We have come a long way since "We don't negotiate with terrorists".
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
118 points (100.0% liked)
Europe
10534 readers
892 users here now
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Not really, business with genociders was as usual
I know it might be hard to grasp, but there is more to German history than WW2.
I am pretty sure is isn't talking about the genocide 80 years ago, but about the many genocides since then.
I'm talking about genocide conducted by dear middle eastern ally of Germany.
Which makes even less sense as the German Autumn is further in the past than Israels current atrocities.
That is totally insane and the people responsible should be put on trial: Today Pakistan declared "open war" against the taliban with airstrikes on Kabul:
So the Merz government has done a shady deal with the Taliban and are now deporting people into an active warzone. That escalation is also not coming out of the blue, but everybody who payed attention knew about it. So what the fuck is the government doing here?
Merz and his government have lost touch with reality even before they got elected. They‘re a bunch of multi millionaires who‘s biggest mission is to fuck with everything still good in the world it seems. Pretty much all their policies are flat out bad for 99% of the population while they are among the remaining 1%.
The Nazis raising again in germany. Im scared.
Look at who's being deported before you write something dumb
The 20 being deported are convicted rapists and drug traffickers who were in Germany illegally. These are not the people you want to defend.
Doesn't matter. Human rights also apply to rapists and drug traffickers.
Very uncomfortable point to make, but also very true
What human rights are being violated here? Immigrating to Germany or any country is not a right, it's a privilege. These individuals went to Germany illegally, then committed serious crimes, were found guilty, and now they're getting deported back to their country because they longer qualify for asylum. This is like the most basic and most common sense immigration policy to have, calling it a human rights violation is asinine.
You are being incredibly shady. What do you think the Taliban will do to those people?
If someone is in Germany and is convicted of a crime then they have to go to prison in Germany.
Probably nothing. This is the Taliban we're talking about. They don't care about things crimes committed against non believers. All 20 of the deported are Afghani men, as long as they show loyalty to the Taliban, they'll probably be left alone.
If someone is in Germany and is convicted of a crime then they have to go to prison in Germany.
My understanding is that if they're convicted of a crime in Germany, they serve their sentence first and then get deported right after.
What human rights are being violated here?
Article 14
Here's what article 14 says:
Article 14
Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
The principle behind this article only applies to genuine cases of political prosecution, where the person seeking refuge is doing so in good faith. Countries can and often do reject asylum cases where the person seeking asylum either lies on their application or commits serious crimes inside the country they're seeking refuge in. I don't see these individuals being deported as a violation of this article.
They deported criminals, but do I really have to explain that those too, have rights? Rights that will be violated the second they set foot on Afghan soil?
You can't just handwaved rights away when things get uncomfortable. Rights are there for everyone or they aren't. If they can deport criminals to war zones or places where said criminals may face execution or torture, they can do that with you too
If they can deport criminals to war zones or places where said criminals may face execution or torture, they can do that with you too
But Afghanistan isn't a war zone anymore and there's no evidence that these individuals are going to be tortured. If there was credible evidence that this deportations would lead to state sanctioned torture, then you would be right, and these deportations should be halted. However, Germany has made similar deportations in the previous years and there hasn't been any reported incidents of torture of any of the deportees.
@Gorilladrums @phoenixz
If there had been, who would be doing the reporting?
I'm pretty sure countries like Germany ask for guarantees like occasional checks on the well being of the deportees from the Taliban as a part of the deal. Since the Taliban desperately wants recognition, they'll follow through with the terms.
@Gorilladrums
I guess the fact you're "pretty sure" is encouraging. Along with "no evidence that these individuals are going to be tortured".
What we really need is ACTUAL evidence that they are NOT mistreated on their return. THAT is what is absent.
Personally, I don't see how Germany could care less once it's no longer their problem.
Because I'm not familiar with the specific terms to give exact answers, I'm just saying that this deal is very likely to follow the trend of similar deals that Germany made before
How do you know they were in Germany illegaly, anyway? The article does not state that?
Germany had similar deportations before, and the previous ones consisted of foreign nationals who committed serious crimes in Germany, got their asylum cases rejected, and we're sent back to the country they came from.
Makes sense. Occupy a country to bring freedom and democracy™, fail horribly, kill a lot of people while at it and in the end deport more people to be killed and tortured 👍
Mission accomplished!
You sound dumb as hell. These 20 are literally Afghan nationals who entered Germany illegally, committed heinous crimes, got convicted in courts, and they're being sent back to their country because they'll never get approved for asylum. How can anyone feel any sort of sympathy to literal rapists and drug traffickers?
got convicted in courts
Last I checked being deported was no penalty in German criminal code.
So those literal rapists and drug traffickers walk free in Afghanistan?
Mission accomplished, such dramatic charges, much wow.
They're not being deported as a punishment, they're being deported because they're in Germany illegal and are no longer qualified to have an asylum case, so they're being sent back to their country.
What is it now? Are they deported because they're illegal or because the are "convicted of heinous crimes (drug trafficking and rape)", as you wrote before?
And if they're "only illegal": how can they not be qualified for an asylum case, if their country tortures and murders political opponents?
Edit: and if they're criminals, but are deported because they're illegal: where's the justice in that? The law states 6 months to 5 years minimum for different acts of rape, for example. So they get a free pass now, because they're of another nationality? Society deems that the proper punishment for rape, apparently, so why are they not punished accordingly, then? And our juidical system thinks of people who served their sentence as redeemed, so after their sentence they could qualify for asylum again, as maybe Afghanistan is still unsafe then, but they're redeemed?!
