Ask Me Help Desk - Maybe this is the way to deal with illegal aliens?

Julia Gillard to send back asylum seekers who arrive by boat | News.com.au

This story may have some ideas for those who have a little problem with illegal arrivals. What I like is the concept that PC is over. No more ducking and diving around the issues of refugees and economic migrants.

What I think is that this approach is long overdue in dealing with the very large numbers of illegal immigrants and transients who make life very difficult for law enforcement and governments all over the world. A zero tolerance policy is the only way to deal with these arrogant people who think that they can jump immigration queues anytime they like and that the laws of various nations mean nothing and don't apply to them. Please notice that this policy has been brought forth by some one who is considered somewhat left of centre in the political arena. It begs the question when does socialist become fascist

Gee, what a novel idea sending boat people back. How quaint. In Russia if you are caught trying to enter their country illegally you are taken to a holding place and left there for YEARS. The only way you can "go home" is to wait until more of your countrymen or countrywomen join you and then and only then will Russia send a bunch of you and your fellow countrymen back to your original country only after you have been incarcerated for 8 years. You can only be held in Russia for 15 years though. At least they will let you go home only after having served your incarceration time.

Now Australia is just sending these people back with no consequences and just having these people try again and again to finally get through. At least in Russia when they incarcerate you you are happy to leave that country even though you are offered the possibility of becoming a Russian. Guess how many people take up Russian citizenship after serving 8 years in a Russian holding facility? Very, very few. If anything they go back to their original country and tell all their friends don't even think of trying to enter Russia illegally.

Maybe Australia needs to do something more drastic than just turning back those unwelcome and unwanted individuals. Australia has extremely limited resources such as water, food, etc. and definitely needs to curtail the influx of people into their country. The only method that seems to work is incarcertion for years. But this is a very costly way to contain such illegal entries. But I know that North Korea has a much better policy. They just shoot on sight. No send back, no hold for years. But then, who in their right mind would even think of entering North Korea period with that kind of incentive?

New asylum seeker policy on agenda for Julia Gillard's Labor Government | The Australian

Odd, but in this article your PM says she wants to put the people smugglers out of business. So, which is it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

Gee, what a novel idea sending boat people back. How quaint. In Russia if you are caught trying to enter their country illegally you are taken to a holding place and left there for YEARS. The only way you can "go home" is to wait until more of your countrymen or countrywomen join you and then and only then will Russia send a bunch of you and your fellow countrymen back to your original country only after you have been incarcerated for 8 years. You can only be held in Russia for 15 years though. At least they will let you go home only after having served your incarceration time.

Now Australia is just sending these people back with no consequences and just having these people try again and again to finally get thru. At least in Russia when they incarcerate you you are happy to leave that country even though you are offered the possibility of becomming a Russian. Guess how many people take up Russian citizenship after serving 8 years in a Russian holding facility? Very, very few. If anything they go back to their original country and tell all their friends don't even think of trying to enter Russia illegally.

Maybe Australia needs to do something more drastic than just turning back those unwelcome and unwanted individuals. Australia has extremely limited resources such as water, food, etc. and definitely needs to curtail the influx of people into their country. The only method that seems to work is incarcertion for years. But this is a very costly way to contain such illegal entries. But I know that North Korea has a much better policy. They just shoot on sight. No send back, no hold for years. But then, who in their right mind would even think of entering North Korea period with that kind of incentive?

We have tried the incarcaration game with detention camps that would have done the nazi, the CCCP and aparteid proud, that didn't work so we abandoned the Russian solution in favour of the Pacific solution where we detained them on some godforsaken tropic isle on the equator, that slowed the influx but didn't stop the problem. We even paid them to go home figuring that was cheaper than the costs of keeping them here, but even though it has been a negative sum gain for the boat people as well as ourselves they keep coming and we are wearing out our patrol boats towing decrepid fishing boats to Chrismas Island. Now we have a leader who doesn't have a bleeding heart for the displaced masses of Asia and so, being of less brutal mind than some and not taken to machine gunning their boats and letting them swim, we think that loading up those planes that aren't as full as they used to be a good idea, sort of a stimulus for the airlines.

