The Student Room Group

Turkey joining the EU with 4.4 million newcomers in 15 years + & Opinion poll

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Clessus
That's just silly. I suppose everyone should just re-settle in Africa then. Should the Irish re-settle in Portugal? Should Americans go back to Europe, Africa and Asia? Again, we are dealing with population today, not 3,000 years ago. Most acheologists agree that the Greeks originated from roughly modern day Syria/Iraq. Should they all re-settle there? Of course not. Many of the Greek sites across the world have been built on the destroyed foundations of what they conquered, e.g in Egypt and Persia, likewise, many of the sites in Britain have been built on the destroyed foundations of those who had been there before, e.g the city of London.



I'm not going to argue over whether or not before the Normans the Britons had a "culture" that is suficciently advanced enough for your liking, the point is that modern day Britain, along with almost every European country, is decended from many invaders, the nationalist myth that they (or any ethnic group including the Greeks), can be traced back in unbroken continuity to the "natives" of the land in which they live is frankly silly.



I agree with you there, although the blind nationalism had to stop on both sides.



And likewise, everyone knows that Greece was just begging for a chance to annex Cyprus.


Firstly I guess it is somewhat irrational, and I'm not defending that, but I have an irrational belief I guess. And they originated from modern day Albania and the Balkans not Syria/Iraq that would be the Semitic people. Plus we have migratory evidence as well as archaeological that the first settlers of Hellas were Indo-European so certainly not from Mesopotamia, and then the "Greeks" we know from Classical age Greece, and the Bronze age were Doric and Ionian settlers that came from north of Greece.

And I never argued about a culture being advanced enough, you can't really define culture. I was debating the assimilation of specific culture and ergo ethnicity, which has been continuously Saxon; Germanic for most of the Islands inhabited span now.
Not sure about the rest of Europe (UK included), but I think Germany wouldn't have much of a problem with it considering their excellent rapport with Turkey, and how many citizens of Turkish heritage they have. I mean Ozil on their football team is part Turkish I think.
Reply 42
Original post by mmmpie
Does the fact that they were racially similar to the people they invaded mean that the Normans, or the Saxons, or the Vikings for that matter didn't in fact move from A to B? That's called migration, and it doesn't actually have that much to do with ethnicity.


It means calling their children immigrants (i.e. foreigners) after over a thousand years of living here, slightly absurd to say the least.
Original post by Huz
'a recent poll conducted by Istanbul's Bahcesehir University suggested that 48 per cent of respondents would not want Christians as neighbours, more than half wouldn't want Jews; four-fifths didn't want homosexuals.'

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london-should-beware-if-the-eu-lets-turkey-join-6429437.html


This is hardly a reliable poll, How many respondents were there? What was the context of the poll? How come there is no other information available regarding this supposed poll? Not much information is available and as everyone knows, newspapers usually cherry pick their information to suit their arguments and political stances.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 44
Original post by AntisthenesDogger
Firstly I guess it is somewhat irrational, and I'm not defending that, but I have an irrational belief I guess.


Fair enough, at least you admit it :smile:

And they originated from modern day Albania and the Balkans not Syria/Iraq that would be the Semitic people.


There is some dispute, though the Phoenicians (where the Ancient Greek civilisation came from) is believed to descend from roughly modern-day Lebanon.

And I never argued about a culture being advanced enough, you can't really define culture. I was debating the assimilation of specific culture and ergo ethnicity, which has been continuously Saxon; Germanic for most of the Islands inhabited span now.


Apologies, I misunderstood you. However what you say is simply untrue. There is still plenty of Normon influence on our culture, from our language and our governmental institutions among other things. Many of our names are of Norman origin. And besides, the Anglo-Saxons were themselves invaders. Britain is a conglamoration of cultures, all brought to us by invaders and immigrants.

As for Turkey's entrance into the EU, yes I support it, although I recognise legitimate problems (such as immigration). Turkey has been a very strong ally to the west, much stronger than Greece who is frankly, a regional troublemaker. The carrot of EU membership has caused Turkey to greatly improve its human rights record (although problems remain), and has made considerable efforts to help resolve the Cyprus dispute.

To those of you saying that Turkey is not geographically in Europe, if that is the case, then neither are Cyprus, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Reply 45
Original post by TheSurgeon345
The vast majority of Turks are Muslims but Turkey itself is a secular country. Also, Westerners always go to Turkey. Also, your comment is either a troll or you are seriously delusional and/or brainwashed.


im not talking about the entire population of turkey migrating to the west, its usually the lower educated, illiterate, primitive lart of society that migrates to the west.
Original post by Clessus
Fair enough, at least you admit it :smile:



There is some dispute, though the Phoenicians (where the Ancient Greek civilisation came from) is believed to descend from roughly modern-day Lebanon.



Apologies, I misunderstood you. However what you say is simply untrue. There is still plenty of Normon influence on our culture, from our language and our governmental institutions among other things. Many of our names are of Norman origin. And besides, the Anglo-Saxons were themselves invaders. Britain is a conglamoration of cultures, all brought to us by invaders and immigrants.

As for Turkey's entrance into the EU, yes I support it, although I recognise legitimate problems (such as immigration). Turkey has been a very strong ally to the west, much stronger than Greece who is frankly, a regional troublemaker. The carrot of EU membership has caused Turkey to greatly improve its human rights record (although problems remain), and has made considerable efforts to help resolve the Cyprus dispute.

To those of you saying that Turkey is not geographically in Europe, if that is the case, then neither are Cyprus, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.


Phoenicia is not where the ancient Greek nation came from. It is a conglomeration of many different people and civilizations. You're simply wrong there. Genetic studies carried out by the genographic project has shown great disparity between those that lived in Hellas and places Phoenicians settled, Iberia, North Africa etc. Not only that but the Kretans who pre-dated the Mycenaean. Greece traded with Tyrus and Phoenicians which were starkly different people; Hellas had been settled long before Phoenicians in short.

