully they'll be ok. One of the boats was from Libya............

 

"The boat with 400 migrants departed from Tobruk, Libya, and had been at risk of capsizing with water in the hull, according to Alarm Phone. The service also said many on board required medical attention, including a child, a pregnant woman and a disabled person."

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/11/europe/italy-boat-migrants-mediterranean-intl-hnk/index.html

 

[still kicking]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Foolishly?

 

Unless you have evidence of why they each took the actions they did take how do you determine they acted foolishly?

 

Or are you making a gross uninformed and pejorative generalization?

 

Of course, he does with every post 

[Hanaguma]

1 hour ago, still kicking said:

Of course, he does with every post 

Getting on an over crowded boat after paying a scumbag human trafficker for the privilege? I would call that foolish. 

[still kicking]

7 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Getting on an over crowded boat after paying a scumbag human trafficker for the privilege? I would call that foolish. 

Do you realize they cannot apply for a visa like in the west victim bashing as it finest 

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, Social Media said:

Migrant arrivals to Italy have risen steeply compared with the same period last year, despite efforts by the right-wing coalition government to clamp down on irregular migration.

So, what happened to that? Was it all just talk, or have they given up?

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, still kicking said:

Do you realize they cannot apply for a visa like in the west victim bashing as it finest 

If they can't do it legally, why do they think they have a right to just turn up and expect a welcome mat?

I only have sympathy for genuine refugees, not economic ones.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Because, after centuries of Western imperialism, war and thievery, their countries have been left as ungovernable hellholes. So most likely they will try again.

Ah, so it's all our fault that they haven't been able to govern their countries properly, despite having had independence for a long time. LOL.

I suspect most of the population were born AFTER independence.

Perhaps if the rulers had their bank accounts examined the populace might know where all the money went.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, still kicking said:

Do you realize they cannot apply for a visa like in the west victim bashing as it finest 

Is that a valid reason to pay criminals to put them on an overcrowded boat that might sink?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If they can't do it legally, why do they think they have a right to just turn up and expect a welcome mat?

I only have sympathy for genuine refugees, not economic ones.

Right so a person who meets all the criteria of a ‘genuine refugee’ can never be a genuine refugee because there are no legal means to travel to the UK available to them.

 

Where’s your sympathy for these people?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Is that a valid reason to pay criminals to put them on an overcrowded boat that might sink?

Is leaving people with the only option of paying criminals to put them in over crowded boats a valid reason to continue the UK Government policy of not providing piratical  access to legal means to claim the right to refugee status in the UK without having to put their lives at risk to do so?

 

Again, where is this sympathy you tell us you have for ‘genuine refugees’?

[RayC]

This sad story highlights the fact that the migrant crisis is a Europe-wide problem.

 

It is clearly not a problem faced by the UK alone in the face of the inability and/or unwillingness of France/the EU to deal with it as some would have you believe.

[thaibeachlovers]

27 minutes ago, RayC said:

This sad story highlights the fact that the migrant crisis is a Europe-wide problem.

 

It is clearly not a problem faced by the UK alone in the face of the inability and/or unwillingness of France/the EU to deal with it as some would have you believe.

The problem with the undocumented economic ones IMO is that as long as some are able to stay in the EU and send news back home, more will follow. The only solution, IMO, is to find a way to prevent undocumented economic migrants staying in Europe, whether by returning them to point of departure, sending them back home, or the Australian solution which has apparently worked.

[RayC]

42 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The problem with the undocumented economic ones IMO is that as long as some are able to stay in the EU and send news back home, more will follow. The only solution, IMO, is to find a way to prevent undocumented economic migrants staying in Europe, whether by returning them to point of departure, sending them back home, or the Australian solution which has apparently worked.

How do you distinguish an economic migrant from an asylum seeker on arrival?

 

(The Australian solution makes no attempt to do this).

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, RayC said:

How do you distinguish an economic migrant from an asylum seeker on arrival?

 

(The Australian solution makes no attempt to do this).

Put them all in detention till they are vetted.

 

The Australian solution works, so worth it to stop more paying criminals to put them on unseaworthy boats, IMO.

[RayC]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Put them all in detention till they are vetted.

 

The Australian solution works, so worth it to stop more paying criminals to put them on unseaworthy boats, IMO.

I am a little confused.

 

Australia does not differentiate between economic migrants and asylum seekers if they attempt to enter the country illegally. There is no vetting process:  Neither group are allowed to settle in Australia.

 

However, if you do differentiate between the two groups (economic migrants and asylum seekers), then if you accept that, following vetting, someone has proven that they have a genuine case for asylum then surely they should be granted the right to remain in the country, be that the UK, Italy or anywhere else? If they are proven to be an economic migrant there is no need to involve a third country; they can be deported to their home country.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, RayC said:

I am a little confused.

 

Australia does not differentiate between economic migrants and asylum seekers if they attempt to enter the country illegally. There is no vetting process:  Neither group are allowed to settle in Australia.

