EU Tries to fine Poland $75 Mil. Poland sends Germany $1Trillion bill for WWII

[Theodarzna]

I'm not going to pretend like it's all positive and everything either, and I somehow doubt that anyone at all is doing that (bar some fringe socialist or anarcho-communist politicians), but I think the general consensus overall is that it's best to spread out these refugees as much as possible to avoid ghetto forming and the likes. Poland is a big country with a lot of living space, as are many other east-european countries. They're all but expected to take in very few compared to others.

The discussion also can't take place disconnected from agreements made though. Whether it's right or wrong, good or bad, is entirely irrelevant to the fact that there are contractual agreements that Poland should take in it's fair share.

And while this might just be a sign or a form of protest, in the end Poland will be taking them in because I can't imagine they'd be willing to lose out on all positives the EU brings them (including money for infrastructure and industry in their nation).

Merkel and Germany are very pragmatic, they tend to care more about what works and efficiency - while that doesn't make them flawless, they are a whole lot less 'progressive' than people try to portray them. The actual policies they enforce are a lot more about efficiency and rational decision making than about 'good feels' like some like to pretend. My own West-European country is ruled by a civic nationalist government, which is taking a very stern stance against excessive immigration and is pretty strict on crime committed by immigrants and refugees - but somehow we're still regarded as some sort of progressive socialist paradise. Maybe that is true compared to the USA, but what I'm observing myself is pragmatism and trying to do what is best for the nation - without sinking to the level of emotional debate about immigration and left vs right tribalism - and without breaking contracts and european signed agreements. It's about professionalism really - instead of about popularity politics.

First, that is not true in that people openly state "Diversity is our Strength" and nobody really rejects that notion among the political consensus of the EU and the UK. Diversity is seen as a self-evidently good thing. And why would ethnic enclaves be bad? After all, multiculturalism is a positive, it brings are that cuisine and culture. As for pragmatism, considering German birth rates, obviously mass importation is critical to the German future.

My point is why spread them out? The implication of not wanting ethnic enclaves seems a bit racist and prejudice against their culture. It seems that if Germany wants these people here, it should be Germany that houses and feeds them, especially since they have been told of how good and wonderful it is to take in unlimited migration.

Poland does not want these people, I see no reason why Poland should be included in the German project of culturally enriching itself.

- - - Updated - - -

If that was the case, how comes member states are still sovereign and none of the EU treaties ever attempted to change it?

Exactly, their are sovereign countries, thus Polands desire to decide its demographic makeup should ruffle no feathers. Afterall it was Germany that desires new faces, fresh voices, a new enrichment of culture and cuisine. Let the Germans enjoy the bountiful harvest. :3

Is the concept of resources one of the multitude of concepts that elude you?

If any country has the resources its the rich, pragmatic, modern and forward thinking Germans with their strong diverse multicultural society that has surely made Germany wealthy and powerful. Plus it is a small investment for the rich and delicious fruits of Diversity.

Except at the time Poland took that obligation, most of the Polish voters were in favor of taking in migrants.

And they have, ones from the Ukraine that Germany must have forgotten. Or is ones status as a refugee depend on skin color?

This only changed after 2 years of PiS' rule and their anti-refugee narrative about how they are all terrorists (when not only are the majority of them not terrorists, almost all terrorists since refugee crisis happened were not related to it at all) or lovely stuff about them carrying unknown plagues, which they got from Mein Kampf.

Exactly, and since there is no danger, why would Germany want to pawn these people off into some poor country like Poland whose people are obviously evil racists?

Clearly these future doctors, engineers and healthy strong young workers eager to join European society would be a godsend to Germany whom can only benefit from them. But it is rather puzzling that on the one hand these people are presented as a self-evident treasure, but on the other hand not worth the money of resettling in ones own country. Something seems off about your narrative.

[Airlick]

Repeating something that isn't true doesn't make it true.

It is true, though. Poland did take in over a million refugees from Ukraine. Oh, the grand majority wasn't running away from war? Well, let's have a look at what, 3 millions of "refugees" from Africa and the Middle East, that often come from countries that aren't even neighbours to a country involved in war. Meanwhile Ukraine is involved in a war. Just because it's happening 500 kilos east from where the majority of the refugees comes from, doesn't mean it didn't affect them in various ways - failing economy being the most apparent one.