And that's also wrong. Charlemagne is the current ethnic father of France, Germany, Denmark and ergo England, the Normans were simply Franks ethnically, which originate from Saxony and lower Silesia, ethnically and culturally they were identical, par succession claims. Not only that but it was widely documented after the Normans went to Ireland of the assimilation of Norman culture into "English" norm. The only people that really were untouched ethnically by Germanic influence were Bretony peoples at that time.

Oh and also I'm not sure why you're defining Phoenicians differently to people of Semitic roots, such as Akkadians, because Phoenicians were Canaanite Semitic too.
(edited 11 years ago)
What the Commission thinks is irrelevant. Every member state would have to agree, and with the exception of the UK, very few would.
Original post by Risserd
im not talking about the entire population of turkey migrating to the west, its usually the lower educated, illiterate, primitive lart of society that migrates to the west.


I don't know why policy makers haven't realised this yet. If you have open borders with a poor country, what you get is the worst of that poor country, not the best.
Reply 49
They going to increase immigration and watch in a few years they gonna ask for a bail out
Reply 50
Original post by AntisthenesDogger
Phoenicia is not where the ancient Greek nation came from. It is a conglomeration of many different people and civilizations. You're simply wrong there. Genetic studies carried out by the genographic project has shown great disparity between those that lived in Hellas and places Phoenicians settled, Iberia, North Africa etc. Not only that but the Kretans who pre-dated the Mycenaean. Greece traded with Tyrus and Phoenicians which were starkly different people; Hellas had been settled long before Phoenicians in short.


My mistake

Oh and also I'm not sure why you're defining Phoenicians differently to people of Semitic roots, such as Akkadians, because Phoenicians were Canaanite Semitic too.


I'm not sure where I said that I defined the Phoenicians differently to people of Semitic roots, I know the Phoenicians were Semitic.
Reply 51
Original post by Callum828
I don't know why policy makers haven't realised this yet. If you have open borders with a poor country, what you get is the worst of that poor country, not the best.


they have, in fact this is probably the reason they want them part of the EU. since the EU ismrun by liberals and christian-democrats
Original post by Clessus
My mistake



I'm not sure where I said that I defined the Phoenicians differently to people of Semitic roots, I know the Phoenicians were Semitic.


Fair enough. We've both been wrong at certain things. It was a nice dialectic anyway. :smile:
Reply 53
Original post by AntisthenesDogger
It was a nice dialectic anyway. :smile:


lol I see what you did there :biggrin:.
Reply 54
No because it has 74+ million people and it's less developed than what Romania and Bulgaria were when they joined, which stunted the EU by a fair amount.
No, they shouldn't be allowed to join before some European nations (Serbia, Macedonia, Ukraine, Belarus, Bosnia, etc.).
Original post by Huz
Jean Maurice Ripert, head of the EU delegation to Turkey, said on Wednesday that they would see Turkey joining the Union soon.

Visiting Turkey's eastern Van city, Ripert said that they were willing to see Turkey within the EU, adding that there were positive developments regarding Turkey's EU membership process.

When we look at the investments which were made in Turkey, we see that 80 percent was made by the EU countries, said Ripert, adding that also many Turkish students, teachers and academicians were using EU's supports.

The EU transferred 850 million Euro to Turkey this year for the country's adjustment with the Union, said Ripert, adding that the EU initiated visa dialogue with Turkey.

Ripert added that Turkey made 50 percent of its commerce with the EU countries.

The committee's estimate of the number of Turks who might want to emigrate to the European Union as a whole is between half a million and
4.4 million by 2030. That strikes me as precisely the kind of back-of-the-envelope sum that produced the underestimate of Polish arrivals.


http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/137854/eu-official-we-will-see-turkey-joining-the-eu-soon.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london-should-beware-if-the-eu-lets-turkey-join-6429437.html

Is this a good move or bad considering the lack of jobs, housing at the moment?

Turkeys population is estimated at 70 million.


I weclome Turkey being part of the EU (even geographically it isn't) but I don't mind.
I don't care if they are BROWN or MUSLIM- I am not racist unlike some others.
How do you know 4.4 million will be comming here? The UK (a failing country in a recession) and Turkey (a growing country with a growing economy and NICE, NOT RACIST people).
Reply 57
Avatar for Huz
Huz
OP
Original post by The_Male_Melons
I weclome Turkey being part of the EU (even geographically it isn't) but I don't mind.
I don't care if they are BROWN or MUSLIM- I am not racist unlike some others.
How do you know 4.4 million will be comming here? The UK (a failing country in a recession) and Turkey (a growing country with a growing economy and NICE, NOT RACIST people).


your way of thinking is just bizarre.
Reply 58
If Romania was let into the EU which is poorer than turkey and not as fast growing economically, why not let Turkey in ? Also Turkey would help the UK and Poland counter the German-French Alliance.

Personally I dont think its in Turkey's interests. Why would you want to sacrifice sovereignty when you already have free trade ? unless you scared of the EU using indirect protectionism.

British People love to work abroad in hot countries so it would not all be one way.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 59
Original post by Formerly Helpful_C
No, they shouldn't be allowed to join before some European nations (Serbia, Macedonia, Ukraine, Belarus, Bosnia, etc.).


I agree with you in the case of Macedonia, Ukraine and Bosnia, but why should Serbia, with its recent history (yes, I am fully aware of Turkey's history before anyone brings it up), be allowed to join before Turkey. Similarly, Belarus is a dictatorship with a lower press freedom than Russia, explain why it should be allowed to join before Turkey.

Quick Reply

Latest