How many Syrian refugees should Australia take?

[David]

By the way, here is an answer to my first question. The death rate appears to be a little under 1%:

http://www.unhcr.org/55e06a5b6.html

[Mugwump]

[David]

^ That's a red herring because, as the article plainly states, the escape routes were inherently risky and did result in deaths. No sea vessels, just soldiers and land mines. The people smugglers in that story presumably did not have access to a luxury airliner to put refugees on, just as the people smugglers of today do not have access to a cruise ship. The fact that either of them received money for their services does not necessarily mean that they were cutting corners safety-wise as a means of maximising profit.

You would concede that there is at least some risk of death in Syrian refugee camps. These are places in which resources are limited, medical aid is not necessarily available and shelter may be insufficient. There are even cases of camps being attacked by military forces. Beyond that, the conditions are abysmal, and it might well be an entirely sensible decision to take the 1% chance of dying at sea if it means escaping that environment.

Of course it's not the Holocaust, but that's not the point. As I said, the cost/benefit analysis of taking a leaky boat across the Mediterranean is perhaps not as clear cut as it would have been for a Jewish refugee trying to escape the Nazis. But that doesn't mean that significant costs and benefits � each of which may well comprise fear of death � are not present in this case. On the balance of things, the people smugglers may still be doing more good than harm. So, where exactly is the tipping point that turns a scumbag into a hero?

[Mugwump]

[pietillidie]

No, it makes smuggling an expected economic consequence.

But 6000 deaths versus how many saved, and how many lost by not taking the opportunity? You're avoiding David's question with bluster, not addressing it rationally.

The broader context concerned consists of millions of refugees, tens of thousands of deaths (or how many you want to throw in), and a mountain range of un-quantifiable suffering. Who knows what hell's in people's heads, and what actual and imagined trade-offs are being made.

You're prone to exaggerated thoughts of apocalyptic clashes from the comforts of the UK. Imagine your mindset on the ground in Syria!

[David]

Mugwump, you're still evading the question of whether, given the dire conditions in the camps � and yes, there are deaths, and there are illnesses, and there is no other way out � the act of taking a boat is not just an understandable risk, but an entirely justifiable one. That is the crucial point here, and I feel that you're not really addressing it. For, if it is a justifiable risk under the circumstances � if, on balance, it is actually a good bet to take; if, on balance, it causes more good than harm for the people involved � then how can we demonise the facilitators of that transport?

I agree that 6000 people dead at sea is a humanitarian disaster. I also think that 12 million displaced, a substantial proportion of whom are waiting indefinitely in squalid conditions in refugee camps, is a humanitarian disaster. There are no easy answers here. While international governments like our own can step up efforts to resettle these people and to resolve the conflict as quickly as possible, the fact is that demand is far outweighing supply at the moment, and individuals will continue to seek alternative means of escape. I'm not sure that you or anybody else has adequately demonstrated that the 700,000 (of whom 6000 have perished) or so who have taken boats would have been better off if they'd stayed where they were. And if you can't even establish that people smugglers are causing a net negative outcome, you have no place condemning them.

[think positive]

[Morrigu]

You have never even stepped foot in a refugee or displaced persons camp have you David

You have no idea how some of these "scumbags" operate - they skulk around and prey on desperate scared people and connive and sell them stories that are mostly lies ( increasing numbers of asylum seekers are abandoning their claims and returning home and this is one of the prime reasons) and fleece them often leaving them with debts that have to be repayed by their families - one way or another!

If you think for one moment their motive is altruistic you are delusional - they are on the whole nasty little lying thugs and criminals - " scumbags"

[David]

I think it would be naive to consider most people smugglers altruistic, but no less so to consider them inherently cruel or callous. I have no doubt that there are people who act exactly as you describe. I also have no doubt that you are painting them all with the same very jaundiced brush.

[stui magpie]

While we're on the subject of people smugglers

[David]

That's such an easy and casual assertion to make. Do you think the people smugglers who got Jews out of Nazi territory were 'slimeballs', or were they some completely different breed of human (who just happened to use similar methods and took similar payments for similarly risky trips for people in a similarly dire situation)?

The world isn't constructed out of such cartoonish binaries. I also suspect that you're getting your dislike of 'irregular' arrivals colour your views of the people who facilitate that process.

It's not unlike drug dealers. Many people (when it's convenient) portray drug addicts as innocent victims and dealers as the scum of the earth. But this ignores the fact that many dealers are addicts themselves and come from similarly desperate circumstances. As with the worst people smugglers, there are of course some who lie, manipulate and callously destroy lives while racking up huge profits. But to presume that all drug dealers are evil masterminds is obviously a fiction. To categorise people smugglers in this way is no less so.

[stui magpie]

The people who got the Jews out of Nazi Germany were helping people escape from death.

These people have already escaped from their home land, are safe in another country and these slimeballs are taking money to encourage them to circumvent the immigration process and putting their lives at risk during the process.

There is absolutely no comparison between the two and I'm not going near the ludicrous comparison with drug dealers..

[think positive]

[David]

^ Exactly my point. You've got this totally binary view of two kinds of people who were essentially plying the same trade, even though many of the people who saved Jewish lives undoubtedly did it for money and some people smugglers in Turkey and elsewhere do it because they think it's the morally right thing to do. Why not just admit that you don't know anything about these people, their motivations or how 'good' they are?

Stui, if you think Kurdish (and other) refugees are 'safe' in Turkey, you have no idea what you're talking about. There are currently 1.9 million asylum seekers in Turkey (1.7 million of whom have fled neighbouring Syria). That's 1 refugee for every 40 Turkish citizens (the equivalent for us would be 600,000, fifty times the number we've pledged to take on) in a country with only moderate resources and social support compared to us. Kurds like the man we're discussing are targets of racial hatred, mob violence and discrimination. How exactly do you picture those 1.9 million people living? Do you think they have access to all the food, shelter and medical resources they need?

I suspect that a great number of asylum seekers in Turkey are aware of the risks and willing to take them. Kurdi, after all, was one of them himself � whether or not he was one of the guys who'd organised the trip, he was on the boat himself when it sank. Clearly, if he thought it was a good bet for himself and his family to take, he thought it was a good bet for everyone else on board. It'd be nice if people at least considered these nuances before pointing fingers and name-calling.

[David]