There are more differences between the refugees (or economic migrants, call them as you may, though you should be calling those in the West welfare migrants) Poland accepted and the ones Western Europe is struggling with. Ukrainians came here to work, and they work, they speak the language, they often integrate into the society and set up their lives here. Not only they benefit the society, we've also never had a Ukrainian chop a soldier's head off with a machete, never had a Ukrainian gang rape women, run people down with a car, blow themselves up in a metro...

Of course they aren't really a good material for the news, especially if you're western or western-funded media with an agenda of discrediting Poland.

Except at the time Poland took that obligation, most of the Polish voters were in favor of taking in migrants. But who'd expect you of knowing what the hell you're talking about. This only changed after 2 years of PiS' rule and their anti-refugee narrative about how they are all terrorists (when not only are the majority of them not terrorists, almost all terrorists since refugee crisis happened were not related to it at all) or lovely stuff about them carrying unknown plagues, which they got from Mein Kampf.

The first surveys reported some 70% approval for accepting REFUGEES from countries involved in war, like Ukraine and Syria. I remember the first media reports on the refugees. I remember the banana boat pictures. I remember internet comments, that everyone saw that those boats weren't filled with women and children fleeing from war, but healthy young males, often holding iPhones. I remember that funny clip (https://www.facebook.com/mieszko.fil...type=2&theater) from the very beginning of the crisis.

People didn't need PiS' anti-refugee propaganda. They had eyes to see. So how could they not start being concerned with letting them into our country? They saw what's going on with the so-called refugees and were right to fear letting them into our country. There is just so much negative material about the refugees - which they produce themselves － and so little positive material - which they don't provide, since they didn't come to EU to work, but for welfare - that even masters of propaganda can't successfully twist it into an image of a group of people that can greatly benefit our society, or even of people fleeing from war.

[Mittens]

The EU will remain a failure for as long as the Euro continues to exist.

[Theodarzna]

Because a drop in the bucket (hypothetical in this case, but still) across the entire EU has to be a drop in the bucked for one or a few countries. You're so fucking hopeless. And that's before one considers the part where the concepts of finite resources still eludes you by some mysterious happenstance. Finally, good job ignoring my earlier post about how Poland already agreed to take their quota, like the antithesis of intellectual honesty that you are.

But why does it matter how many of them? Surely even if half of Germany was made up of such migrants it would be no trouble. After all, Diversity is our Strength correct? Diversity is a self-evident good and if that is true, than Germany taking in so many can only be a good thing.

The issue here is you are arguing inconsistently. If there is no harm or danger from these people coming in than Germany can surely absorb them all since Germany welcomed them in. After all they are nothing but a blessing and it is an honor and noble duty to house such poor benighted people.

And in this case, good job ignoring just one paragraph earlier from the very same post. 37 refugees from Ukraine is not 5000, 500000, a million or whatever other bullshit number you pull out of your ass to support your fantasies. And it doesn't matter where they're from. Poland taking refugees from other places does not negate their obligation to take that specific 5000.

Poland has become the main destination for Ukrainian refugee's, my mistake. However they are surely taking in economic migrants just as Germany. And again, why should Germany give up those 5000 blessings? After all every single one is a grateful Syrian I am sure, happy to join the German society and work their hardest for Germany. And Germany is all the better for having them.

You're not saying they are bad are you? That is hate speech buddy. :3

Because Germany being unable to handle that amount on its own is the very thing that started the relocation quota business and your continual attempt at playing dumb by ignoring this piece of information that's inconvenient to the narrative you're trying to weave doesn't magically unmake it.

Germany is the EU's richest member, and how can it not handle them? Germany is rich, if they can't handle them, nobody can. And surely it is just a matter of housing them since the economic boon of resettling these people is surely going to more than pay for the costs up front. Again Diversity is Strength remember?

[Hengwulf]

"Over a million" is a weird way to write 37.

The fact they don't apply for refugee status doesn't change that they are people fleeing from the country where there is war. They are still here, what does it matter under what label they live?

