Refugees

[Piet]

It also includes giving them citizenship which is LAST thing these people should get. With citizenship comes privileges after all.

In Finland, you wish, citizenship is increasingly turning into a unilateral deal, it bestows responsibilities on individual but really not on state. I would give up mine in a heart beat but alas I am unable to due to legal reasons, I do not have a second citizenship.

It gives your right to vote, in remote chance of effecting a change, right to aid from embassy and above all else...
YOU CAN'T DEPORT CITIZEN!

Of course the solution offered by me is not a real solution (or the law should be changed first..., but with the current administration in place this will never happen ), but I am glad to see it makes people think about solutions. which is the whole purpose of this whole thread of course. So... anyone else any ideas or opinions?

BTW Seems idiotic politicians are not the monopoly of Finland, In the Netherlands, they thought it to be wise to create an Asylum centre with 1400 places in a little village of 140 people.....that means the refugees outnumber the original population with 10 to 1... this is NO JOKE.

[Beep_Boop]

I do have a solution

I'm sorry, but your solution is absolutely comical. To be honest, after reading it, now I fully understand the thought process behind the rest of your comments, so that's a silver lining.

So, here's your brilliant solution: Now all of those 20,000 refugees are Finnish citizens. Now what? They can simply just pack up and move to Sweden, UK, Germany, etc. You have suddenly given citizenship to tens of thousands of people, some of whom have questionable pasts. Now countries with whom you have visa-free travel agreements will start reconsidering these agreements. I guarantee you that the Commonwealth will immediately suspend all visa-free travel for Finnish citizens.

Okay, let's say you managed to keep your international relations and somehow prevent those new citizens from moving abroad. Now you gave them guns, yay.. good job! After a few incidents where some of them (the potentially dangerous ones) during the training where you lost some of your officers, they're now fully trained after a year. You ship them back to Iraq and Syria.. bravo.

Now they're on the ground. Do you really think they're gonna fight for your objective under your own ROE? You'll be 100% sure that some of them will commit war crimes, but now they'll be done under your flag.

Uhh.. I'm down brainstroming this one. It's clearly a stupid idea, sorry.

[Marsh04]

There is only one solution and that is not to go and fu.k up the countries at first place . Let people sort out their own issues and problems. This all escalated with the involvement of US and it's poodles. Western powers openly gave arms to groups to fight a government. They have also openly trained people.. Had they not done this those so called rebels would have been crushed long ago . If you want interfere then expect consequences as well.

Same was with Iraq,libya and many other places.

Now you can argue that Finland was not involved in any direct action but the problem is if you belong to a group then you also become responsible for the actions of the others in that group especially when you don't actively try to stop any such action.

[Piet]

I do have a solution

I'm sorry, but your solution is absolutely comical. To be honest, after reading it, now I fully understand the thought process behind the rest of your comments, so that's a silver lining.

So, here's your brilliant solution: Now all of those 20,000 refugees are Finnish citizens. Now what? They can simply just pack up and move to Sweden, UK, Germany, etc. You have suddenly given citizenship to tens of thousands of people, some of whom have questionable pasts. Now countries with whom you have visa-free travel agreements will start reconsidering these agreements. I guarantee you that the Commonwealth will immediately suspend all visa-free travel for Finnish citizens.

Okay, let's say you managed to keep your international relations and somehow prevent those new citizens from moving abroad. Now you gave them guns, yay.. good job! After a few incidents where some of them (the potentially dangerous ones) during the training where you lost some of your officers, they're now fully trained after a year. You ship them back to Iraq and Syria.. bravo.

Now they're on the ground. Do you really think they're gonna fight for your objective under your own ROE? You'll be 100% sure that some of them will commit war crimes, but now they'll be done under your flag.

Uhh.. I'm down brainstroming this one. It's clearly a stupid idea, sorry.

Off topic:

It is funny to see how one obvious not serious meant remark, is used as a tool to qualify all someone said... (personally,.. after your previous posts I would not have expected this from you) I expected you to be smarter than that,

Why?

First of all, it is legally impossible to grant all Iraqi refugees a citizenship the moment they arrive (and it will never be.. just impossible so that should have given away the amount of seriousness of the literal taking this solution).
Secondly, as someone else already said in a comment on they idea, UN missions are voluntary, and this will never change, so there is your second hint this cannot be taken seriously
Third (and that should be enough) Iraqi will never go back to fight in their own country if they just escaped it for the fear of ever having to do so..

On topic:

The whole point of mentioning the idea is, that is is so obviously meant, to show how the behaviour of these male refugees (which is in my opinion pretty cowardly, egoistic and greedy) in respect to what we (at least I) think is normal behaviour, that one could ask himself if her or she really wants to allow such people into our country in the first place.
And since I have also the Finnish Nationality (besides my origin foreign Nationality) this (Finland) is also my country.

