> Yes, nothing says "promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization" like replacing the people that came up with those very institutions with Muslims who will inevitably end up destroying them.
Except that is not what is happening, you nutjob. Go to r/conspiracy or whatever. Maybe they will be more receptive to your bullshit.
>Ok, so what is the upper limit then? Clearly you'll be able to name that number since it exists, right?
There have been various limitations that de facto limited the absolute intake, which even someone like you should be able to easily understand.
> They don't have to deal with it "properly", they just have to deal with it.
LOL. Says the one pretending to be worried about not only European culture, but even civilization. Your nazi bs is pretty much uncivilized.
> And they would have, if other countries and the EU would not attack them for it,
You are delusional. They were obviously not able to deal with the situation apropriately. Of course, Nazis like you do not care.
>Massively less means 200.000 new requests in 2017.
You say that as if you got a point.
>That number was mainly reduced because countries like Austria and other actively starting border controls again
>I don't care, probably Lybia, we could easily force them to take the migrants back in, too. What are they gonna do, invade Europe?
So you want to shit on international law, our own laws, and most of the the things Europe purports to stand for? You are a short sighted dipshit, and you certainly are not a defender of European civilization.
>No, that's how it usually works, when you have 6 months of data, you extrapolate that towards 12 months by doubling the numbers you have.
Lol at your Milchmädchenrechnung.
> And the numbers in 2016 were very similar, which just proves that it's the sensible thing to do.
Total non sequitur, and you have not shown that either.
Here for you: https://www.coursera.org/learn/logic-introduction
Does not even cost anything but your time.
>You're making the mistake to assume that "ausreisepflichtig" equates to "abgelehnter Asylbewerber"
No, I am not you moron. It literally says half of them are abgelehnte Asylbewerber, meaning the groups cannot be identical. Learn how to fucking read.
> Not every denied asylum seeker is obliged to leave the country, unfortunately. That's one of the things I was getting at with my comments.
According to figures published by the Federal Statistics Office in December 2015, Germany has 155,103 rejected asylum applicants living with a "Duldung." Add them to the other numbers, and the percentage of people deported is still not abysmally low.
>No, again, 25k were deported, the rest left voluntarily.
"Voluntarily" as in taking financial help before leaving. They were set to deported otherwise, and if they could have easily stayed most of them would probably not have taken that money and left.
>Eithery way, fact is, there's over half a million rejected asylum seekers living in Germany, most of them for several years already, with no sign of deportation in the near future.
100k+ of which are from Kosovo and Serbia, European countries. Furthermore, what is your point? Your claim about "abysmal" numbers of deportations has already been disproven.
>It's not inconsistent, you just don't seem to grasp the diference between rejected asylum seeker and people obliged to leave the country.
Lol. Just mixing two numbers from mutually exclusive sources, and then throwing in a third number that nobody claimed for rejected "Asylanträge" and which just so happens to equal the total number of such requests mentioned before, is totally not inconsistent?
I think I am done with you.