SURVEY: Should EU countries continue to accept refugees and migrants?

[Kitsune]

It sounds callous, but I would say accept only the non Muslims or the ones traumatized enough by DAESH and Bashar el hasad, that they give up Muslim faith .

Bringing migrants to our territory is bringing the war in our land.

We know how these cute kids grow up to be anti democratic.

Yes migrants bring money to a country, but to whom? To the rogue bosses who exploit them?

The most important thing for me is our way of life which has already been altered

All these migrants are Muslims and this religion is already interfering with European way of life (No pork served in schools, separate hours for men and women in public swimming pools, etc)

In France a lot of people are not Charlie and think it's justified to kill someone for drawing the Prophet.

If we take on another massive load of Muslims we'll never be able to have human rights anymore.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Kitsune

[simple1]

<snip>

All these migrants are Muslims

Syrian, Eritrean and Iraqi Christian refugees are being prioritised or have already been granted asylum in a number of Western countries.

[Kitsune]

<snip>

All these migrants are Muslims

Syrian, Eritrean and Iraqi Christian refugees are being prioritised or have already been granted asylum in a number of Western countries.

But that's only a small portion of them, the vast majority is Muslim

[Gulfsailor]

I am very much ashamed to see so many ignorant and narrow minded people on this website. Of course it's Europe's duty to take ALL refugees coming from Syria or other bombed countries with war and terror. It's called HUMANITY. If we all times point on our culture then it's up to us to support and help. Not by giving them money to stay away from Europe but help them to find a new home. Nobody of these poor people left their home because of economical problems but of fear. Fear for their lives. Everybody with children try to do best for them having a secure future. But those from e.g. Syria they don't have any future if they would stay there.

Another point is that all those countries (no 1 is UK) which deny to take a greater number of those poor refugees forget that our society is getting older fast and WE will have big problems in the nearer future with our pensions and social welfare. The number of retirees is growing but the number of working people is declining. It's unbelievable that Cameron can't see it! But anyway we have to take refugees as a big chance for development of our countries not as intruders or enimies. Meet them with respect and not with hate. Help them but don't kick them out.

By the way, those problems with IS and Syrian war are cuased by wrong American politics.

One assumes, from your participation on this forum and your choice of poster name, that you live in Thailand. So, to get this clear, you live in a country that has very tight immigration controls, that would take non of these people as refugees and that has no social security handouts for its own people let alone foreigners. Yet you presume to tell the people of Europe that they should take these people in, in the name of humanity, however many may come, and provide for them all the necessities of life from the public purse.

If you actually live, work and pay taxes in Ireland I might be impressed; otherwise you are just another "bleeding-heart, feel-good" hypocrite determined to have your cake and eat it.

In my view no-one who lives in Thailand is justified in lecturing the people of Europe for lack of compassion to the needy. If you don't feel able to lecture the Thais on compassion, don't try telling the people of Europe how they should deal with an almost unprecedented situation.

thailand has a much more open policy towards foreigners than any western country. Over 150,000 Burmese refugees are still in camps today. Many many more are now residing in Thailand, legally or otherwise. Total foreign workers in Thailand is nearly 4.5 million. Thailand benefited enormously in economic sense from these economic migrants.

For those afraid of Muslim influence (which worry I share), i can only say that the richer and better educated a population is, the less likely it will be a religious (extreme) population. So the only way to rid the world of Muslim or any other religion is to improve global wealth and education. Open borders does just that. It allows impoverished people to gain wealth in rich nations and have their kids enjoy a secular upbringing. Open borders also mean many more economic and political migrants only stay temporary and will move back 'home' after a few years.

[DoctorB]

Another point is that all those countries (no 1 is UK) which deny to take a greater number of those poor refugees forget that our society is getting older fast and WE will have big problems in the nearer future with our pensions and social welfare.

So why then bring in a whole lot of older people who then make your average age even older, who soak up social welfare etc etc. Plus down the line want what everyone else has who has been in the country their whole lives. Oh and by the way poor refugees isnt really gonna cut it either, stop off in saudi arabia why dont they, lots of money there.