And we are not even speaking about the obvious other problems that come with "importing" these people. Especially taking in account what you mentioned about what happens when these, in 5 year still under 30, males really become Finnish citizens and are by law required to go into military service (or some social replacement service), and get a gun, see your quote. (They can get a gun/rifle by that time, I got one registered with the police too.... for the past 15 years!!)

But hey, if you have a serious solution or something constructive to offer, by all means don't hesitate to share it here. (oh no you were not remotely interested in this matter at all, you wouldn't care if they all drowned on their way here...your words not mine..)

On topic:

There is only one solution and that is not to go and fu.k up the countries at first place . Let people sort out their own issues and problems. This all escalated with the involvement of US and it's poodles. Western powers openly gave arms to groups to fight a government. They have also openly trained people.. Had they not done this those so called rebels would have been crushed long ago . If you want interfere then expect consequences as well.

Same was with Iraq,libya and many other places.

Now you can argue that Finland was not involved in any direct action but the problem is if you belong to a group then you also become responsible for the actions of the others in that group especially when you don't actively try to stop any such action.

[Tiwaz]

There is only one solution and that is not to go and fu.k up the countries at first place . Let people sort out their own issues and problems. This all escalated with the involvement of US and it's poodles. Western powers openly gave arms to groups to fight a government. They have also openly trained people.. Had they not done this those so called rebels would have been crushed long ago . If you want interfere then expect consequences as well.

Same was with Iraq,libya and many other places.

Now you can argue that Finland was not involved in any direct action but the problem is if you belong to a group then you also become responsible for the actions of the others in that group especially when you don't actively try to stop any such action.

Then, by that same logic, these refugees who belong to ethnicities famous of their overblown representation in rape statistics and other crimes, along with radical habit of being worthless for society (not finding jobs, just collecting support money) can be declared to ALL be criminals as they are not doing a damn thing to actively stop the activities.

Finnish law gives us full right to deport people committing serious crimes, thus we can arrange nice U-shaped tunnel to Tornio where these criminals enter and other end can lead them back to Sweden. If they keep wanting to come back, flood of criminals trying to force entry should give government all the reason to declare martial law and use more radical means to keep them out.

If you are going to hold us responsible for deeds of Americans, Russkies and whatnot, then we can just as well use same methods to secure our interests. And whoever happens to get caught in crossfire. Well, that is what yanks came up concept of collateral damage for.

[Oho]

If you are going to hold us responsible for deeds of Americans, Russkies and whatnot, then we can just as well use same methods to secure our interests. And whoever happens to get caught in crossfire. Well, that is what yanks came up concept of collateral damage for.

Blaming political west for the cataclysmic events in the Middle-East and north Africa falls wide of the mark anyway. Even in Iraq the ill advised US led invasion really only served as a catalyst, by expediting the removal of the dictator. In real terms what happened is what always seem to happen to illegitimate autocratic dictatorships sooner rather than later, they are toppled and the toppling is followed by violent struggle to grab power (and more often than not to re-establish autocratic dictatorship of slightly different stripe).

[Marsh04]

If you are going to hold us responsible for deeds of Americans, Russkies and whatnot, then we can just as well use same methods to secure our interests. And whoever happens to get caught in crossfire. Well, that is what yanks came up concept of collateral damage for.

Blaming political west for the cataclysmic events in the Middle-East and north Africa falls wide of the mark anyway. Even in Iraq the ill advised US led invasion really only served as a catalyst, by expediting the removal of the dictator. In real terms what happened is what always seem to happen to illegitimate autocratic dictatorships sooner rather than later, they are toppled and the toppling is followed by violent struggle to grab power (and more often than not to re-establish autocratic dictatorship of slightly different stripe).

Yes dictators are replaced by dictators as kings are replaced by kings. But any examples to support your claim that there is this scale of destruction and civil war when a dictator is replaced?

@tiwaz: You can talk as an extremist but practically that is already what happens even if people are not members of an organised group ( like countries are members of EU, Nato etc) . A dark law abiding and working person becomes victim of racism because people like you think that darker people are always on social benefits and criminals. Even those people are not connected in anyway still they pay the price of actions of some of similar looking others. But countries within EU and NATO are directly responsible for the actions of these blocks because they are part of the process of decision making.

[Oho]

Yes dictators are replaced by dictators as kings are replaced by kings. But any examples to support your claim that there is this scale of destruction and civil war when a dictator is replaced?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Civil_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_civil_wars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War

Just from the top of my head....

[Piet]

Blaming political west for the cataclysmic events in the Middle-East and north Africa falls wide of the mark anyway. Even in Iraq the ill advised US led invasion really only served as a catalyst, by expediting the removal of the dictator. In real terms what happened is what always seem to happen to illegitimate autocratic dictatorships sooner rather than later, they are toppled and the toppling is followed by violent struggle to grab power (and more often than not to re-establish autocratic dictatorship of slightly different stripe).