I really think the solution is to give them an island of their own, where they can be what they want to be without interference from us. Unfortunately most of the desirable ones are taken. It's not that we have limited resources and we have a large migration program anyway, but that our cities are becoming overcrowed and housing shortage is a problem. We just don't want to turn the place into a slum because some people think this is utopia when it is actually barbequearea. We were stupid enough to allow camels into the country and look what it did, now we don't want to be overrun by cameldrivers

Quote:

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

New asylum seeker policy on agenda for Julia Gillard's Labor Government | The Australian

Odd, but in this article your PM says she wants to put the people smugglers out of business. So, which is it?

That's the theory, if the people the people smugglers smuggle don't get to stay, but are just delivered back to GO, having wasted their money on a long trip to nowhere by the scenic route, then the people won't pay the people smugglers anymore, and the people smugglers will be out of business and another poli has an election policy that everyone will vote for. This doesn't say what anyone is going to do with the thousands already enroute, but that isn't our problem

Hey, some of us are smarter than this, and we know that after the election things will change, but here is more in the saga
http://www.news.com.au/features/fede...-1225888456714

In a remarkable update Red Julia has recycled the Pacific solution with the twist that refugees and asylum seekers (would be boat people who have made it that far) will be processed in East Timor. One assumes they will set up temporary slums where they will be indistinguishable from the locals and the expense of accommodating them, etc will have been avoided. Obviously if they are rejected there will be no obligation to fly them back home either. I don't see how this cuts into be business of people smugglers much, it just changes their destination from Ashmore Reef to Dili.

This demonstrates just how shallow some people can be, dumping a whole lot of potential trouble makers in the lap of a disadvantaged neighbour

Oh yeah I forgot you still "occupy " East Timor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

oh yeah I forgot you still "occupy " East Timor.

Yes, Tom, in the same way the US occupies Afghanistan. We are just helping out some oppressed people there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

I really think the solution is to give them an island of their own

Hello:

I need to shower after reading this thread.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

Yes, Tom, in the same way the US occupies Afghanistan. We are just helping out some oppressed people there.

So then sometimes being an "occupier " is a good thing ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

So then sometimes being an "occupier " is a good thing ?

I doubt that is what you meant, but by your definition we also occupy Port Vila Let me be clear here I don't think having troops in nearby countries and engaging in police actions is a good thing but someone has to help out in these failed states which is a little different to having a permanent military presence offshore.

Just distorting the definition of the word as you do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

just distorting the definition of the word as you do.

Just for the record Tom here is the size of the "occupying force"

Quote:

Operation Astute - Approximately 400 Australian personnel and 140 New Zealand personnel are deployed to East Timor as part of the ISF that is working in support of the Government of East Timor and the United Nations to maintain peace and stability.
Operation Anode - Australia's commitment to the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) Consistes of a 160-strong Combined Task Force. The ADF contributes around 80 to 120 troops to this Task Force

Which not just distrorting the definition of the word but the truth

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

Which not just distrorting the definition of the word but the truth

Hello Clete:

Truth?? TRUTH?? Dude. You are NOT the holder of the truth. One country's liberation is another country's occupation. One man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter. One man's illegal alien, is another man's valued employee. One country founded by CONVICTS, casts aspersions about the legality of others seeking a better life.

I don't know. Things are NOT black and white.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello Clete:

Truth??? TRUTH??? Dude. You are NOT the holder of the truth. One country's liberation is another country's occupation. One man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter. One man's illegal alien, is another man's valued employee. One country founded by CONVICTS, casts aspersions about the legality of others seeking a better life.

I dunno. Things are NOT black and white.

excon

Hi Ex in the narrow context we were discussing the truth is readily apparent, in the broader context of world affairs the truth has always been coloured by perspective. Your perspective is that my country was founded by convicts, my perspective is that your country was founded by religious fanatics. Which would I trust to have a better perspective on how people should be treated. My country has never known slavery but it has known brutality, your country fought a war which resulted in freeing the slaves but not giving them equality, from my perspective you have never lost the legacy of placing one race over another and nowhere is this more apparent than your dealing with illegal aliens. We have no problem with legitimate migrants with the skills to make it without becoming a welfare statistic, all we ask is they don't try to sneak, or finess their way, into the country.

The definition of terrorist goes to methodology not cause. Are we liberating Afghanistan or occupying it? Very much a question of perspective, I think it was liberated in 2001 and what is happening now is an occupation. When the soviets occupied Afghanistan we were happy to see the same people we are fighting now use the same methods to fight them, your country even supplied the arms to do it.. The difference is only in perspective.