This argument seems to have originated from the early days of immigration when it was believed that young immigrants would come and work, pay their taxes, contribute to economic growth, and after a few years return home to their families.

Of course it never worked like that. They came for life, brought their families over, ultimately grew old like the rest of us and became pensioners too. Coupled with the fact that many immigrants came from troubled countries with low rates of literacy and had little in the way of education or skills, the net effect was an increased drain on already overblown social security systems; not a solution to an aging population as originally, and naively, thought.

A very noticeable effect has also been, certainly in the UK, a rocketing increase in population level and essential services (housing, medical services, schools etc) under ever increasing strain.

[Kitsune]

Plus the more we accept them, the more they will come.

The conflicts in Iraq, Eritrea, Syria, are not going to be resolved anytime soon, we cannot take in all these countries populations.

[DoctorB]

I am very much ashamed to see so many ignorant and narrow minded people on this website. Of course it's Europe's duty to take ALL refugees coming from Syria or other bombed countries with war and terror. It's called HUMANITY. If we all times point on our culture then it's up to us to support and help. Not by giving them money to stay away from Europe but help them to find a new home. Nobody of these poor people left their home because of economical problems but of fear. Fear for their lives. Everybody with children try to do best for them having a secure future. But those from e.g. Syria they don't have any future if they would stay there.

Another point is that all those countries (no 1 is UK) which deny to take a greater number of those poor refugees forget that our society is getting older fast and WE will have big problems in the nearer future with our pensions and social welfare. The number of retirees is growing but the number of working people is declining. It's unbelievable that Cameron can't see it! But anyway we have to take refugees as a big chance for development of our countries not as intruders or enimies. Meet them with respect and not with hate. Help them but don't kick them out.

By the way, those problems with IS and Syrian war are cuased by wrong American politics.

One assumes, from your participation on this forum and your choice of poster name, that you live in Thailand. So, to get this clear, you live in a country that has very tight immigration controls, that would take non of these people as refugees and that has no social security handouts for its own people let alone foreigners. Yet you presume to tell the people of Europe that they should take these people in, in the name of humanity, however many may come, and provide for them all the necessities of life from the public purse.

If you actually live, work and pay taxes in Ireland I might be impressed; otherwise you are just another "bleeding-heart, feel-good" hypocrite determined to have your cake and eat it.

In my view no-one who lives in Thailand is justified in lecturing the people of Europe for lack of compassion to the needy. If you don't feel able to lecture the Thais on compassion, don't try telling the people of Europe how they should deal with an almost unprecedented situation.

thailand has a much more open policy towards foreigners than any western country. Over 150,000 Burmese refugees are still in camps today. Many many more are now residing in Thailand, legally or otherwise. Total foreign workers in Thailand is nearly 4.5 million. Thailand benefited enormously in economic sense from these economic migrants.

For those afraid of Muslim influence (which worry I share), i can only say that the richer and better educated a population is, the less likely it will be a religious (extreme) population. So the only way to rid the world of Muslim or any other religion is to improve global wealth and education. Open borders does just that. It allows impoverished people to gain wealth in rich nations and have their kids enjoy a secular upbringing. Open borders also mean many more economic and political migrants only stay temporary and will move back 'home' after a few years.

I would query a couple of points here. Firstly you suggest that Thailand has a very open policy toward foreigners, yet day after day people post on this forum about the difficulty of getting long-term permission to remain in Thailand for any length of time; ie you have to over 50, married to a Thai, on a recognised education course, have money in the bank etc. You may be right about the number of foreign workers in Thailand (I'd be interested to know where you got your figures from) but in the absence of a social security net they either work or starve or go home. This is so fundamentaly different to what happens in Europe as to change the whole picture.

Unfortunately your belief that education etc is an antidote to Islamic fundamentalism is serious contradicted by British experience. The people who murdered 50+ comuters in London in 2005 were all 3rd generation UK born and educated. Also if you check the reports on persons from the UK going abroad to join ISIS they almost all appear to be young and UK born and educated, in some cases to degree level. Jihad among Europeans appears to be the new "chic", a source of romance and excitement, not a product of poverty or ignorance. Of course the situation in the UK is not helped by the fact that Muslims are almost all educated in Islamic schools (ok I know, just as most Catholics are educated in Catholic schools). Secular education in the UK is unfortunately a choice not a requirement.