[Mehrunes]

The fact they don't apply for refugee status doesn't change that they are people fleeing from the country where there is war. They are still here, what does it matter under what label they live?

Except they are not fleeing a war. There were hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians in Poland before the war, there are hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians after the war. It's not just that they don't get the refugee status. They're not even applying in any serious numbers. Polish labor law explicitly makes it easier for Ukrainians (also Belorussians, Georgians and some others) compared to other non-EU foreigners to get employment in Poland. They are here for work (mostly seasonal over continuous employment at that) just like they always were. If there was ever going to be a change in Ukrainian demographics in Poland it'd be the EU recently dropping visas for them (and that's a maybe, since it didn't come with employment rights).

The first surveys reported some 70% approval for accepting REFUGEES from countries involved in war, like Ukraine and Syria. I remember the first media reports on the refugees. I remember the banana boat pictures. I remember internet comments, that everyone saw that those boats weren't filled with women and children fleeing from war, but healthy young males, often holding iPhones. I remember that funny clip (https://www.facebook.com/mieszko.fil...type=2&theater) from the very beginning of the crisis.

People didn't need PiS' anti-refugee propaganda. They had eyes to see. So how could they not start being concerned with letting them into our country? They saw what's going on with the so-called refugees and were right to fear letting them into our country. There is just so much negative material about the refugees - which they produce themselves － and so little positive material - which they don't provide, since they didn't come to EU to work, but for welfare - that even masters of propaganda can't successfully twist it into an image of a group of people that can greatly benefit our society, or even of people fleeing from war.

By eyes you mean prejudice, right? Because morons flailing about "ermahgerd they have iPhones" had an utterly horseshit argument then and it didn't get any better by now. Syria wasn't a shithole before the civil war, by regional measure it was doing pretty OK economically. And an iPhone isn't exactly some pinnacle of luxury. But even if it was, rich people aren't immune to bullets or suicide bombers and flee wars as well. So yay for misunderstanding of war and racist undertones of "why don't they wear rags and wipe themselves with leaves like I expected people from Syria to do?". On top of that a smartphone is, well, a smart thing to take on such a journey, because Internet and GPS are helpful tools for it and the phone part also lets them keep up with family.

Same goes to "ermahgerd men". Women are already in the refugee camps in neighboring countries. But they were overflowing so of course some people tried to go elsewhere. Considering the far destination, of course the most going to Europe were men. They are usually taking more risks. Some planned to bring their families once they settled, some went on their own. But that's immaterial. Because just like the rich people, men flee wars as well! Who'd have thunk. It's not like it's 1017 where the enemy is conscripted peasants with the same training (or lack of thereof) and similar equipment. Even if your average Syrian man had a gun, it wouldn't have amounted much against ISIS' tanks, Assad's chemical weapons and US' coalition's white phosphorus. So them not meeting yet another shitty assumption of "what do you mean they aren't mostly women and children like I thought? Isn't Syria just a larger Titanic?" is no argument either.

And damn, what a surprise that the thousands of refugees that do nothing of note for media to pick up like flashy crimes is not reported.

[Sarevokcz]

Except they are not fleeing a war. There were hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians in Poland before the war, there are hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians after the war. It's not just that they don't get the refugee status. They're not even applying in any serious numbers. Polish labor law explicitly makes it easier for Ukrainians (also Belorussians, Georgians and some others) compared to other non-EU foreigners to get employment in Poland. They are here for work (mostly seasonal over continuous employment at that) just like they always were. If there was ever going to be a change in Ukrainian demographics in Poland it'd be the EU recently dropping visas for them (and that's a maybe, since it didn't come with employment rights).

there were hundreds of thousands arabs in germany before, there are hundreds of thousands now. whats your point again? and saying ukrainans arent fleeing the war is even dumber than calling migrants refugees, when like 90% arent even from syria

[Hengwulf]

Except they are not fleeing a war. There were hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians in Poland before the war, there are hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians after the war. It's not just that they don't get the refugee status. They're not even applying in any serious numbers. Polish labor law explicitly makes it easier for Ukrainians (also Belorussians, Georgians and some others) compared to other non-EU foreigners to get employment in Poland. They are here for work (mostly seasonal over continuous employment at that) just like they always were. If there was ever going to be a change in Ukrainian demographics in Poland it'd be the EU recently dropping visas for them (and that's a maybe, since it didn't come with employment rights).

