German Elections 2017.

Exit poll shows CDU loses seats but largest party. SPD also makes considerable losses. Smaller parties gain, most notably far right Alternativ fur Deutschland, which gets 13%. Discuss.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41376577

Reply 1

JMR2021_

OP

Debate & Current Affairs Helper

22

AfD wants to respect WW2 German soldiers and ban Islam. Seems like Nazis are back in the Reichstag lads.

Reply 2

Retrospectre

9

Original post by JMR2017

AfD wants to respect WW2 German soldiers and ban Islam. Seems like Nazis are back in the Reichstag lads.

If the AfD's the only party that realises how big of a threat to the West radical Isam is, they need to get themselves into power.

Reply 3

JMR2021_

OP

Debate & Current Affairs Helper

22

Original post by Retrospectre

If the AfD's the only party that realises how big of a threat to the West radical Isam is, they need to get themselves into power.

😂😂😂

Reply 4

Retrospectre

9

Original post by JMR2017

😂😂😂

Huh?

Reply 5

Rakas21

21

Original post by JMR2017

Exit poll shows CDU loses seats but largest party. SPD also makes considerable losses. Smaller parties gain, most notably far right Alternativ fur Deutschland, which gets 13%. Discuss.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41376577

Interestingly the result indicates that both governing parties have been punished for the refugee crisis (CDU are down about 8%, SDP down about 4%) which the hidden story being the return of the FDP although the Greens have made gains too.

Also interesting is the fact that The CDU and FDP together are still 30 seats short of a majority meaning that either the Greens are involved or they do a confidence and supply deal with AfD (unlikely).

Original post by JMR2017

AfD wants to respect WW2 German soldiers and ban Islam. Seems like Nazis are back in the Reichstag lads.

With regards to Islam a large number of people in most european countries would support a tighter stance than now even if not going quite as far (i would certainly support preventing its further expansion).

With regards to the war i actually have some sympathy in that i think the way Germans are treated by their establishment is horrific, constantly reminded of the shame they should feel for a war not even their fathers fought. Personally i think that Germany has a lot to be proud of and they should feel pride in their country and to some degree in their history just as many in the UK feel a degree of pride in the empire. It does not mean we are going to head out educating the savages tomorrow.

Reply 6

username2766878

11

Original post by JMR2017

Exit poll shows CDU loses seats but largest party. SPD also makes considerable losses. Smaller parties gain, most notably far right Alternativ fur Deutschland, which gets 13%. Discuss.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41376577

This is the consequence of letting in one million people into your country without screening or processing asylum applications properly to determine if the claim is legitimate. There is ample evidence to suggest that a significant proportion if not majority of those entering Europe illegally are economic migrants. According to the EU’s own vice president it could be 60%. Merkel’s decision to let them all in unconditionally regardless of where they come from has triggered understandable backlash, after all, German taxpayers money is being spent to house and feed people who are in Germany on a false pretext. The AfD’s rise is the logical repercussion of hasty migration policy and trying to look compassionate for political gain on Merkel’s part.

Merkel and the entire EU should have followed appropriate procedure in response to the original refugee crisis. Firstly, screen people. Far too many people from safe countries were let in and given asylum. Secondly, check that people from war-torn countries (Syria mainly) have already applied for asylum in the first safe country they arrived at in accordance with international law. If not, their status as a refugee is illegitimate. Thirdly, deport those who have no legal grounds to be on European soil. Fourth, start to transition to a zero tolerance policy on migrants arriving by boat (as Australia has successfully done) to disincentivise people paying people smuggler’s for risky journeys.

Instead, Merkel and the EU’s bureaucratic bodies decided this was a great opportunity to to show off faux compassion and let everyone in, even trying to demand other EU nations take people in by quota.

Merkel’s ego has jeapordised any plans she had to accelerate the EU’s federalisation. The Bundestag is more eurosceptic than before and a grand coalition with the SDP is off the table. You reap what you sow. Let this be a warning to all other politicians who want to appease liberal faux humanitarianism.