Finally, what you say about open borders and economic development may be true but only in a genuinely open labour market where the options are work, starve or go home. European social security systems on the other hand just encourage freeloaders with a hard luck story, who may have absolutely nothing to contribute to the host society.

Edited September 7, 2015 by DoctorB

[Shermanator]

Europe is doomed! What happens now is a geopolitical war and most people, dancing in their pink dogooder haze, don't even see it coming. Why are no muslim brothers helping? Who started all the wars in the first place and who paid for the weapons? Why aren't the people financing and participating in all these wars helping? You can't cure a sickness by just treating the symptoms.

There is a book that has been written in 1973, "The camp of the saints" by Jean Raspail. I strongly advise anyone, especially Europeans, and very especially Germans to read this book and wake up before it's too late... (even though I believe that for Europe it is ten past twelve).

http://www.amazon.com/The-Camp-Saints-Jean-Raspail/dp/1881780074

Edited September 7, 2015 by Shermanator

[GaryAdriaenssens]

Maybe a farfedged opinion but maybe it's time for European people over there to take over power gradually. As long as these political clowns of mainstream parties are in power Europe is declining and on the brink of a future ethnic war similar to that of the ex Yugoslavia conflict and that wasn't nice as we all can remember.... Those politicians only need the people during elections, after that they can go to hell!!! Time for change over there, military or not!

Edited September 7, 2015 by GaryAdriaenssens

[White Christmas13]

I think the U.S. should take more of them but also I think Europe should take more from Latin America. Result? Better Mexican food in Europe and then later Thailand.

The U.S. will not take any more than they must because they are not christians. The U.S. is strictly a chirstian country.

10% of Syrians are Christians

[ABCer]

There is a lot of hearts of gold here who never miss an opportunity preaching "goodness" at other people expense.

Europe must take more, - they say.

USA must take more, - they say.

Etc. etc. etc.

Nobody must take anybody!... Especially Muslims!

Europeans had their own problems for centuries.

They have suffered in full measure in the past. They fought, they worked, they built their life and their world.

The Muslims from Middle East are suffering now. Because they are still living in 12th century. Let them fight, let them work, let them build their life and their world.

After 700 - 800 years maybe they will become as benign and civilized as the West is today! (actually I do not believe this)

Then and only then there can be talks about integration, multiculturalism and co-existence.

Taking them in now will not help them but will bury us. The equality will be achieved only at the lowest common denominator.

The awful bombed out picture shown in the above post is the future of your area if this migration madness continues.

Anyone not understanding this and suffering from a "bleeding heart syndrome" should be allowed to take his noble feelings with him and move to any of the troubled spots of their choice.

Edited September 7, 2015 by ABCer

[brain150]

The Muslims from Middle East are suffering now. Because they are still living in 12th century. Let them fight, let them work, let them build their life and their world.

After 700 - 800 years maybe they will become as benign and civilized as the West is today! (actually I do not believe this)

Then and only then there can be talks about integration, multiculturalism and co-existence.

Actually they suffer now because the WEST is usually bombing them back into the stone age !

Syria: The rebels financed and equiped by the US

IRAQ: Bombed into the ground by the US

Libya: Bombed into the ground by NATO

Yugoslavia: Bombed into the ground by NATO

Afganistan: Bombed into the Stone age by the US

... I am not sure if we can blame the muslims for any of this !

Looks to me like the West has big fun bombing the shit out of these countries ...

For what it's worth:

Everywhere the WEST is not directly involved in bombing anything into the ground it is supplying weapons, training and financial aid

to any dictator who seems to be willing to participate in the destruction of human lives.

PS:

I am NOT talking about the populations of the WEST ... I am talking about their corrupt Governments [most of all the US, UK, France, Germany]

and the financial and economical interests in these countries !!!

[Ghostnigel]

Yeah that'll work.

That looks like East London....lol

Or will be when the muzzies take over!!