 

However, if you do differentiate between the two groups (economic migrants and asylum seekers), then if you accept that, following vetting, someone has proven that they have a genuine case for asylum then surely they should be granted the right to remain in the country, be that the UK, Italy or anywhere else? If they are proven to be an economic migrant there is no need to involve a third country; they can be deported to their home country.

I may be incorrect in thinking that the Australian system vets them for genuine refugees as against economic undocumented migrants, and if so apology for that mistake. However, I would like to see such, UNLESS they can be held in a safe area, where they can live a "normal" life, till such time as their country of origin is safe to return to.

I do not support letting any undocumented arrival being allowed to jump the q and be allowed to live freely in the country of their choice just by paying criminals to take them there, and absolutely any established to be economic arrivals as against genuine refugees should be deported immediately, or held indefinitely in a detention centre as a disincentive for those that might try to follow.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, RayC said:

However, if you do differentiate between the two groups (economic migrants and asylum seekers), then if you accept that, following vetting, someone has proven that they have a genuine case for asylum then surely they should be granted the right to remain in the country, be that the UK, Italy or anywhere else?

I disagree. A genuine refugee has the right to be kept safe and live as normal a life as possible, but it doesn't have to be in a country of their choosing.

I'm fine with them being kept safe in a different country.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I disagree. A genuine refugee has the right to be kept safe and live as normal a life as possible, but it doesn't have to be in a country of their choosing.

I'm fine with them being kept safe in a different country.

Nor a country of your choosing.

Why even the Hone Secretary can’t give any definite answers on the matter:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/braverman-small-boats-deportation-sunak-b2296400.html

[Hanaguma]

You pay your money, you take your chance.  Get on a rickety boat with 300 people and you might drown.  Don't count on the charity of others to rescue you, clothe you, and let you into their home.   

[RayC]

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

However, I would like to see such, UNLESS they can be held in a safe area, where they can live a "normal" life, till such time as their country of origin is safe to return to.

I'm not sure what you mean?

 

My interpretation - which obviously may be completely incorrect - is that this means asylum seekers cannot become permanent residents/ citizens of the country in which they seek refuge? Instead, they are held in what sounds like some sort of "open prison" where they remain until their home country is deemed to be safe? 

 

As I said, this might be a complete misinterpretation. If so, apologies.

 

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I do not support letting any undocumented arrival being allowed to jump the q and be allowed to live freely in the country of their choice just by paying criminals to take them there,

"Any" implies refugees as well as economic migrant. 

 

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and absolutely any established to be economic arrivals as against genuine refugees should be deported immediately, or held indefinitely in a detention centre as a disincentive for those that might try to follow.

Isn't that what happens in the UK currently?

[RayC]

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I disagree. A genuine refugee has the right to be kept safe and live as normal a life as possible, but it doesn't have to be in a country of their choosing.

I'm fine with them being kept safe in a different country.

Agreed to an extent. Italy is a wonderful country but I doubt that it is necessarily the only choice that asylum seekers landing there would find acceptable. It is also unreasonable to expect Italy to accommodate all these refugees. This is why Merkel and the European Commission proposed a quota system among EU states for resettling refugees. Although this became law, it was never fully implemented and, I believe, has now been rescinded.

 

The opposite may be true for UK asylum seekers. They almost certainly do have a desire to resettle in the UK rather than elsewhere (presumably because of family ties, linguistic reasons, etc.). Is this an unreasonable request?

[RayC]

Some facts about UK asylum seekers. Draw your own conclusions

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-december-2022/how-many-people-do-we-grant-protection-to#:~:text=There were 74%2C751 asylum applications,number for almost 2 decades.

[Hanaguma]

53 minutes ago, RayC said:

Agreed to an extent. Italy is a wonderful country but I doubt that it is necessarily the only choice that asylum seekers landing there would find acceptable. It is also unreasonable to expect Italy to accommodate all these refugees. This is why Merkel and the European Commission proposed a quota system among EU states for resettling refugees. Although this became law, it was never fully implemented and, I believe, has now been rescinded.

 

The opposite may be true for UK asylum seekers. They almost certainly do have a desire to resettle in the UK rather than elsewhere (presumably because of family ties, linguistic reasons, etc.). Is this an unreasonable request?

Yes it is unreasonable. Refugees are supposed to be seeking temporary refuge until they can return to their homeland. It is not a substitute for immigration. Generally, they flee trouble and are supposed to stop in the first safe country they enter. They are not to "shop around" for the best deal or be picky about where they temporarily are housed. 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Yes it is unreasonable. Refugees are supposed to be seeking temporary refuge until they can return to their homeland. It is not a substitute for immigration. Generally, they flee trouble and are supposed to stop in the first safe country they enter. They are not to "shop around" for the best deal or be picky about where they temporarily are housed. 

Link please to the basis of your claim asylum/refugees must stop at the first ‘safe country they enter.’?

 

 

Edited April 13, 2023 by Chomper Higgot