No refugees anymore for Poland after Paris attacks: minister

[Kabexuela 1,184]

6 hours ago, Rapunxel said:

that's true, but is it worth taking in refugees knowing there could be terrorists between them who will eventually attack the country's inhabitants.

Unfortunately this is the truth guys.  It's come to this and the poor innocent lives lost or hurt from another country is only common sense to bear down and hope the laws will strengthen our infrastructure.  Residents and all.  It's scary and hard to swallow.

[TiphEret 1,320]

12 minutes ago, Gaga of Time said:

French isn't closing its borders in the way : They want no one to step foot in there. "Closing borders" means they control each and every one of those who would like to come. I guess it's the right thing, because now that all the eyes are targeted towards Paris, other parts of the country become vulnerable. It's easier to control 10.000 people (example) coming each day, then control 65 millions of people.

I was talking about Poland not France, and of course it's legitimate in a time of crisis to control your borders. 

[Qualle1 1,385]

7 hours ago, Simon said:

Well, the EU forces a lot of stuff on its members. I mean the euro in Greece also didn't function, didn't it, Mr Know-it-all?

As far as I am informed, Greece wanted to become a member of the EURO Group - and so its currency.

I don't remember, that any European nation has been "forced" into the EURO Group, Simon.

Moreover it is well known, that the Greece Government would have declared "national bankruptcy" this summer - if the European Commission, the European Central Bank as well as the International Monetary Fund would not have been lending them billions of Euros.

And if a country is so fed up with and so against its membership inside of the European Union: Please leave!

[JbGaga 2,261]

Poland the only smart country as of now. Its crazy to belive that there are no syrian terrorists in the refuges.  Reports claim they are mostly young men. I think Governments have a duty to protect there own people first. Set up a safe zone for these people and fix there country so they can go home eventually.

Germany (who took in over 600k Syrian refuges is going to have a serious problem)

[Bebe 17,289]

12 hours ago, Whispering said:

The more you let in, the more chance you have of having second and third generations down the line turning to radicalization. If takes 10 intelligence agents to keep up with one radicalized individual. That was one of the problems in Paris. There are now too many citizens, who have gone to other lands to train, to keep up with. France simply doesn't have the man power to keep up with them and watch them like they should. The main problem here is trained individuals, not the lone wolf who will kill one to a handful of people. (which is still a trajedy) 

Poland is separate from France, I was just making a point about France because it was the attacks on them that led to this. This talk of second and third generations turning to radicalisation can also be applied to non-migrant families.

These are a couple of Australian examples of people who have become radicalised and fled to Syria to join ISIS (I'm Australian so they are just easier examples for me).

These kids were not born muslim, they were not raised muslim and did not come from families that had recently immigrated. Obviously ISIS are more likely to target and appeal to disenfranchised young muslims, but we are hearing more and more about cases like this.

Poland has taken in 2 thousand refugees, they have a population of 38.53 million. They can afford to take in some more refugees, in September they were the only ones to to back out of a deal with its partners (Visegrad group- consisting of Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia) that would have seen it take  4 thousand, five hundred more.

The amount of refugees Australia took in in 2013, was 13,200 refugees. The second highest in the world.
We have currently 64 Australians who have joined ISIS. That means, assuming all the Australian's who joined ISIS are refugees (which we know already is false) and that Australia only accepted refugees and asylum seekers in 2013 (hugely false) that 0.48% of all refugees in Australia produce an ISIS terrorist. That's a hugely inflated number than reality and it's not even 1 percent. 

What you are talking about is ignoring refugees, fleeing from ISIS and war who desperately need help because you are terrified of such a tiny minority.

[OBEY 57,109]

5 hours ago, JbGaga said:

Poland the only smart country as of now. Its crazy to belive that there are no syrian terrorists in the refuges.  Reports claim they are mostly young men. I think Governments have a duty to protect there own people first. Set up a safe zone for these people and fix there country so they can go home eventually.

Germany (who took in over 600k Syrian refuges is going to have a serious problem)

i think i read somewhere that the refugees were mostly very young children and their moms, i dont know if its true though ...