[sojourner007]

People need to accept this is all by design.

Gadaffi promised that Europe would be flooded by immigrants without him and sought funding from the EU to keep acting as their buffer. He was betrayed in a move that any global strategist would have quickly identified as a direct attack on the migration controls of all the countries of Europe. The same goes for Syria - can anyone remember why Assad and Gadaffi were allowed to be replaced by Islamic terror states? Where were the front-page photos of the children lying headless from 2 years ago thanks to ISIS?

You only have to look at the hysteria around that poor, drowned 3 year-old economic migrant, compared to the horror which has been steadily ignored for years, to understand that social manipulation of epic proportions is underway.

"Freedom of Movement" inside the EU is not a "red line" for no reason. Without it, the EU project can be reversed. With it, each nation-state becomes so diluted in culture and loyalty, that the opportunity for a country to seize back sovereignty is very short-lived. This mass injection of people who have no loyalty to their host nation is one of the final moves in the set-piece. We are witnessing the final years of the nation-states of Europe; "Ever-closer union" is being delivered as promised.

Agree!

[sawadee1947]

Another point is that all those countries (no 1 is UK) which deny to take a greater number of those poor refugees forget that our society is getting older fast and WE will have big problems in the nearer future with our pensions and social welfare.

So why then bring in a whole lot of older people who then make your average age even older, who soak up social welfare etc etc. Plus down the line want what everyone else has who has been in the country their whole lives. Oh and by the way poor refugees isnt really gonna cut it either, stop off in saudi arabia why dont they, lots of money there.

This argument seems to have originated from the early days of immigration when it was believed that young immigrants would come and work, pay their taxes, contribute to economic growth, and after a few years return home to their families.

Of course it never worked like that. They came for life, brought their families over, ultimately grew old like the rest of us and became pensioners too. Coupled with the fact that many immigrants came from troubled countries with low rates of literacy and had little in the way of education or skills, the net effect was an increased drain on already overblown social security systems; not a solution to an aging population as originally, and naively, thought.

A very noticeable effect has also been, certainly in the UK, a rocketing increase in population level and essential services (housing, medical services, schools etc) under ever increasing strain.

Fortunately that is absolutely nonsense. That kind of thinking we had last century.

Fact is that e.g Sweden take immigrants allowing them to stay. Everybody who will find a tax paying job within 3 months time can stay. Expenses for those people are as low as possible. Social welfare NOT necessary because of employment.

So Sweden could be a good examole how to handle the problem/meaning integrating migrants (not refugees!)

Don't forget refugees could be high educated and might be specialists with different skills. Of course we need them in EU. And....illiterate people you'll find in your UK population (stands for many other countries) as well. So where is the difference.....invest in education for refugees and your own folks at the same time.

[boomerangutang]

What are Middle Easterners and N.Africans doing re; birth control? I think the answer is: essentially nothing, except maybe Israelis, the most level-headed of the bunch.

They just continue popping out nearly 8 babies per woman, while continuing the utter devastation of their environments. It's a bad mix, and nothing but bad can ensue.

Pop Quiz: When you're environment has been reduced to sand and rocks, what's left to destroy? Answer: there's always more room for garbage and toxification, and if you can't find enough space to bury people in graves, there's always pouring flammable liquid and burning them.

[Basil B]

Allow them to go to the countries whose foreign policies are responsible for the mess.

Agreed! So that would be Russia, USA and the EU countries....

How far do you want to go back? I'd say the UK is in that mix too. Drawing middle east countries with borders that make no sense ... this mess is endless.

Last time I checked the UK was stil an EU country... Although some ignorants would love to change that.

It always amazes me that many foreigners who settled in Thailand and complain the hardest about how difficult immigration here makes it for them, are the same ones who'd love to throw out all immigrants out of their home country, while at the same time whining about why it is so hard for their Thai wife or girlfriend to get a visa. Bigots, the lot of them.

You either want open borders for everyone, meaning you can live where you want, and so can anyone else, or you are in favor of closed borders, and everyone stays in their country of birth, no exception.

