Syria war: 22 Turkish troops killed in airstrike

Sankari · 3 Mar 2020 at 21:38

ntg said:
Asylum seekers are only entitled to ask for asylum at the first country they land on.

That is absolutely not true. The international law on seeking asylum does not say this at all.

As far as we know

'As far as we know' doesn't cut it. Asylum claims have to be formally considered before a decision is made.

They cannot be considered, therefore, as defenseless asylum seekers but as people who try to illegally cross a country's borders. The country is justified to use force to stop them.

This is absolute nonsense, for the reasons given earlier. Also, unarmed people are defenceless, and the people in that dinghy were definitely unarmed.

I think it's beyond obvious that the Turkish government is using masses of asylum seekers in an attempt to destabilize it's neighbor

I believe that is absolutely true.

and blackmail EU into paying large sums of money.

If Erdogan thinks he can extort the EU with a wave of asylum seekers, he's dumber than he looks.

Sankari · 3 Mar 2020 at 21:47

FoxEye said:
This post seems awfully contradictory

What's contradictory about it?

and coming from an Ozzie to boot... a country that is happy to stick people in off-shore detention camps where conditions are allegedly Guantanamo bay style...

I'm strongly opposed to Australia's asylum seeker policy, and I've always objected to off-shore detention. Conditions in the detention camps are not great, but independent journalists have confirmed that they're definitely not 'Guantanamo bay style.'

Are these migrants seeking asylum from persecution in Turkey, then?

They don't need to be seeking asylum from persecution in Turkey in order to qualify as asylum seekers.

Does that give them the right to storm Greece's borders?

I don't know why you're using the word 'storm.' Are they attacking en masse, with violence and weapons? In that video I just saw a bunch of unarmed people in an overloaded dinghy.

Why don't they have the right to get on boats in Turkey and turn up in Oz, then?

They absolutely have the right to do that.

You going to welcome then all as "asylum seekers from Turkey" now?

If they're found to be genuine asylum seekers, there's no reason why we wouldn't welcome them. Australia's annual asylum quota is ~20,000 but we sometimes accept more than that (we resettled 34,200 asylum seekers in 2016).

robfosters · 3 Mar 2020 at 22:20

Evangelion said:
What's contradictory about it?

I'm strongly opposed to Australia's asylum seeker policy, and I've always objected to off-shore detention. Conditions in the detention camps are not great, but independent journalists have confirmed that they're definitely not 'Guantanamo bay style.'

They don't need to be seeking asylum from persecution in Turkey in order to qualify as asylum seekers.

I don't know why you're using the word 'storm.' Are they attacking en masse, with violence and weapons? In that video I just saw a bunch of unarmed people in an overloaded dinghy.

They absolutely have the right to do that.

If they're found to be genuine asylum seekers, there's no reason why we wouldn't welcome them. Australia's annual asylum quota is ~20,000 but we sometimes accept more than that (we resettled 34,200 asylum seekers in 2016).

Do you think we should open the border then?

StriderX · 3 Mar 2020 at 22:57

robfosters said:
Do you think we should open the border then?

No, as there are embassies for this.

ntg · 3 Mar 2020 at 22:58

Evangelion said:
That is absolutely not true. The international law on seeking asylum does not say this at all.

You can read up on it here: https://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain/opendocpdf.pdf?reldoc=y&docid=4bab55da2
Its the UN Refugee website. I'm pretty sure they know what they are talking about, and the criteria described therein apply 100% to the people we are referring to. Their 1st country of asylum is Turkey.

'As far as we know' doesn't cut it. Asylum claims have to be formally considered before a decision is made.

We are commenting on the news we all read/access. Unless you have some other news source that presents evidence they are, we should continue the discussion upon the inference they aren't. Even if they were, they would only be entitled to seek asylum in Turkey.

This is absolute nonsense, for the reasons given earlier. Also, unarmed people are defenceless, and the people in that dinghy were definitely unarmed.

My point was more towards the 'asylum seekers' part of that sentence. Yes, I agree they are all defenseless.

If Erdogan thinks he can extort the EU with a wave of asylum seekers, he's dumber than he looks.

You'd think, but, EU has already funded Turkey with generous sums of money to hold back the immigration flows. Turkey has taken the money and is now rescinding on its end of the deal and asking for even more money. Apparently EU thought that doing business with a dictator is a good idea, but it's working quite well for Turkey.

Also, please don't alter a quoted text and respond to it. I said ".. the Turkish government is using masses of illegal immigrants in an attempt.." and you quoted it changing the 'illegal immigrants' to 'asylum seekers', highlighting it in red. Since it won't be clear to everyone that the highlight is an alteration by you, and not simply highlighting something I actually said, I'd appreciate if you don't do it.

ntg · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:04

Evangelion said:
What's contradictory about it?
I don't know why you're using the word 'storm.' Are they attacking en masse, with violence and weapons? In that video I just saw a bunch of unarmed people in an overloaded dinghy.

