Are these other asylum seekers from conflicts bordering the EU?
Is there a war in South Africa?
When did a war break out in South Africa?
I’m not sure why people are shocked that Europeans are more open to hosting other Europeans. Having preference for people more similar to you is part of the human condition.
Do you think people in Oman care more about the war in Yemen or Ukraine?
I mean easy answer is because Ukrainians are being viewed as temporary refugees who will ultimately return home, whereas there is little hope for peace in the other countries so they will be more of a permanent fixture. Also a predominantly white country has an easier time empathising with another predominantly white country.
Sick of these so called asylum seekers tbh, just be honest and admit you’re coming here for economic reasons. Ukrainians are in the biggest European war since WWII.
This is why people don’t like journalists.
Well, I would say I’m probably more receptive to someone genuinely fleeing for their life than someone trying to ride the taxpayer.
Maybe if 99% (or some similarly mad high percentage) of our refugee applications from non Ukraine countries weren’t rejected as fraudulent…
That auld whataboutism chestnut.
It’s the simplicity of the conflict also.One people fighting valiantly for their sovereignity and to align themselves with Western democratic values.
I’ve read a few books about international geopolitics and have read chapters about Syria and Ethiopia to give two examples.
I still couldn’t explain the conflicts there given the amount of factions dividing along religious, ethnic , tribal and nationalistic lines.
It’s baffling.
90% of asylum seekers that come here are proven false and use legal loopholes to remain here in direct provision until we give up. Atleast the Ukranian migrants are genuinely fleeing a war.
Ukrainian men are staying behind to fight while women, children and the elderly are fleeing to safety, with the intention of returning once the conflict subsides.
That’s markedly different from most other recent conflicts where it appears to be overwhelmingly unaccompanied men in their 20s fleeing and leaving the women and children behind in the warzone.
It’s more about who they are fleeing from. In this conflict the clear “bad guys” are the Russian military so the western media can cover the conflict and show the true horrors that are happening there.
In most other conflicts, the “bad guys” are both sides including allies of the west. The western media don’t show what’s really happening.
Take Yemen for example, it’s a proxy conflict between the USA and Iran. Close to half of the horrors inflicted on the population is Western bombs. We don’t see that on the news.
Ukrainian refuges are real. Their plight and resulting needs perfectly matches the criteria laid out in asylum legislation.
Pakistani and Nigerian ‘refugees’ are not, in fact, legitimate cases. They come from broken countries where graft, poverty and hardship is the way of life. Their reasons for seeking asylum in Ireland are bogus.
It’s not clear why we should give asylum to people from South Africa. In the rankings for human rights/ rule of law, it is in the better end of the table. Asylum seekers who can get on a plane from South Africa should certainly go through a process. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/human_rights_rule_law_index/
Refugees from Syria and Afghanistan being majority males over the age of 16 where the Ukrainians are largely women and children from a country that’s hopefully only temporarily unsafe is a huge part of it. Also that a significant number of the refugees out of Syria were refugees because they were part of the alphabet soup of Islamist groups fighting the government there.
There were stories of Christian refugees being thrown overboard into the Mediterranean as soon as it became known to the others. Whether there’s any validity to that or not, it’s all about perception at the end of the day. Looking at the news coming out of the Islamic State region it certainly wasn’t unimaginable either.
Stories of failed integration of second and third generation immigrants in mainland Europe, including the group of Belgians that carried out the massacre during the Paris rock concert, are also giving people pause I’m sure. Maybe it is because they’ve been marginalized because of their skin color, but whatever the reason, it’s not a good thing. Then again maybe Ireland can manage to be less racist than the backward mainland, and it seems a lot of people are trying their best by calling out racism wherever they think they see it. If it turns out that maybe there are other factors involved.. well.. what does anything really matter anyway right?
Before anyone comes at me with the racism patter, I’m in favor of taking in Christians and Jews as well as other religious minorities and atheists from the Middle East, but think we should keep a very careful eye on the demographics when it comes to the Muslim population. ISIS was a good example of how Muslims from very different backgrounds can find a common identity and common goals.
“But but you can’t do that!”… Please explain to me why not.