You're just stating the facts, but I am asking a question - what is the difference? They are here, hundreds of thousands of people. Their country is partially occupied by enemy forces, and the fights are still ongoing, as far as I know, at least, so many of them aree in fact fleeing a war. If we are talking about moral obligations, we are fulfilling our part. Why is it so important that some people apply to be considered refugees and some prefer to just find work, if both of those groups meet the criteria of being a refugee from a country under war? Wouldn't it be fair, if those people would be counted as a part of the refugee influx problem? Of course then would be the matter of money, since Ukrainians don't expect any welfare, but I suppose we could just participate in the costs of accomodating immigrants in those countries, who are willing to take them. Wouldn't it be a good solution?

[Mehrunes]

there were hundreds of thousands arabs in germany before, there are hundreds of thousands now. whats your point again? and saying ukrainans arent fleeing the war is even dumber than calling migrants refugees, when like 90% arent even from syria

Except there's a noticeable increase in Germany after Merkel opened up the borders, while there's none whatsoever in Poland. And I didn't say Ukrainians in general aren't fleeing the war. I was explicitly talking about Ukrainians that come to Poland not fleeing the war. Context is a thing. Good job sucking at basic reading comprehension.

[oathy]

Unless the EU changes, the UK wont be the last leaving.
The obsession with becoming one big Generic state will be its downfall.
I saw 1st hand the impact Blairs Mistake made here in the UK.

overnight dentists. doctors hospitals became jammed with people needing help.
impossible to find a rented house. Schools loaded with extra children
basically all local services pushed to the point of breaking, All this was ignored
but Labour and the tories for years, Then Cameron the idiot thought none of that would matter
so he agreed on a vote.

The biggest Mistake anyone in the EU will make is thinking people who voted leave
did so over Xenophobia etc.. the local practical reasons are what motivates people
and the same will happen in this Case. The EU is such a huge beast it doesn't realise the small issues
will be its downfall

[Mehrunes]

You're just stating the facts, but I am asking a question - what is the difference? They are here, hundreds of thousands of people. Their country is partially occupied by enemy forces, and the fights are still ongoing, as far as I know, at least, so many of them aree in fact fleeing a war. If we are talking about moral obligations, we are fulfilling our part. Why is it so important that some people apply to be considered refugees and some prefer to just find work, if both of those groups meet the criteria of being a refugee from a country under war? Wouldn't it be fair, if those people would be counted as a part of the refugee influx problem? Of course then would be the matter of money, since Ukrainians don't expect any welfare, but I suppose we could just participate in the costs of accomodating immigrants in those countries, who are willing to take them. Wouldn't it be a good solution?

Those facts are that difference... And they don't meet the definition of a refugee. The stark majority of Ukrainians doing their usual business of working in a country that pays more are as relevant to the topic of refugees as the two million Poles in Germany. So even if we counted each and every Ukrainian for some godforsaken reason, it's not exactly a strong argument to not take 5000 refugees, because Germany has twice as many Polish people to use as a counter-argument. And it's not about a moral obligation. That evidently doesn't work on on PiS given their mental gymnastics about Ukrainians (at the time they started this nonsense there were only two Ukrainian refugees in Poland, both from before the conflict with Russia). It's about legal obligations. Poland under PO government already accepted the relocation quota. That agreement had no opt out clause. And an election doesn't magically unmake previously established legal obligations.

[Spl4sh3r]

If Poland didn't do this before I feel like it is kinda too late now.

[Deleted]

anyone who knows more than just to listen to pro EU biased headlines will know the EU is dead in the water.

however , it does not collapse over night so the majority on here think well that must mean they are right and everyone is wrong.

the EU will take years and more than likely a decade or 2 before it is completely dissolved.