Yes, they are. There are currently circa 10,000 people (give or take, depends on the news site) at the Turkish border trying to get in Greece. They have violently clashed with border security forces.

The dinghy is not the only news.

see here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/01/world/europe/greece-migrants-border-turkey.html

and here:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-after-turkish-border-onslaught-idUSKBN20N0GE

Even reuters describes it as an onslaught. It's not that people in this thread are exaggerating.

Panos · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:08

Evangelion said:
I don't know why you're using the word 'storm.' Are they attacking en masse, with violence and weapons? In that video I just saw a bunch of unarmed people in an overloaded dinghy.

Get ready for some surprise what kind of people Greece has to deal with atm. I doubt Australia or any other country faces that kind of people at it's borders.
So that's why I said, before you condemn Greece come and take them to Australia. See how fast you will send them back

a) They slap their children while putting them above fires so the smoke can make them cry uncontrollably for the media to take shots & videos of the crying children due to the tear gas the Greek police is using at the borders to repel them

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10222087245433525

b) Setting fires at the border, throwing stones to the Police & Army at the other side of the fence (dozens of videos like this from each day since Saturday morning)

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10222077969401630

c) This one is from Afghanistan saying "I was in prison, they open the door and told us go"

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10222081947621083

d) This one is possibly angry because the illegals going to the border, while asking why Erdogan doesn't transport them to Aivajik so they would make some money by ferry them illegally to Lesbos island (the island the video you talking about).

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10222066335470789

e) Someone who has been already transferred back to Algeria because Greece couldn't given him asylum.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1233924783231971329

f) Watch the video, no need for translation

g) Turkey moves them by bus to the borders. Btw where are the starving women and children UN talks about?

h) And taxis

Do you want me to continue? They are so stupid that criminalize themselves by uploading their acts to the social media, oh the irony.

(btw who pays their mobile data connection?)

Also last minute news...Basically even Russia came out tonight saying that all these are barely 1/3 Syrians. The rest are from all around the world.
https://www.tanea.gr/2020/03/03/wor...elnei-130-000-metanastes-sta-ellinika-synora/

FYI according to EU & Greece intelligence all these are ISIS/Al-Qaeda ex fighters, kicked by SAA & Russia in Syria. Their left overs still fighting alongside Turkey the SAA in Syria..... While most are in Turkey for 8+ years.

And thats why even the biggest EU supporters of open borders like Guy Verhofstadt, "whispering" that need to protect the Greek borders....
Most Britons in here know him for not "whispering" but shouting against UK and EU FOM.

All these on the back of the Turkish venture in Syria to annex part of the country, using all these for blackmailing NATO & EU to attack the Russian forces inside Syria. Only morons (eg Raab) don't foresee this will start WWIII. While every country tries to fight SARS atm.

This isn't madness this is Balkans.

StriderX · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:13

Well the best thing to do now is for European nations to send an ultimatum to the US, if this attack continues with Turkey, they will rescind NATO's charter and institute a more relevant treaty without them.

I really wish European countries would stop rationalising this ****** authority that's lost all relevance.

I still believe that not all these refugees are agents, some will be being promised the world, some will be being coerced, perhaps violently by Turkey and goodness knows what else as it's never this simple.

Unfortunately Europe cannot allow Turkey to use them as a weapon, nor can it trust the intentions of any of them due to this.

Tuppy_Glossop · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:33

The bigger problem is the UN. All the clout and five vetoes too many.

StriderX · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:35

Tuppy_Glossop said:
The bigger problem is the UN. All the clout and five vetoes too many.

Veto's don't mean anything with NATO, it's about making the threat and then following through.

I'd rather have an alliance with Russia than the US and Turkey right now, that's how sad this organisation is.

Panos · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:39

Tuppy_Glossop said:
The bigger problem is the UN. All the clout and five vetoes too many.

Yeah. The UN agency for immigration condemned Greece saying that should open the borders and give automatically to everyone asylum.
Hahaha.

Seems have lost it completely.

RxR · 3 Mar 2020 at 23:55

Evangelion said:
The policy of every country is that they decide who comes to their country. There's not a single country on Earth that asks the rest of the world else to make the decision for them.

Obviously. Why do you think I used the word "sovereign" in my statement. Clearly, neither you nor StriderX saw the term was and is distributed by the statement made.

Or rather, StriderX did infer the wider scope that I intended, but sought to qualify it wrt countries that have land borders.

StriderX · 4 Mar 2020 at 00:02

RxR said:
Obviously. Why do you think I used the word "sovereign" in my statement. Clearly, neither you nor StriderX saw the term was and is distributed by the statement made.