I guess blaming especially one country in the west falls right on spot, all others are just followers who want to be best boy of the class without taking the time to think for themselves (if they are even able to do so at all).

One can argue here that Saddam Hussein would have been removed by an uprising eventually anyway, but that was not the US decision to make in the first place, especially under false pretences (WOMD). You don't shoot some one dead because he will die anyway (eventually). This was all about the money (& oil) in the first place.

Interference by US has in all recent wars only led to more problems starting with Vietnam (some people might have forgotten about that already).

Point here is that now US also says this refugee problem is an European problem while they are in fact the cause of it by lighting the fuse in the powder barrel...and then they did it again in Libia...

Now I will put on my tin foil hat again and say that is what US wants, US is afraid of a strong economic power as Europe was (becoming), so let the Europeans deal with the refugees, which will put stress on their economic recovery after a (by Banks induced) crisis, they can sell more weapons at the same time in Iraq and get the oil from Iraq for cheap, 3 hits with one stroke....they think Europeans are stupid anyway (and they might be right..TTIP)

But that is another discussion

I guess for now, Sipilä is getting his slaves for almost free (if they don't complain that it is too cold outside and their lunch time is too short, it ruins their clothes, they might get sick..or whatever excuse like the food is not of their liking they might come up with..)

from yle today:

the ministry would examine fields of employment that need workers.
“These jobs could be, for example, light forest clearing or berry picking, snow shovelling, property maintenance jobs,” Sorainen told the paper.

[Rip]

But it bluntly, the situation is caused by the Europeans themselves. If they had not been sending messages that, "yes, you come here", the asylum seekers would not have come. Earlier times have seen million man invasions stopped even when they have been supported by considerable military might. If they had been a policy to send these migrants back, the numbers would have never reached the current levels.

[Tiwaz]

@tiwaz: You can talk as an extremist but practically that is already what happens even if people are not members of an organised group ( like countries are members of EU, Nato etc) . A dark law abiding and working person becomes victim of racism because people like you think that darker people are always on social benefits and criminals. Even those people are not connected in anyway still they pay the price of actions of some of similar looking others. But countries within EU and NATO are directly responsible for the actions of these blocks because they are part of the process of decision making.

No, I think you do not grasp it. Finns are getting VERY fed up with southern folk wandering here uttering "asyylum" and expecting to be catered like kings.
And darker people ARE by and large massively unemployed. Our largest group of "dark" people... Somalis. Employment rate, approximately 14-20%. In rape statistics they shine though along with other arrivals from islamic regions by outperforming native of similar status, wealth, education, age etc many times over.


You also clearly have no grasp of "process of decision making". Could you point out which of these countries are/have been invaded/occupied recently by EU? NONE! At worst what they are getting from EU is AID.


So, I say that we have much more reason to declare this lot to be treated as criminals than you have case to say Finland has any responsibility for mess in their countries of origin.

[Oho]

But it bluntly, the situation is caused by the Europeans themselves. If they had not been sending messages that, "yes, you come here", the asylum seekers would not have come. Earlier times have seen million man invasions stopped even when they have been supported by considerable military might. If they had been a policy to send these migrants back, the numbers would have never reached the current levels.

Indeed its a good thing Comrade Stalin did not invent this ploy in 1939, just send daily 100 000 red army troops to apply for asylum and Finland would have collapse by day three at the very latest. The irony of course is that the red army troops with pretty good likelihood had more pressing need for asylum than the seekers ad. 2015 and in Finland they would have arrived at the first safe country.

[Upphew]

But it bluntly, the situation is caused by the Europeans themselves. If they had not been sending messages that, "yes, you come here", the asylum seekers would not have come. Earlier times have seen million man invasions stopped even when they have been supported by considerable military might. If they had been a policy to send these migrants back, the numbers would have never reached the current levels.

Indeed its a good thing Comrade Stalin did not invent this ploy in 1939, just send daily 100 000 red army troops to apply for asylum and Finland would have collapse by day three at the very latest. The irony of course is that the red army troops with pretty good likelihood had more pressing need for asylum than the seekers ad. 2015 and in Finland they would have arrived at the first safe country.

Good one

[Rick1]

But it bluntly, the situation is caused by the Europeans themselves. If they had not been sending messages that, "yes, you come here", the asylum seekers would not have come.

That great effort that Sipilä made is only starting from next year and only while he is MP. He just forgot to mention that .

[RevealingtheTruth]

Please refrain from calling this culture a Christian culture. What we have here is because of liberalism and not giving a damn to religion and church/priests.

If you want to see Christian culture go to countries where religion is taken seriously like African or south American or to some extent some Eastern European Christian countries. Where children are raped by loving christian priests on daily basis and if you try to speak against the raping priests you can face severe consequences. Beating wives in a Christian culture is a norm, honesty is sacarce and violence in abundance.

luckily here in Finland we are better off without your Christian god and values.