ChatterBank4 mins ago
Why Are Illegal Immigrants Sailing From Tunisia To Italy?
Whats wrong with Tunisia?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dave50. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.People don't give up their homes and possessions and launch themselves onto a freezing sea on a dodgy dinghy unless they are desperate to escape something and to find something that will give them and their kids a bit of hope in life. You may resent them trying to do that, but you might consider what you might do in similar circumstances. Then again, you might not give a toss.
would all of them just go to ireland or france and then go “ahhh i am safe now…” Yes of course they would, because we know how to behave. From there many may apply to go elsewhere through the proper channels. But I will give you that one can't expect every nation to reach such a basic level of decent behavior. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have seen examples of how to behave in a civil manner.
Is Libya still ruled by warlords?
If it is I don't suppose they'd be unduly troubled by concerns about civil rights. If they'd taken European gold , and I don't know that they have, they would have ensured the route from their country to Europe was sealed.
That might explain why the departure point from Africa is now in Tunisia.
If it is I don't suppose they'd be unduly troubled by concerns about civil rights. If they'd taken European gold , and I don't know that they have, they would have ensured the route from their country to Europe was sealed.
That might explain why the departure point from Africa is now in Tunisia.
the point i was making was that if in my example tories were forced to flee the UK they would not simply settle in france or ireland... they would go to whichever country gave them a chance to rebuild their lives... many perhaps even most would end up in the USA or candaa via ireland or iceland because they are anglophone countries and a lot of people in the UK have connections there
and despite new judge quoting article 31 there is absolutely nothing in that legislation which forbids refugees from exercising a degree of choice about where they settle... indeed if we insisted that all refugees should just settle in the countries which happen to neighbour their own then the UK would accept no asylum seekers whatsoever including for example ukranians and those unfortunate countries which neighbour crisis areas would be overwhelmed and unable to effectively help. this would clearly be unjust.
the majority of those who claim asylum in this country after arriving illegally actually do have their applications accepted which suggests that a large number of them are not "chancers" or economic migrants as hatemongers like to suggest... distinguishing the two groups is why asylum applications have to be approved.
unfortunately because the uk has deliberately closed all safe and legal routes of entering the country for the purposes of claiming asylum the only way to enter the UK for that purpose is by doing it the same way as those who do so for criminal or "economic" reasons... so there is no way to tell the difference until they arrive. if we did facilitate asylum applications in e.g. france then we would not be faced with that problem but we won't do that because tory voters i suspect want no asylum seekers to come to this country at all regardless of whether or not they are legimitate
and despite new judge quoting article 31 there is absolutely nothing in that legislation which forbids refugees from exercising a degree of choice about where they settle... indeed if we insisted that all refugees should just settle in the countries which happen to neighbour their own then the UK would accept no asylum seekers whatsoever including for example ukranians and those unfortunate countries which neighbour crisis areas would be overwhelmed and unable to effectively help. this would clearly be unjust.
the majority of those who claim asylum in this country after arriving illegally actually do have their applications accepted which suggests that a large number of them are not "chancers" or economic migrants as hatemongers like to suggest... distinguishing the two groups is why asylum applications have to be approved.
unfortunately because the uk has deliberately closed all safe and legal routes of entering the country for the purposes of claiming asylum the only way to enter the UK for that purpose is by doing it the same way as those who do so for criminal or "economic" reasons... so there is no way to tell the difference until they arrive. if we did facilitate asylum applications in e.g. france then we would not be faced with that problem but we won't do that because tory voters i suspect want no asylum seekers to come to this country at all regardless of whether or not they are legimitate
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.