[thilicen]

This makes me proud of my Polish ancestry



Poland refuses to take its EU immigrant quota. Germany threatens to fine Poland $75 million. Poland responds by demanding $1 trillion in WWII Reparations from Germany.

Are you also proud that pretty much half of their population are currently immigrants through aggressive migration accross Europe for work?

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

The EU is a leeching cluster fuck dreamt up by the "powers that ought not be" as the first stage of a one world government.

The EU was founded to bind West Germany to the rest of western Europe and the Marshall Plan bloc, to avoid the Soviets taking over western Europe like they did to eastern Europe.

Countries have lost their currency/identity, countries brought to the brink of collapse because of the euro, they cannot make their own rules any more and must answer to, and pay a fortune to an unelected bunch who no one knows and for what?

The European Commission is appointed by the elected governments of the member states
The European Parliament is elected directly by the citizens of the member states

What benefits are there of this EU union? There is only risks and caveats and should be dissolved.

Some benefits:

* No import taxes between the port of entry and the end consumer when importing from outside the EU
* No import duties between EU member states
* EU citizens can settle wherever they like and work
* human rights laws
* food and product safety regulations are unified
* science research gets funding (the UK has repeatedly cut back national science funding in budgets for the last 40 years)
* infrastructure in member states gets funding (a lot of sea defences in the UK were renovated due to EU funding)
* The EU is a stronger party in trade negotiations than any single member state on their own
* subsidies for industries that would not otherwise be competitive on the global market (for example agriculture)
* protection of nascent industries against international competition (for example the 400% import duty on Chinese solar panels)

[ArguesWithStrangers]

That is what is basically going on. Economists all seem to strongly agree that the intake or refugees and immigrants will be a longterm economic gain for the EU.

Short term however the burden needs to be shared.

Why then are so many of these immigrants to Europe living off the welfare state instead of filling vacancies in the workforce?

- - - Updated - - -

A member state that refuses to comply with an ECJ ruling regarding its failure to follow EU law will have its EU funding frozen and risk voting rights penalties. Given how Poland is currently a subject of an ongoing procedure to preserve the rule of law, in case they act in the above manner, EU will also skyrocket that procedure to the top of their internal politics priorities and will see it to fruition, resulting in even more sanctions. The same will happen to other cases of Poland disobeying EU law that are currently being investigated by the ECJ.

We'll see if it comes to pass. Poland being separate from the Eurozone gives them a great deal more freedom to thumb their nose at brussles than say, Greece. Furthermore, the US is increasingly seeing Poland as an ally of strategic importance. We can disincentivise the EU taking any overly rash actions.

[oathy]

It's abject nonsense to believe it will dissolve at this point tbh. Despite populist sensationalism the EU is only growing stronger, and due to Brexit (and Trump) the overall support for it (and support for an EU military) has grown considerably over the past few years. If the UK leaves it will be able to do a lot of things the UK used to single handedly veto in times past. A lot of things which will empower the authority of the EU.

I agree.
the UK would use its VETO again at some point. and we all remember the fury it caused last time.
We've had successive governments scared stiff to actually talk about what the EU actually does, And as I posted previously
people have been left to just see all the negative aspects being a member had.

I have utterly no doubt the UK was always going to leave the EU it was just a Question of when.
In a way the UK has been a firewall for a number of countries unhappy with the free movement policies
and allowed the UK to carry on taking the hit, Its when we finally leave then those countries either accept
that's what they signed into or do like the UK and leave.

Just hope all sides grow up and get making this exit as sensible as possible for everyone.
as it stands they are all acting like stupid kids arguing over nothing.

[rosebull]

Well Poland gets 13.3 billion EUR for free from the EU annually, and in return it complies with the rights, laws that the EU draws, don't want it? Forfeit the money and leave the EU, and we know they won't do that because Poland literally has no leg to stand on outside of the EU.

Sounds like sanctuary cities not wanting to follow federal law, then getting upset when the consequences of not following said law are to stop funding until they agree to continue following the law.