[AlphaMonster 1,806]

I can't blame them... Why would they be willing to take **** ton of refugees that will damage their already not super good economy ? Their first priority is their own citizens' well being, and wealth... 

[mic 1,415]

I hate the new government in my country but this time around they are right. 

the Western Europe have ****ed themself over, wanting some cheap labour and enhancing reputation as the 'good ones'. 

Can somebody explain me why these immigrants don't go to Saudi Arabia, Emirates and other rich Arabic countries? Why they choose Europe? I heard the main incentive is the financial support from the government but I don't know if it's true.

[Whispering 18,865]

1 hour ago, Bebe said:

What you are talking about is ignoring refugees, fleeing from ISIS and war who desperately need help because you are terrified of such a tiny minority.

What I'm talking about is having a more organized plan for accepting refugees and for weeding out the economic refugees before they cross over five to ten countries. What I'm talking about is funding refugee camps and finding new ones that will allow people to stay somewhere near their country of origin. What I'm talking about is the harsh reality that developed and stable countries cannot accept all the people in all the unstable or that are starving. That would be trying to place at least 200 million people. 

ISIS is stretched across multiple countries and continents and continues to grow. There will be millions upon millions of displaced and desperate people now and in the future. It won't stop. 

I'm not terrified, I simply understand that countries need to keep their citizens safe. They need to have the resources available to process and maintain whatever immigrants they accept, realizing that there will be increasing numbers with future generations, and that some groups do pose a risk of radicalization...that can end up costing countries billions of dollars for intelligence in order to keep the citizens of the country safe. 

[Bebe 17,289]

Just now, Whispering said:

What I'm talking about is having a more organized plan for accepting refugees and for weeding out the economic refugees before they cross over five to ten countries. What I'm talking about is funding refugee camps and finding new ones that will allow people to stay somewhere near their country of origin. What I'm talking about is the harsh reality that developed and stable countries cannot accept all the people in all the unstable or that are starving. That would be trying to place at least 200 million people. 

ISIS is stretched across multiple countries and continents and continues to grow. There will be millions upon millions of displaced and desperate people now and in the future. It won't stop. 

I'm not terrified, I simply understand that countries need to keep their citizens safe. They need to have the resources available to process and maintain whatever immigrants they accept, realizing that there will be increasing numbers with future generations, and that some groups do pose a risk of radicalization...that can end up costing countries billions of dollars for intelligence in order to keep the citizens of the country safe. 

We are clearly talking about separate things here though. Having a sensibly and realistic plan for refugees is fantastic, but that plan isn't "No more refugees at all". That doesn't solve the issue, that's not showing any compassion.

For Poland, the country in question, allowing in 4500 more refugees isn't a huge ask. Nobody is asking them to take on the entire burden, but the risk posed by such a tiny percentage of refugees is so incredibly small. The largest terrorist risk Poland has faced in the past five years was a foiled attempt from a member of a nationalist group. 

http://www.thenews.pl/1/9/Artykul/118953,Serious-terrorist-attack-foiled-in-Poland-say-prosecutors

The biggest national security threat to Poland is citizens who are radicalised into non-islamic nationalist groups who are extremist, xenophobic and anti-semitic. It's not refugees fleeing from ISIS.

[MonsterMum 2,532]

2 hours ago, OBEY said:

i think i read somewhere that the refugees were mostly very young children and their moms, i dont know if its true though ...

It's not true.

[FGGrayson 9,670]

3 hours ago, mic said:

 

Can somebody explain me why these immigrants don't go to Saudi Arabia, Emirates and other rich Arabic countries? Why they choose Europe? I heard the main incentive is the financial support from the government but I don't know if it's true.

nevermind, i think i was wrong :air:

[Whispering 18,865]

1 hour ago, Bebe said:

We are clearly talking about separate things here though. Having a sensibly and realistic plan for refugees is fantastic, but that plan isn't "No more refugees at all". That doesn't solve the issue, that's not showing any compassion.