By the way, ALL significant economics agree that complete open border would increase wealth worldwide on a massive scale, with the poorest countries gaining around 300% in GDP and the richest countries will see an increase of 20% GDP.

Agree on the double standards...

Basically what percentage of British expatiates in Thailand are basically "economic migrants" avoiding tax, ducking and diving contributing to society.

Probably the same ones who say they want to end the EU freedom of movement because they may claim benefits, yet they are oblivious to the fact that for every German claiming benefits in the UK there are 6 Brits claiming benefits in Germany...

Edited September 7, 2015 by Basil B

[happydude303]

Why don't these men from these countries stay there and fight to keep there countries , just like England and Europe did all them years ago . Image all of our grandparents left and went to there countries back then oh yeah there really going to tolerate is and our ways , also I've notice a lot of these videos on the internet show mainly Middle Aged men coming , but it's all a plan I think from the elite rich family's that run the world , so it can cause mass chaos , and then they can set into motion about the one world order shit

[Exsexyman]

I think the U.S. should take more of them but also I think Europe should take more from Latin America. Result? Better Mexican food in Europe and then later Thailand.

The U.S. will not take any more than they must because they are not christians. The U.S. is strictly a chirstian country.

10% of Syrians are Christians

Not for much longer if The US, UK and France get their way and effect a regime change in Syria, getting rid of Assad which will hand over control of the country to ISIS. When that happens the current influx of refugees fleeing from ISIS controlled parts will be a drop in the ocean compared to what will happen then. This can only end badly. Western governments are on the wrong side of history here. In Libya NATO effectively acted as the ISIS airforce, deposing a regime that were putting down Islamic State militants, of course quite brutally, but effectively. Now Libya is overrun by assorted Islamic militants, is a haven and training ground for Islamic State fighters before they head off to do their dirty work in Syria and the rest of North Africa. Not to mention the many thousands of refugees now fleeing and trying to get to Europe via the mediterranean. But of course NATO knew that this would be the consequence of their actions because just about every expert with any knowledge of the situation warned them. But they went ahead anyway, just as they did in Iraq, and just as they are desperate to do in Syria.

Whether we like it or not the actions of our governments have led to this crisis, and for some unfathomable reason they seem hell bent on doing it all over again, which will inevitably result in making an already catastrophic situation even worse. The question that is crying out to be asked of them, but never is, is why? Why do you want to enable handing over control of sovereign nations to ISIS and their ilk? For who's benefit, who's interests are being served here? Certainly not ours, the ordinary citizens. Honest answers to these questions would , i am sure, be enlightening. But to address the situation as it is now, whether we like it or not, the answer must be yes. Western nations who have been responsible for destabilizing and in some cases destroying countries in the Middle East and North Africa have to look in the mirror and take some responsibility for their actions. No amount of hand wringing and weasel words, (nothing to do with us guv), can change that. They have a moral duty, 'You break it, you own it'. As for us, the average man on the street, who lets face it, have to pay the price for this influx of refugees competing for ever dwindling public resources, housing, health services etc, we have been betrayed by our government's actions. One thing you can guarantee, certainly in the UK, there won't be too many refugees seen in Oxfordshire where David Cameron has his pile, or Buckinghamshire where Tony Blair has one of his (eight at the last count) estates. Or Mayfair, Chelsea etc. It was ever thus!

[Basil B]

I don't blame them but even the legit refugees, and there are many, are showing a strong motivation to go to places that will be much better for them, like Germany, rather than some other places that might take them but won't be as good.

I agree many have decided where they want to go...

IMHO they should first be screened in the country where they apply for asylum, then fingerprinted (so they can not reapply), then they draw lottery numbers to decide where they go...

Fact is unlike warm countries it will be too cold to house them in tented refugee camps in central and northern European countries so these countries need to find alternative accommodation not easy at short notice.

Personally I would rather the EU in the first instance give financial support to the likes of Turkey and Jordan to provide shelter (refugee camps) in the short term.

[DefaultName]

These people were there when their countries fell apart, they have to take some responsibility for that. Left to immigrate in huge numbers they will bring those same practices with them. The ones already here are out-breeding us 2 for 1, unless that ends Europe is lost, it'll be the dark ages again.