Reply 7

Kallisto

Entertainment Forum Helper

22

After the results the so called 'Jamaica' unit as government consists of Die Grüne, FDP and CDU is the one government which comes into question.

Original post by JMR2017

AfD wants to respect WW2 German soldiers and ban Islam. Seems like Nazis are back in the Reichstag lads.

It is always the same with the Germans. Whenever the Germans are frustrating with the politics in their country, they tend to vote radica-right-wing parties like AfD without to know what the intentions of this party are. -.-

Reply 8

anarchism101

17

Original post by Sycatonne23

Secondly, check that people from war-torn countries (Syria mainly) have already applied for asylum in the first safe country they arrived at in accordance with international law. If not, their status as a refugee is illegitimate.

You're mixing up a lot of things here.

Firstly, the "first safe country" rule is not one of international law, but of EU directives. As such, it is really the "first safe EU country" rule - passing through Albania or Turkey means nothing.

Secondly, the rule applies to states, not asylum seekers. Essentially, it says that the first safe EU member state reached by a refugee must process their asylum request, but any later member states reached have the option to refuse to do so. It can't alter the refugee status of an individual, as that is governed by international conventions and UNHCR, and the EU has no power to affect that.

Thirdly, the reason Merkel did not enforce the rule was that there was a wide recognition that it had not been designed for such circumstances, but for much smaller numbers of refugees. Expecting a country as small and (in EU terms) impoverished country like Greece to accomodate 1-2 million extra people was simply unrealistic and everyone knew it.

Reply 9

anarchism101

17

Original post by Rakas21

With regards to the war i actually have some sympathy in that i think the way Germans are treated by their establishment is horrific, constantly reminded of the shame they should feel for a war not even their fathers fought. Personally i think that Germany has a lot to be proud of and they should feel pride in their country and to some degree in their history just as many in the UK feel a degree of pride in the empire. It does not mean we are going to head out educating the savages tomorrow.

Aside from the purely moral aspects of German shame and apology for WW2, it has had significant practical benefits. It has produced a largely peaceful and cooperative environment in Central Europe. The alternative model of trying to play down atrocities practiced by Croatia, Serbia and Turkey has led to far more troublesome results.

Reply 10

username2766878

11

Original post by anarchism101

You're mixing up a lot of things here.

Firstly, the "first safe country" rule is not one of international law, but of EU directives. As such, it is really the "first safe EU country" rule - passing through Albania or Turkey means nothing.

Secondly, the rule applies to states, not asylum seekers. Essentially, it says that the first safe EU member state reached by a refugee must process their asylum request, but any later member states reached have the option to refuse to do so. It can't alter the refugee status of an individual, as that is governed by international conventions and UNHCR, and the EU has no power to affect that.

Thirdly, the reason Merkel did not enforce the rule was that there was a wide recognition that it had not been designed for such circumstances, but for much smaller numbers of refugees. Expecting a country as small and (in EU terms) impoverished country like Greece to accomodate 1-2 million extra people was simply unrealistic and everyone knew it.

I concede that you have a valid point. The first safe country concept is not codified international law but this does not change the fact that a great many migrants who are arriving and have arrived are economic migrants and not refugees. The EU Vice President put the figure at 6/10. Having a complete open door to anybody is stupid and only encourages more illegal entry, usually by people smugglers who take dangerous and risky routes. The majority aren’t even Syrian. Many come from poor but safe countries in North and Central Africa. People are naturally taking advantage of weak external border enforcement.

Reply 11

That Bearded Man

22

To be fair - as much as the Nazis were wrong, for the majority of German soldiers im sure their only motivations were patriotism and a job.

Reply 12

Kallisto

Entertainment Forum Helper

22

Original post by That Bearded Man

To be fair - as much as the Nazis were wrong, for the majority of German soldiers im sure their only motivations were patriotism and a job.

Patriotism and get a job were the main reasons why so many people voted the NSDAP at that time, yes. But in presence, it is mainly a vote of frustration.

German Elections 2017.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you