Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Hapster23 t1_jduk62q wrote

Reply to comment by djq_ in Banksy's migrant rescue ship seized by Italy's coast guard in Lampedusa by Crimbobimbobippitybo

In the meantime people are dying in the mediterranean because their rescue ship is seized by italian authorities. Fucked situation

6

Yog_Sothtoth t1_jdur5pi wrote

It's their goal, to make people die (so less migrants), while at the same time denying it.

5

Hapster23 t1_jduujxn wrote

That's not really something one can prove (that they want them to die) so I would avoid that kind of rhetoric since it doesn't add much to the conversation, other than polarising the issue. In reality it is a complex issue, since these countries have to bear the burden of all north African migration attempts. Their solution was to reduce the number of rescues by making rescue boats return to port, this in theory would mean the passage is more dangerous and thus disicentivize illegal migration, and thus less of a burden on these countries. Obviously reality is different, these people are fleeing their country because they would rather risk dying in the Mediterranean then continue living as they are, so this "solution" just leads to more deaths. Truth is that EU needs to help share the burden of these countries (some form of migrant relocation system based on populations etc) so then they cannot justify shitty laws like the above.

14

Yog_Sothtoth t1_jduvhre wrote

While I agree with you I have to point out this is a well established strategy, they did the same with unemployment benefits, the goverment campaigned heavily for its removal only to find out a lot of their supporters benefit from it so what are we going to do? Easy, you cannot refuse ANY job offer, not just about the money, but also location. It's ingenious, you can be offered a job 500km from where you live with a paycheck of 500€ and if you refuse you lose unemployment. No matter if you actually could live on it or not.

2

GroundbreakingRice36 t1_je5w5h9 wrote

>Truth is that EU needs to help share the burden of these countries (some form of migrant relocation system based on populations etc) so then they cannot justify shitty laws like the above.

I agree, EU need to implemant a new relocation system based on population within africa first because africans migration into EU will be the biggest threat to European's politics in the future. If they act NOW, they can reduce that crisis....at least until they find a better plan.

Africa is big, plenty of land. All they need to do is building many large cities in safe countries like Gabon, Botwana, Angola, Namibia (like the way chinese do with their ghost cities). Then bring skilled workers from around the continent to manage it. And then bring the refugees/migrants there to work and live in safe and stable environnement.

It will be a huge investment but much more beneficial in short and long term.

I doubt Europe will survive another migration crisis. I've seen many population around EU already prostesting against putting refugees/migrants into Hotel. France is burning, inflation... Italy voted a right wing, Greece is already overwelmed.

It's time for EU to have a PLAN and anticipate the problem before it come to its shores.

1

GroundbreakingRice36 t1_je5zna3 wrote

EU have its own agenda. They only wanted the syrians refugees (and some libyan refugees) for their need of cheap labor not all refugees. EU even had Operation Sophia to rescue migrants for their aging population. Once they got what they needed, they stoppped the operation.

It was never about "good moral" nor "right thing to do". It's by interest.

So now, whoever try to get into the mediteranean sea, will have to face the consequences. Whatever they make it or not.

1