[katana]

Recent immigrants in Lesbos, Greece - locals complain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZZY8AWajUk

Edited September 7, 2015 by katana

[katana]

ctd

Edited September 7, 2015 by katana

[JHolmesJr]

Had this suspicion for a few days but now certain that cnn has got some agenda....they are making it sound like evryone is out to get these refugeees, poor things.....i could sense outrage in the tone of arwa damon at the conditions on the hungarian border. Of course the conditions will be poor...thousands of people just showed up without warning.

[cookee68]

It will soon turn into a free for all, and the real needy will suffer, and all because people in a civilized world have some kind of a heart which can be easily exploited, at what cost, we will soon find out, and i don't expect it to turn out good

[notmyself]

Is there any Muslim Countries Taking any Refugees besides Turkey ??. In my opinion, Europe is in for big problems ahead

Saudi have said they have taken in 500,000 though there is no evidence of this.... at all.

Turkey have around 2 million with Jordan hosting around 1.5 million.

[ABCer]

brain150:

"Syria: The rebels financed and equipped by the US

IRAQ: Bombed into the ground by the US

Libya: Bombed into the ground by NATO

Yugoslavia: Bombed into the ground by NATO

Afganistan: Bombed into the Stone age by the US"

You are absolutely right! Just add one touch - Americans sell arms with strings attached. Russians and Chinese - without any political preconditions.

BUT!

The Muslim Religion is straight from stone age.

Moreover it is more than Religion - it is A Way Of Life.

When I say West must not interfere and intermingle with Islam - some posters here place me on the right of Genghis Khan.

And this is despite me not calling for chop-chop to their hands or heads. Just deportation!

Ergo sum - West must fight Islam. West cannot fight Islam. West is doomed.

If anybody thinks Huns or Attila were bad for the Western Civilization - they are wrong.

It is the Second Dark Age coming. From the same Dark Age Islam.

Go Google: - 4000/ Terrorists/ Europe.

[timbothaivisa]

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hungary-tells-germany-stop-taking-refugees-085924522.html#lLpDJqn

Hungary's prime minister is calling on Germany to state they will not accept any more of the refugees travelling through Europe.

Viktor Orban has warned "millions" of people will descend on the continent if Berlin's open door policy continues - and criticised Austria for allowing migrants to "enter its territory without hindrance".

The right-wing leader also alleged that many of those who have worked their way through Turkey, Greece, Macedonia and Serbia to the European Union were not refugees in danger - but immigrants attracted by the prospect of a German lifestyle.

In an interview with Austrian television, Mr Orban claimed the crisis could also place an intolerable financial burden on EU nations, threatening the continent's "Christian welfare states".

The country's police were accused of using pepper spray on refugees this afternoon as scuffles broke out on the southern border with Serbia .

In the coming days, Hungary is planning to "seal off" this border - effectively stopping any migrants or refugees from crossing over into the EU member state.

Edited September 8, 2015 by timbothaivisa

[h90]

Intentionally or due to ignorance ( don't know what is worse), your comment about 90% of the Syrian refugees are males between 18 and 35 is a total LIE.

Syrian refugees are spread over all age groups and male / female ratio is 50/50. Males between 18 and 59 make up 21.8% of the total. Total children under 18 make up over 50% of all Syrian refugees.

The number of male refugees may well be 50% of the total persons displaced from Syria, yet many in bordering countries report that the vast majority of those seeking access to Europe are (male) economic migrants.

Watching people cry out for un-checked mass-migration from a terrrorised war zone is as if some disease has taken hold of their brains, derelicting the most basic notions of common sense - get it into your head, ISIS have promised to use this crisis to infiltrate thousands of fighters into the EU!

It is told that many refugees are actually Pakistani who either bought a Syrian passport or claim to have lost their Syrian passport.

[h90]

<snip>

All these migrants are Muslims

Syrian, Eritrean and Iraqi Christian refugees are being prioritised or have already been granted asylum in a number of Western countries.

No this was demanded but it is was labeled as not political correct and racist....not done in Germany and Austria