That’s because they’re genuinely fleeing a war and it’s mostly women and children. Many other asylum seekers are men of military age who are really just economic migrants.
I’m very sorry to say it, I come from South Africa, there is no legitimate grounds for a South African to claim asylum here.
South Africa’s crime rate is obscene and if that is grounds for asylum then there are plenty of countries that would qualify.
Some older South Africans have been granted asylum here (but I think that was prior to reform), mostly they now get rejected after 10 years and their 3 appeals.
Edit: it also not what the global asylum system was intended for. By this logic many people in Detroit or Minnesota could be applying in Ireland.
Asylum seekers not equal to refugees like Ukrainians are according to the rules.
Honestly, people should only be able to claim asylum in the closest safe country. That would solve all this bullshit. If a country chooses to allow people in from non-neighbouring countries (as with much of Europe and Ukraine) so be it. But if you, as an asylum seeker, have chosen to bypass several safe countries to go somehwere richer, then even if you come from a dangerous situation initially you have become an economic migrant. People from nearby, similar regions integrate better. This has been manifestly obvious post 2016 and the disaster of the migration crisis. Helping people to our own detriment is nonsensical
Ukrainians == Automatically Enrolled as Refugees (Asylum Granted) in the EU.
Asylum Seekers == People not Granted Asylum
These are fundamentally different terms.
Donie O’Sullivan getting a big big for his boots (literally)
I think half of these articles deliberately lack nuance as a form of click bait. Writing stupid shit for stupid readers.
Most people know that the majority of people living in direct provision are bogus applicants, if they weren’t they’d have been granted the right to remain instead of endlessly challenging their rejection. They’re ultimately economic migrants abusing a system designed for people fleeing war in order to skip the queue ahead of legitimate immigrants and asylum seekers.
I do find it particularly galling that the likes of the RTE pull this bleeding heart shit about people who grow up in DP, as if it’s somehow our fault that their parents prolonged their stay here by trying to defraud the Irish state.
It’s so funny how they say things like that, and yet no mention of the rich GCC countries such as Bahrain, Qatar, UAE who officially do not recognise refugees and hence take in 0.
26 comments
No good deed goes unpunished.
No-one ever said we were perfect.
Are these other asylum seekers from conflicts bordering the EU?
Is there a war in South Africa?
When did a war break out in South Africa?
I’m not sure why people are shocked that Europeans are more open to hosting other Europeans. Having preference for people more similar to you is part of the human condition.
Do you think people in Oman care more about the war in Yemen or Ukraine?
I mean easy answer is because Ukrainians are being viewed as temporary refugees who will ultimately return home, whereas there is little hope for peace in the other countries so they will be more of a permanent fixture. Also a predominantly white country has an easier time empathising with another predominantly white country.
Sick of these so called asylum seekers tbh, just be honest and admit you’re coming here for economic reasons. Ukrainians are in the biggest European war since WWII.
This is why people don’t like journalists.
Well, I would say I’m probably more receptive to someone genuinely fleeing for their life than someone trying to ride the taxpayer.
Maybe if 99% (or some similarly mad high percentage) of our refugee applications from non Ukraine countries weren’t rejected as fraudulent…
That auld whataboutism chestnut.
It’s the simplicity of the conflict also.One people fighting valiantly for their sovereignity and to align themselves with Western democratic values.
I’ve read a few books about international geopolitics and have read chapters about Syria and Ethiopia to give two examples.
I still couldn’t explain the conflicts there given the amount of factions dividing along religious, ethnic , tribal and nationalistic lines.
It’s baffling.
90% of asylum seekers that come here are proven false and use legal loopholes to remain here in direct provision until we give up. Atleast the Ukranian migrants are genuinely fleeing a war.
Ukrainian men are staying behind to fight while women, children and the elderly are fleeing to safety, with the intention of returning once the conflict subsides.
That’s markedly different from most other recent conflicts where it appears to be overwhelmingly unaccompanied men in their 20s fleeing and leaving the women and children behind in the warzone.
It’s more about who they are fleeing from. In this conflict the clear “bad guys” are the Russian military so the western media can cover the conflict and show the true horrors that are happening there.
In most other conflicts, the “bad guys” are both sides including allies of the west. The western media don’t show what’s really happening.