Or rather, StriderX did infer the wider scope that I intended, but sought to qualify it wrt countries that have land borders.

Maybe because it's a buzzword at this point due to the last decade? I am a cynical person.

RxR · 4 Mar 2020 at 00:07

StriderX said:
Maybe because it's a buzzword at this point due to the last decade? I am a cynical person.

I don't think it's that. The use of the word is less clear cut in some respects in the context of land borders that you mentioned, certainly in the EU, with its freedom of movement allowance.

Sankari · 4 Mar 2020 at 06:49

robfosters said:
Do you think we should open the border then?

No, I don't support open borders.

I think the UK should maintain its current policies, and process asylum seekers as they reach the UK. I don't believe any asylum seeker should be accepted unless their claim has been thoroughly scrutinised and confirmed to be genuine. This takes time, hence the existence of detention camps.

Sankari · 4 Mar 2020 at 07:01

ntg said:
You can read up on it here: https://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain/opendocpdf.pdf?reldoc=y&docid=4bab55da2
Its the UN Refugee website. I'm pretty sure they know what they are talking about, and the criteria described therein apply 100% to the people we are referring to. Their 1st country of asylum is Turkey.

Did you even read that? It contradicts you completely. It doesn't say anywhere that asylum seekers are not permitted to seek asylum beyond the first country they enter. It specially states that asylum seekers can seek asylum in a second or even third country.

Not only that, but it also explains how the concept of 'first country of asylum' is defined:

The concept of first country of asylum is defined in Article 26 of the APD:

A country can be considered to be a first country of asylum for a particular applicant for asylum if:

(a) s/he has been recognised in that country as a refugee and s/he can still avail him/herself of that protection; or

(b) s/he otherwise enjoys sufficient protection in that country, including benefiting from the principle of non-refoulement; provided that s/he will be re-admitted to that country.

The critical point here is that many countries entered first by asylum seekers do not qualify as countries of first asylum under these criteria, hence the need to move on and seek asylum elsewhere.

We are commenting on the news we all read/access. Unless you have some other news source that presents evidence they are, we should continue the discussion upon the inference they aren't.

Why should we do that? All asylum seekers are assessed on the merits of their individual cases. Many of these people will be asylum seekers. Many will not. Either way, it's an issue that the appropriate authorities must determine.

Even if they were, they would only be entitled to seek asylum in Turkey.

Completely untrue.

You'd think, but, EU has already funded Turkey with generous sums of money to hold back the immigration flows. Turkey has taken the money and is now rescinding on its end of the deal and asking for even more money. Apparently EU thought that doing business with a dictator is a good idea, but it's working quite well for Turkey.

The EU won't put up with it.

Also, please don't alter a quoted text and respond to it. I said ".. the Turkish government is using masses of illegal immigrants in an attempt.." and you quoted it changing the 'illegal immigrants' to 'asylum seekers', highlighting it in red. Since it won't be clear to everyone that the highlight is an alteration by you, and not simply highlighting something I actually said, I'd appreciate if you don't do it.

I corrected your incorrect statement, and highlighted it in red to demonstrate this so that nobody would mistaken it for the original text. You're welcome.

Sankari · 4 Mar 2020 at 07:01

ntg said:
Yes, they are. There are currently circa 10,000 people (give or take, depends on the news site) at the Turkish border trying to get in Greece. They have violently clashed with border security forces.

Anyone trying to enter with violence should be refused entry.

Panos · 4 Mar 2020 at 08:12

Evangelion said:
Anyone trying to enter with violence should be refused entry.

Yet you didnt watch any of their own videos posted above, so this discussion moving in circles.

At the end or the day Greece had enough. No Australian or anyone else can ask Greece to take in the remnants of ISIS.

Panos · 4 Mar 2020 at 10:54

Since early this morning Turkish riot police started firing tear gas against the Greek forces inside the Greek territory, trying to push them back from their lines.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Enjoy.
https://www.skai.gr/news/greece/vin...ei-kata-ton-ellinon-me-pollaplous-ektokseytes

On any other country this could have been taken as act of war.

StriderX · 4 Mar 2020 at 11:04

Panos said:
Yet you didnt watch any of their own videos posted above, so this discussion moving in circles.

At the end or the day Greece had enough. No Australian or anyone else can ask Greece to take in the remnants of ISIS.

Videos online are very limited in terms of evidence (its very easy to misrepresent things), you cannot generalise a view with them, the internet is too ripe with misinformation to just assume things are accurate representations. That said, if you can corroborate it with other evidence, it starts being a little less crude.

Obviously with respect to national security, and not that of just Greece, it's enough realistically with the statements/actions by the Turkish government to turn them away and protect the border. Unfortunately if some of them are genuine, then it's unfortunate, but they should be directed to embassies if Turkey is no longer safe for them.