For Poland, the country in question, allowing in 4500 more refugees isn't a huge ask. Nobody is asking them to take on the entire burden, but the risk posed by such a tiny percentage of refugees is so incredibly small. The largest terrorist risk Poland has faced in the past five years was a foiled attempt from a member of a nationalist group. 

That 4500 grows when they send for their families and have generations of children. 

I will just quote another member, because he is saying what I was getting at- every country has to look at the amount of resources they have to give when deciding whether to accept refugees and the number they can handle, especially considering the growth patterns in future years.

From Miker:

"Struggling countries are less inclined to be able to protect themselves against terrorism because they can't afford the security. Also the refugees would prefer to enter richer countries like Germany.

Each country is responsible to safeguard their citizens and if they believe their solution presently is to close their borders for the betterment of their people then who can question their rationale. Decisions like this are difficult to make and understand but they are made for a reason." 

 

[JbGaga 2,261]

3 hours ago, OBEY said:

i think i read somewhere that the refugees were mostly very young children and their moms, i dont know if its true though ...

Ive been seeing the opposite. This might be media Bias or false reporting on one or both sides

[Truth 90]

5 hours ago, Bebe said:

Poland is separate from France, I was just making a point about France because it was the attacks on them that led to this. This talk of second and third generations turning to radicalisation can also be applied to non-migrant families.

These are a couple of Australian examples of people who have become radicalised and fled to Syria to join ISIS (I'm Australian so they are just easier examples for me).

These kids were not born muslim, they were not raised muslim and did not come from families that had recently immigrated. Obviously ISIS are more likely to target and appeal to disenfranchised young muslims, but we are hearing more and more about cases like this.

Poland has taken in 2 thousand refugees, they have a population of 38.53 million. They can afford to take in some more refugees, in September they were the only ones to to back out of a deal with its partners (Visegrad group- consisting of Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia) that would have seen it take  4 thousand, five hundred more.

The amount of refugees Australia took in in 2013, was 13,200 refugees. The second highest in the world.
We have currently 64 Australians who have joined ISIS. That means, assuming all the Australian's who joined ISIS are refugees (which we know already is false) and that Australia only accepted refugees and asylum seekers in 2013 (hugely false) that 0.48% of all refugees in Australia produce an ISIS terrorist. That's a hugely inflated number than reality and it's not even 1 percent. 

What you are talking about is ignoring refugees, fleeing from ISIS and war who desperately need help because you are terrified of such a tiny minority.

You should consider the fact that there is also the war in Ukraine (Ukraine and Russia are neighbors of Poland) and Poland has taken over 500 000 refugees from Ukraine, as it is their main destination. However, whenever there is more tension, more and more people escape to Poland, so in the following years Poland expects even up to 2 mln refugees from Ukraine or even more (depending on how this conflict pans out) so Poland actually takes a lot of refugees, certainly more than they can afford! And on the other hand, Poland is not Germany, it's a poor country with millions(!) of Polish children starving, which I found trurly shocking, because I'm from Switzerland and I've never considered what is the reason of mass migration of Poles.

moreover, refugees know well about the situation in Poland and this is why they avoid it, Poland has taken Syrian refugees already, they were given better conditions that most of Polish families, but they still escaped to Germany, some even stole boats and tried to sail to Sweden which is pretty ridiculous to me. However, you cannot force them to stay, can you? Their lives are not in danger since they cross the Turkish boarder, but they complain about their standard of living and in Poland they will not receive much more, not to mention that climate is much more severe. I was told that the dole in Poland is only about 150-200 euro a month (there is a different currency, but their prices are much more "European", so it is still a good idea to tell it in euro as it's so less and is not enough to survive even in Poland). If refugees avoid Poland, Polish officials cannot come to e.g. Austria or Germany and tell the refugees "we will take you to Poland regardless of your decision where you want to be", in such a way, Europe would force them to stay in Turkey (they are safe there). So I don't think it's a problem if Poland closes its borders if no refugee wished to go there. It is Germany that gave them promise to give them the new life, now the solution is not to relocate them to the countries that cannot handle even they own citizens, but rather investing in camps in countries that are neighbors of Syria, so at least those poor people will not lose their lives during their attempts to reach Europe.