EU will restrict visas for states not taking back migrants

[Protean]

International laws don't mean squat. They're not enforceable, they're basically just an agreement to play by some rules that everyone can freely ignore when they feel like it.



Wrong, circumstances makes it either ethical or unethical. In this case, they're not in need of saving as they're not fleeing anything in the first place. They just want a better and more comfortable life or do you seriously mean to suggest that worse living standards than first world countries is something people need to flee from and be saved from?

If they are in the water, without fuel or food to go home, they are in immediate lifethreatening danger if they aren't allowed on shore.

I stand by my earlier statement, can't expect broken people to act like decent human beings.

[Freighter]

If they are in the water, without fuel or food to go home, they are in immediate lifethreatening danger if they aren't allowed on shore.

I stand by my earlier statement, can't expect broken people to act like decent human beings.

Due to their own stupidity. People have no ethical obligation to save those who endanger themselves through reckless behavior.

[Mayhem]

International laws don't mean squat. They're not enforceable, they're basically just an agreement to play by some rules that everyone can freely ignore when they feel like it.

I like that you keep repeating this nonsense, you really stick to it.

Wrong, circumstances makes it either ethical or unethical. In this case, they're not in need of saving as they're not fleeing anything in the first place. They just want a better and more comfortable life or do you seriously mean to suggest that worse living standards than first world countries is something people need to flee from and be saved from?

You missed the point, it's about not letting them drown not about helping them flee.

[Freighter]

I like that you keep repeating this nonsense, you really stick to it.

It's not nonsense just because you do not like it. Myanmar had their sanctions lifted while actively engaging in genocide against their muslim population, how are those international laws working out? Countries like Japan and South Korea refuses to help refugees in most cases, nobody doing anything but say some harsh words.

You missed the point, it's about not letting them drown not about helping them flee.

There is no ethical obligation to help those who put themselves in harms way through their own reckless behavior.

[Mayhem]

Due to their own stupidity. People have no ethical obligation to save those who endanger themselves through reckless behavior.

Duty to rescue is a thing in most of continental europe.

"Criminal law:
In some countries, there exists a legal requirement for citizens to assist people in distress, unless doing so would put themselves or others in harm's way. Citizens are often required to, at minimum, call the local emergency number, unless doing so would be harmful, in which case the authorities should be contacted when the harmful situation has been removed. As of 2012, there were such laws in several countries, including[1] Albania, Andorra,[23] Argentina,[24] Austria,[25] Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Croatia,[26] Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,[27] Finland, France,[28] Germany,[29] Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland,[30] Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and Tunisia."

[Protean]

It's not nonsense just because you do not like it. Myanmar had their sanctions lifted while actively engaging in genocide against their muslim population, how are those international laws working out?



There is no ethical obligation to help those who put themselves in harms way through their own reckless behavior.

Yes there is. Normal people's first instinct is to rescue people in trouble. Whether they caused it themselves or not.


Only jaded fucked up people first stop to evaluate and judge whether they deserve death or not.

[Freighter]

Duty to rescue is a thing in most of continental europe.

"Criminal law:
In some countries, there exists a legal requirement for citizens to assist people in distress, unless doing so would put themselves or others in harm's way. Citizens are often required to, at minimum, call the local emergency number, unless doing so would be harmful, in which case the authorities should be contacted when the harmful situation has been removed. As of 2012, there were such laws in several countries, including[1] Albania, Andorra,[23] Argentina,[24] Austria,[25] Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Croatia,[26] Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,[27] Finland, France,[28] Germany,[29] Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland,[30] Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and Tunisia."

Law does not mean ethical obligation.

[Mayhem]

It's not nonsense just because you do not like it. Myanmar had their sanctions lifted while actively engaging in genocide against their muslim population, how are those international laws working out? Countries like Japan and South Korea refuses to help refugees in most cases, nobody doing anything but say some harsh words.

That's nice and also not relevant.

[Freighter]

Yes there is. Normal people's first instinct is to rescue people in trouble. Whether they caused it themselves or not.

No, if I saw someone climbing up a building to jump to their death I would just let it happen. I wouldn't intervene.

Only jaded fucked up people first stop to evaluate and judge whether they deserve death or not.

No, sane people do.

[Protean]

Law does not mean ethical obligation.

The alternative you propose makes people the judge, jury and executioner of foreign people without a single word with them.

Please defend the ethics of that.

[Freighter]

That's nice and also not relevant.

First you claim that my statement is nonsense then I bring up a case where international law first lead to sanctions due to human rights abuses, which were then lifted in the midst of an ongoing genocide against their muslim population. International law is applied when it suits the politicians agenda and is ignored when it does not.

[Protean]

No, if I saw someone climbing up a building to jump to their death I would just let it happen. I wouldn't intervene.



No, sane people do.

Thank you, this completely disqualifies you in any discussions about morals or ehics.

Please see yourself out.

[Mayhem]

Well, its not nonsense. NATO basically broke international laws when they bombed Serbia.

Yes it is nonsense as it's meaningless to the point. It's not about countries breaking international law and not being held responsible by other countries but by their own jurisdiction.

- - - Updated - - -

But the refugees and immigrants are usually picked up in Libyan waters and transported to Italy etc..

Yeah and that's another problem, but has nothing to do with duty to rescue.

[Freighter]

The alternative you propose makes people the judge, jury and executioner of foreign people without a single word with them.

Please defend the ethics of that.

You have no ethical obligation to save strangers who put themselves in harms way by spending your own resources.

[Mayhem]

First you claim that my statement is nonsense then I bring up a case where international law first lead to sanctions due to human rights abuses, which were then lifted in the midst of an ongoing genocide against their muslim population. International law is applied when it suits the politicians agenda and is ignored when it does not.

Bring up a case of a country that is involved in what the discussion is about.

- - - Updated - - -

You have no ethical obligation to save strangers who put themselves in harms way by spending your own resources.

You don't only have an ethical obligation you also have a lawful obligation.

[Freighter]

Bring up a case of a country that is involved in what the discussion is about.

Your statement was that what I said about international law was nonsense. It's not nonsense, as can be seen by how it's conveniently ignored when politicians see it fit. Thurin brought up one such case, I brought up another. That shows that it's not nonsense.

- - - Updated - - -

You don't only have an ethical obligation you also have a lawful obligation.

No, you don't have an ethical obligation. Lawful obligation does not mean ethical. Ethical obligation is what's being discussed. Laws can be changed.

[Mayhem]

Your statement was that what I said about international law was nonsense. It's not nonsense, as can be seen by how it's conveniently ignored when politicians see it fit.

It is nonsense considering the countries in question.

No, you don't have an ethical obligation. Lawful obligation does not mean ethical. Ethical obligation is what's being discussed. Laws can be changed.

Yes you have.

[Deleted]

It's not only moral but also human ethical to save any life in danger on national/international waters. Trying to deny it so only makes one completely subhuman.

That said, like I already said on this thread, this is a good measure, the emigrant countries need to end with the human smugglers or we won't legally accept anymore and keep dumping their nationals back home.

[Freighter]

It is nonsense considering the countries in question.

Okay? Any country can ignore it at will.

Yes you have.

No, law =/= ethics. The laws are unethical if they force you to spend your resources on saving people who have put themselves in harms way, or face penalties.

[Protean]

Okay?




No, law =/= ethics. The laws are unethical if they force you to spend your resources on saving people who have put themselves in harms way, or face penalties.

How are your resources more important than the life of someone else? You have no way of knowing if they put themselves in harms way or not. You cannot even talk to most refugees.


And if you cannot be certain they "deserve" it, then you cannot say it's ethical to let them die because they might deserve it.