Great, so all the Birmingham Pakis can enter India as terrorists.
India extends visa-on-arrival facility to 180 countries
Times View
Source: India extends visa-on-arrival facility to 180 countries - The Times of India
Continued from: http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/foreign-relations/58030-intel-nod-visa-arrival.html
[HR][/HR]
Good move or a move that makes India vulnerable? Also, should India seek reciprocity?
GOI must think that all the white people will suddenly come to India in droves, settle there, mix with the undesirables like the adivasis and what have you, which would improve the genetic pool. @Known_Unknown is this plausible?
Just out of curiosity, you are opposed to this visa on basis of internal security or on the basis of immigration leading to job loss or both? Just to get a clearer ideaIndia has a non-existent immigration enforcement system, hence we have >20m illegal Bangladeshis living there for generations. What stops Afghan, Iraqi, African and other refugees from all over the world from utilizing the VoA system to get in and never leave? Remember, unlike embassy-issued visas which go through a strict check of documents, background information, ties to the home country etc, the immigration desks at the airport have neither the time nor the means to verify all the information provided by an applicant on arrival. Are we going to make the tourists wait in an airport lounge for days on end until all their information is verified and they are finally granted entry? Of course not.
So what does this mean? The quality of immigration checks will go down drastically, leading to all kinds of undesirables from drug peddlers to refugees to terrorists entering India on fake documentation, passports etc.
This will be an utter nightmare, and whoever thought this moronic plan up should be sent visa-free with a one way ticket to Antarctica.
This is another bad argument. Come on. Wake up to realities. Real life is not a fairy tale of justice and equality. We are living in the world where 5 states can officially have nuclear weapons(increased to 6 with addition of India) when those five preach nuclear non proliferation to others. Why? Because thats how real life worksonly 45 countries and 80% of them usless and rest are some disputed territories and islands
I don't think immigration leads to "job loss"; it might increase competition.Just out of curiosity, you are opposed to this visa on basis of internal security or on the basis of immigration leading to job loss or both? Just to get a clearer idea
True. But again, I am not going to deny the religious and internal security problems which will be caused by immigration. There are two ways to combat it- the american way(assimilate them to be more american than the actual americans) which is arguably better as evidenced by american success and the other way(block out immigration entirely) like what the most Indian patriots here are suggestingGreatest danger (among others) will be a possible long term demographic shift (esp. in smaller countries) and the social tensions that may ensue.
But my question was whether they are opposing it on the internal security grounds or for economic reasons. Besides, what more can be more hypocritic than NRIs/PIOs opposing immigration based on employment opportunies being lost to the locals. I mean i know hypocrisy is awesome and all but there should be at least some standards to which we should not sink to right?I don't think immigration leads to "job loss"; it might increase competition.
Religious and internal security problems are mostly covered under demographic shifts and social-ethnic tensions part.True. But again, I am not going to deny the religious and internal security problems which will be caused by immigration. There are two ways to combat it- the american way(assimilate them to be more american than the actual americans) which is arguably better as evidenced by american success and the other way(block out immigration entirely) like what the most Indian patriots here are suggesting
I not sure how you come to conclusion that I'm implying that immigration leads to "opportunities being lost to locals" and "destruction of economy".But my question was whether they are opposing it on the internal security grounds or for economic reasons. Besides, what more can be more hypocritic than NRIs/PIOs opposing immigration based on employment opportunies being lost to the locals. I mean i know hypocrisy is awesome and all but there should be at least some standards to which we should not sink to right?
Immigration leading to destruction of the economy is the stupidest thing I have heard! You should go through this thread on immigration . It was a fun thread about how NRIs contribute to their host countries while Bangladeshis coming to India would be disastrous for local economy
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/subcontinent-central-asia/60944-bangladesh-migrants-citizens-no-man-s-land.html
I agree with the points made in this section of the video.Anyway, if you interested in knowing the actual truth about immigration here is a good video :
I think I seriously need to work on what I want to say and who I am referencing toReligious and internal security problems are mostly covered under demographic shifts and social-ethnic tensions part.
So take for example Scandinavian countries. They were dumb enough to let massive amount of immigrants from Muslim world into their countries. These people have mostly not assimilated and have formed ghettos. The ethnic and religious differences between these Muslims and the Swedes will not go away that easily. They will eventually lead to stronger unity among the muslims there and create social tensions (covering religious ethnic criminal and other aspects) among the natives and the Muslims.
The picture of America is also not that rosy. The recent media exposure of marginalization of blacks is an example. Or take a trip to Florida, everybody speaks Spanish. When/If the money dries up these differences will start becoming stronger.
I not sure how you come to conclusion that I'm implying that immigration leads to "opportunities being lost to locals" and "destruction of economy".
I haven't gone theough that thread, but the threat from illegal Bangledeshis's is obviously not from the economic aspects more from the social-ethnic conflict aspect that will happen/is happening and how politicians take advantage; need I say more, I think you know what I'm talking about.
I agree with the points made in this section of the video.
But you quoted atheisthindu for an opinion. That means open season. Anybody can then comment on it. NRI, PIO, Argentine, Chinese, Martian.I think I seriously need to work on what I want to say and who I am referencing to
Obviously I was not refering to you when I was saying NRIs/PIOs are being hypocritic. You were very clear on your position regarding your opposition for their immigration(which was clearly on basis of internal security). I was just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy in the other NRI/PIO posters. Thats why I dint quote your post. . IMO, these people dressing the social/religious problem as an economic one just reeks of too much politically correct BS!
Sorry for not being clear enough before!
5 million plus NRIs plus million hippies plus 1000 foreign multi national executivesWho wants to come to India!
Exactly the reason to make visa procedure easy.5 million plus NRIs plus million hippies plus 1000 foreign multi national executives
Why should India offer VoA unilaterally when these countries don't offer it to Indians ? There is always a quid pro quo in diplomacy.Exactly the reason to make visa procedure easy.
Its tourist or small business visit visa. I do not see a reason why India should not get this easy money. Anyway, no one wants to go to India due to all the stupid hassles and poor infrastructure.Why should India offer VoA unilaterally when these countries don't offer it to Indians ? There is always a quid pro quo in diplomacy.
Millions of tourists disagree.Anyway, no one wants to go to India due to all the stupid hassles and poor infrastructure.