Take Yemen for example, it’s a proxy conflict between the USA and Iran. Close to half of the horrors inflicted on the population is Western bombs. We don’t see that on the news.
Ukrainian refuges are real. Their plight and resulting needs perfectly matches the criteria laid out in asylum legislation.
Pakistani and Nigerian ‘refugees’ are not, in fact, legitimate cases. They come from broken countries where graft, poverty and hardship is the way of life. Their reasons for seeking asylum in Ireland are bogus.
It’s not clear why we should give asylum to people from South Africa. In the rankings for human rights/ rule of law, it is in the better end of the table. Asylum seekers who can get on a plane from South Africa should certainly go through a process. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/human_rights_rule_law_index/
Refugees from Syria and Afghanistan being majority males over the age of 16 where the Ukrainians are largely women and children from a country that’s hopefully only temporarily unsafe is a huge part of it. Also that a significant number of the refugees out of Syria were refugees because they were part of the alphabet soup of Islamist groups fighting the government there.
There were stories of Christian refugees being thrown overboard into the Mediterranean as soon as it became known to the others. Whether there’s any validity to that or not, it’s all about perception at the end of the day. Looking at the news coming out of the Islamic State region it certainly wasn’t unimaginable either.
Stories of failed integration of second and third generation immigrants in mainland Europe, including the group of Belgians that carried out the massacre during the Paris rock concert, are also giving people pause I’m sure. Maybe it is because they’ve been marginalized because of their skin color, but whatever the reason, it’s not a good thing. Then again maybe Ireland can manage to be less racist than the backward mainland, and it seems a lot of people are trying their best by calling out racism wherever they think they see it. If it turns out that maybe there are other factors involved.. well.. what does anything really matter anyway right?
Before anyone comes at me with the racism patter, I’m in favor of taking in Christians and Jews as well as other religious minorities and atheists from the Middle East, but think we should keep a very careful eye on the demographics when it comes to the Muslim population. ISIS was a good example of how Muslims from very different backgrounds can find a common identity and common goals.
“But but you can’t do that!”… Please explain to me why not.
That’s because they’re genuinely fleeing a war and it’s mostly women and children. Many other asylum seekers are men of military age who are really just economic migrants.
I’m very sorry to say it, I come from South Africa, there is no legitimate grounds for a South African to claim asylum here.
South Africa’s crime rate is obscene and if that is grounds for asylum then there are plenty of countries that would qualify.
Some older South Africans have been granted asylum here (but I think that was prior to reform), mostly they now get rejected after 10 years and their 3 appeals.
Edit: it also not what the global asylum system was intended for. By this logic many people in Detroit or Minnesota could be applying in Ireland.
Asylum seekers not equal to refugees like Ukrainians are according to the rules.
Honestly, people should only be able to claim asylum in the closest safe country. That would solve all this bullshit. If a country chooses to allow people in from non-neighbouring countries (as with much of Europe and Ukraine) so be it. But if you, as an asylum seeker, have chosen to bypass several safe countries to go somehwere richer, then even if you come from a dangerous situation initially you have become an economic migrant. People from nearby, similar regions integrate better. This has been manifestly obvious post 2016 and the disaster of the migration crisis. Helping people to our own detriment is nonsensical
Ukrainians == Automatically Enrolled as Refugees (Asylum Granted) in the EU.
Asylum Seekers == People not Granted Asylum
These are fundamentally different terms.
Donie O’Sullivan getting a big big for his boots (literally)
I think half of these articles deliberately lack nuance as a form of click bait. Writing stupid shit for stupid readers.
Most people know that the majority of people living in direct provision are bogus applicants, if they weren’t they’d have been granted the right to remain instead of endlessly challenging their rejection. They’re ultimately economic migrants abusing a system designed for people fleeing war in order to skip the queue ahead of legitimate immigrants and asylum seekers.
I do find it particularly galling that the likes of the RTE pull this bleeding heart shit about people who grow up in DP, as if it’s somehow our fault that their parents prolonged their stay here by trying to defraud the Irish state.
It’s so funny how they say things like that, and yet no mention of the rich GCC countries such as Bahrain, Qatar, UAE who officially do not recognise refugees and hence take in 0.