[Airlick]

By eyes you mean prejudice, right? Because morons flailing about "ermahgerd they have iPhones" had an utterly horseshit argument then and it didn't get any better by now. Syria wasn't a shithole before the civil war, by regional measure it was doing pretty OK economically. And an iPhone isn't exactly some pinnacle of luxury. But even if it was, rich people aren't immune to bullets or suicide bombers and flee wars as well. So yay for misunderstanding of war and racist undertones of "why don't they wear rags and wipe themselves with leaves like I expected people from Syria to do?". On top of that a smartphone is, well, a smart thing to take on such a journey, because Internet and GPS are helpful tools for it and the phone part also lets them keep up with family.

Same goes to "ermahgerd men". Women are already in the refugee camps in neighboring countries. But they were overflowing so of course some people tried to go elsewhere. Considering the far destination, of course the most going to Europe were men. They are usually taking more risks. Some planned to bring their families once they settled, some went on their own. But that's immaterial. Because just like the rich people, men flee wars as well! Who'd have thunk. It's not like it's 1017 where the enemy is conscripted peasants with the same training (or lack of thereof) and similar equipment. Even if your average Syrian man had a gun, it wouldn't have amounted much against ISIS' tanks, Assad's chemical weapons and US' coalition's white phosphorus. So them not meeting yet another shitty assumption of "what do you mean they aren't mostly women and children like I thought? Isn't Syria just a larger Titanic?" is no argument either.

And damn, what a surprise that the thousands of refugees that do nothing of note for media to pick up like flashy crimes is not reported.

Are you deliberately refusing to acknowledge the fact that the grand majority of the so-called refugees come from countries that haven't been touched by wars in years? You're not wrong about Syrians. Noone refused them asylum, either. Leave alone that talk about "they should be fighting for their country instead of fleeing". Many Europeans that are now preaching how the Syrians should be fighting for their own country would be among the first to run if their country was torn by war. Most people fled wars in 1017 too, men, women and children alike. Now isn't any different. Noone right in their mind refuses to help people that were actually displaced by war.

Except Syrians and Libyans are a drop in the ocean of economic migrants. I wonder if you simply do not know better or convinced yourself otherwise.

Perhaps I shouldn't try to speak for "most people", but I personally refuse to have my tax money wasted on welfare for brown bums that never heard a gunshot IRL and came to EU believing stories on how it's a paradise land where they'll never have to work and will always have everything provided for them.

And you're perfectly right. There are not thousands, but millions of migrants that DO NOTHING. They may not be actively raping women and burning down their own accomodation centers, but they sure as hell aren't working, looking for a job or educating themselves. They do nothing and expect to be provided for for as long as they want. Among those millions, not even thousands have found jobs, so few of them have that it's pretty much within statistical error. Or are you going to go as far in your SJW preaching as to call actual facts reported by the same agencies that deal with migrants on daily basis anti-refugee propaganda?

[Kiri]

Are you deliberately refusing to acknowledge the fact that the grand majority of the so-called refugees come from countries that haven't been touched by wars in years? You're not wrong about Syrians. Noone refused them asylum, either. Leave alone that talk about "they should be fighting for their country instead of fleeing". Many Europeans that are now preaching how the Syrians should be fighting for their own country would be among the first to run if their country was torn by war. Most people fled wars in 1017 too, men, women and children alike. Now isn't any different. Noone right in their mind refuses to help people that were actually displaced by war.

Except Syrians and Libyans are a drop in the ocean of economic migrants. I wonder if you simply do not know better or convinced yourself otherwise.

Perhaps I shouldn't try to speak for "most people", but I personally refuse to have my tax money wasted on welfare for brown bums that never heard a gunshot IRL and came to EU believing stories on how it's a paradise land where they'll never have to work and will always have everything provided for them.

And you're perfectly right. There are not thousands, but millions of migrants that DO NOTHING. They may not be actively raping women and burning down their own accomodation centers, but they sure as hell aren't working, looking for a job or educating themselves. They do nothing and expect to be provided for for as long as they want. Among those millions, not even thousands have found jobs, so few of them have that it's pretty much within statistical error. Or are you going to go as far in your SJW preaching as to call actual facts reported by the same agencies that deal with migrants on daily basis anti-refugee propaganda?

Which agencies reported that there are millions of migrants unwilling to work or educate themselves? I haven't seen such data, so I'd like to.