There is literally nothing wrong with refugees fleeing death and destruction in their home countries trying to find a place in civilised society. Prove me wrong /int/
Obviously, there is nothing wrogn with not wanting them to change your country either
>>60116860
You have an obligation as a fellow human being to accept them despite their shortcomings, over time they will become a Slovak like you
>>60116798
You are correct, there is nothing morally wrong with that. On the other hand, there's nothing morally obliging others to take in those refugees. In fact, if it is detrimental to the natives and society at large (which it will ALWAYS be in large enough numbers), it'd be an immoral act to allow those refugees in.
You also forget that most of these "refugees" are economic migrants. They have already reached the relative safety of countries like Morocco or Turkey or Tunisia, yet choose to keep going to the countries with jobs.
Why else do you think Germany gets the most asylum applications while Cyprus, fucking CYPRUS, gets close to none?
>>60116888
no
I have no problem with refugees so long as they promise to fuck off home asap
>>60116798
>welcome refugees thread
>see flag
>Australia
How are your refugees living in Nauru?
>>60116929
>yet choose to keep going to the countries with jobs
yet choose to keep going to the countries with free monies
ftfy m8
>>60117039
That's only a temporary setback lad
Just by dealing with internal refugees because of our armed conflict the outskirts of the big cities became ghettos and the all the streets were filled with beggars and robbers.
Can't even imagine how it is to take in millions of shitskins with nothing in common with you and all the intentions to destroy your civilization.
I have no obligation tonhelp anyone who is not German or at least European. There are too many Arabs/Niggers etc in this world anyway
>>60116798
Prove yourself right first.
Also, they shouldn't pass through half a dozen safe countries before they stop here. That's not OK. Not that I'd want them here in the first place. The vast majority of them should have stayed put.
>>60116798
Who am I to blame them. It's understandable even if their home countries didn't have war; who wouldn't rather live in Europe?
>>60116798
If we're supposed to take them in because we've got to stick to various agreements on refugees, then it's reasonable to expect them to stick to the agreements on refugees as well. As soon as they left safe countries they became economic migrants. If a country isn't allowed to decide whether or not it wants to accept economic migrants you're asking for anarchy.
I agree. I also think if there is opportunity to move to place with best economic opportunity it isnt unreasonable, its natural. everybody in history did it. when the Irish had to leave their country they all went to America for the milk and honey
>>60117752
>when the Irish had to leave their country they all went to America for the milk and honey
And Americans were willing to accept them because
1. They were white. With the acception of Asian indentured servants, America only accepted white immigrants until the 1960s.
2. America was LITERALLY FUCKING EMPTY. It was one of the rare few instances in history where a country legitimately needed immigrants. Hell, by 1783 the Netherlands and the USA had roughly the same population.