What is it now? Are they deported because they’re illegal or because the are “convicted of heinous crimes (drug trafficking and rape)”, as you wrote before?
It's not complicated:
Foreign national enters the country illegally to seek asylum (which is fine) -> commits a serious crime -> their asylum case is no longer valid -> they no longer have legal status to remain the country -> deported
So they get a free pass now, because they’re of another nationality?
They don't. They almost carry out their sentence in Germany first and the get deported right after. This is not a get out jail free card. This is a you're leaving the country after you finish your sentence in jail card.
It is very complicated.
commits a serious crime -> their asylum case is no longer valid
If their asylum case is dismissed because of crimes, that would be a direct violation of human rights. The right to asylum does not depend on whether you're a nice or very shitty person.
They almost carry out their sentence in Germany
So in the eyes of the law they're redeemed and attoned? How is their crime then relevant in the legal discussion about deportation? You, personally, can still hate them for their crimes, the state cannot. So it's back to "do they have a reason for asylum?". I'd say yes, very much, it's an easy case for Afghanistan.
The right to asylum does not depend on whether you're a nice or very shitty person.
But it does depend on whether or not you're a genuine threat to society, which these individuals are.
So in the eyes of the law they're redeemed and attoned?
They're not German citizens or residents. Germany has no obligation to keep them in the country. They lost their legal status and chance at attaining asylum when they committing the crimes, and they're no longer allowed in the country once they serve their sentences.
I'd say yes, very much, it's an easy case for Afghanistan.
I'm not sure why you're willing to go so far to defend literal rapists being deported, but there's no credible evidence that the Taliban has gone after any of the deportees from the previous deportation rounds that Germany made. These are muslim Afghani men who were rejected from the west, I think the Taliban will embrace them if anything.
Ah, that clears up your misundestanding. You misinterpret the second paragraph in Article 14.
The second point of Article 14 is not about "you lose your right to asylum if you perpetrate a crime". It is about "you cannot claim asylum for the prosecution of a crime". So if they were e.g. commiting murder in Afghanistan, fled from there and claimed asylum in Germany, because they were prosecuted in Afghanistan for said murder, they had no right to asylum.
But it does depend
No. Here's the funny thing: having human rights depends on nothing! That is what makes them 'universal' and 'inalienable'.
chance at attaining asylum when they committing the crimes
Again not how human rights work. I'm pretty sure that even the state has better reasoning for the deports than you, as this would be such a blatant violation of human rights, that it would be very awkward for Germany.
go so far to defend literal rapists
You made that allegation often in this thread. But you do realize that defending the individual and their deed is very different from defending their rights? All those 'Western' and 'Christian' values? Here we could really show them and fill those words with meaning. Having values and standing for them becomes hard, when you have to apply them to rapists, yes. But that's also the test, whether you're serious about those grandiose values.
No. Here’s the funny thing: having human rights depends on nothing! That is what makes them ‘universal’ and ‘inalienable’.
Yes, they do. What alternate world do you live in? The UN declaration of human rights is nothing more than a listing of guiding principles to establish liberal based international order. The right to seek asylum literally has conditional in the original document. Like what are we even talking about?
Again not how human rights work. I’m pretty sure that even the state has better reasoning for the deports than you, as this would be such a blatant violation of human rights, that it would be very awkward for Germany.
It's not a violation. You can repeat the same thing like a broken record, but it doesn't mean anything if it's not true. Germany doesn't have to host them if they are a danger to German society or if they lied about their claim to asylum. It'll only be a violation of human rights IF their claim to asylum was genuine AND they aren't causing real harm to the host society. In this case, they violated both and therefore their cases got rejected. They're not entitled to be in Germany or any country, again, this is literally baked in into article 14 of the human rights declaration.
You made that allegation often in this thread. But you do realize that defending the individual and their deed is very different from defending their rights?
That's not allegation. That's literally what you're doing. You don't seem to understand that you DON'T have a moral argument here. Germany is acting in accordance with human rights, the people in question got due process, deserve to get deported, and they got due process. What is there to complain about? It's not like this is the first round of deportations to Afghanistan under the Taliban that Germany has had, and there has been no credible reports or evidence that any of the deportees have been abused or tortured for being deported. If that's the case, why are you so hellbent here to defend these criminals? Your central argument simply doesn't hold, and therefore, it's not unreasonable to assume that you're just defending the criminals because you think they're entitled to be in Germany no matter what.
@Gorilladrums @kossa
"IF their claim to asylum was genuine AND they aren’t causing real harm to the host society."
So, logically, if the "IF" condition is True and the "AND" condition is False, they maintain their rights to asylum. 🤷
"Moral arguments" are subjective. (Especially in this thread. 😏) "Send them to certain death" & "All humans have rights" can both claim subjective moral rectitude. 🤷
to bring freedom and democracy
Which never is the real reason.
fail horribly
It could be a success. We don't know.
They deported criminals, but do I really have to explain that those too, have rights? Rights that will be violated the second they set foot on Afghan soil?
You can't just handwaved rights away when things get uncomfortable. Rights are there for everyone or they aren't. If they can deport criminals to war zones or places where said criminals may face execution or torture, they can do that with you too