|
Post by Moose on Sept 4, 2015 17:39:11 GMT
I presume that this is getting coverage all over the world, especially after that horrendous picture of the drowned three year old was broadcast worldwide. I know there's a general dislike of the words 'refugee' and 'asylum seeker' in some circles (cough .. Daily Mail) but I really feel that the world has an obligation to help these people. They did not start this situation and leaving them to the mercy of ISIS would be simply wrong. Surely every country in the world could take a few, so's to not put too much of a burden on any one country?
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalAlan on Sept 5, 2015 10:39:46 GMT
Yes they could but as has been shown recently, they don't want to go to any old country in the world, they want to go to Germany
As my son-in-law will point out, there's a big difference between being a political refugee and an economic migrant.
( he's a political refugee )
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Sept 5, 2015 14:03:41 GMT
And what do you call refugees from war? There are bombs falling on Syria from the Syrian governement. There are IS beheading people of the wrong faith and selling and buying teenage girls captivated in war. Angela Merkel did the right thing when welcoming Syrian refugees. Merkel is a true statesman (stateswoman?), Cameron is not. Hopefully UK stops shirking its responsibility. It should not be only Germaany's, Italy's and Sweden's job to receive the refugees. The Dublin regulation is unjust. It would mean that Greece and Italy should take care of the refugees, just b/c these countries are situated where they are. Of course, I think other counrtries should receive the Syrian refugees too. Which country is most responsible for this mess, due to the invasion of Iraq? Also, why are migrants seen as something always negative? They cost a lot in the beginning but in the long run we need them. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/04/this-refugee-crisis-is-too-big-for-europe-to-handle-its-institutions-are-broken
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 5, 2015 15:54:10 GMT
YEs the US could certainly help too.
|
|
|
Post by juju on Sept 5, 2015 17:40:32 GMT
I agree with Space Flower. Every country should do it's bit to help this desperate situation.
If we could go back to 1939 and we were faced with boatloads of Jews, don't we like to think we would have done more to help? Yet here we are again, with the likes of the Daily Mail doing what they did then - spreading fear about 'swarms' and thinking it's someone else's problem.
|
|
|
Post by Kye on Sept 5, 2015 18:15:06 GMT
Exactly, juju! I'm preaching a sermon on this tomorrow (I'm not usually super political in my sermons) and I'm going to encourage our congregation to get involved in the situation in some concrete way.
|
|
|
Post by robert on Sept 6, 2015 2:55:20 GMT
Yes...all major nations should take in refugees.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 6, 2015 7:55:34 GMT
An Egyptian billionaire reckons we should find a spare Greek island and move them all there. Whilst in principle, if wealthy nations invested proper housing and infrastructure in it, it could work, in practice it would be underfunded and end up being a costly and traumatic shambles. Egyptian billionaire offers to buy Greek islandThe Daily Mail would whip up public sentiment against the idea - why are we spending so many millions of pounds on this holiday resort for migrants sort of thing - and Katie Hopkins would have a field day. David Cameron doesn't have a heart to fund disability benefit claimants let alone refugees, so that's out of the question.
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Sept 6, 2015 11:03:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 9, 2015 18:36:58 GMT
To be fair, if I were a Syrian refugee Saudi Arabia would not be my first choice of destination - there's nothing to say the same thing won't happen there. The UAE could take some though; Jordan too.
ANd yes, the parallel with Nazi Germany is very apt.Ironically, the Mail has not changed at all since then. Same old same old.
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Sept 9, 2015 21:43:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 9, 2015 22:06:46 GMT
I am just waiting for someone to say that people should be glad if S Arabia would take them in. THey should not. What's the point in replacing one oppressive regime with another? I doubt that, despite what the DM says, these people want to be in Europe for the benefits. I think that they just don't want to live under ISIS. Who would? (well apparently a few silly, misguided young people from the UK do. Never a bigger mistake will they make)
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalAlan on Sept 10, 2015 10:16:05 GMT
But are these people looking for safety and protection? If that were the case why are they desperate to flee from safe protective countries in the EU? They are not motivated by the prospect of safety.
They are heading to Germany ( where migrant labour is much needed ) and Sweden, how does this not make them economic migrants?
|
|
|
Post by juju on Sept 10, 2015 11:19:16 GMT
Even if they are fleeing because of war, they still need to know that the place they are fleeing to would welcome them. They are still allowed a preference as to where they head for, otherwise they would all settle in the first place they came to. I have a friend who is half Syrian. She loves Syria and wants nothing more than for it to be restored to a country people can live and prosper in. They don't want to come here, they want to thrive in their own country. Unfortunately the threat of IS (which the west had a hand in creating) means that no-one is safe there.
|
|
|
Post by Kye on Sept 10, 2015 12:57:07 GMT
I know if I had to leave my country I'd want to be able to decide where I wanted to go and which country would offer me the best life in the years to come. But of course I'd rather stay in Canada! Who wouldn't want to prosper in their own country and offer a good life to their family.
I think we sometimes forget that the story doesn't end in someone leaving their country and arriving in another. That's just the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 10, 2015 17:30:28 GMT
I wonder if it would be possible to establish an entirely new state for these people, as was done with the fleeing Jews after WWII (perhaps somewhere a little less controversially situated though). There must be a lot of space in the world surely?
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 10, 2015 18:13:36 GMT
In answer to Jo's question, repeated from another thread: An Egyptian billionaire reckons we should find a spare Greek island and move them all there. Whilst in principle, if wealthy nations invested proper housing and infrastructure in it, it could work, in practice it would be underfunded and end up being a costly and traumatic shambles. Egyptian billionaire offers to buy Greek islandThe Daily Mail would whip up public sentiment against the idea - why are we spending so many millions of pounds on this holiday resort for migrants sort of thing - and Katie Hopkins would have a field day. David Cameron doesn't have a heart to fund disability benefit claimants let alone refugees, so that's out of the question.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 10, 2015 22:38:38 GMT
Yes I read that. But that's not the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 11, 2015 8:05:12 GMT
The Egyptian billionaire suggested that the Greek island would become a new state, a state of the dispossessed.
|
|
|
Post by juju on Sept 11, 2015 10:15:47 GMT
That's all very well, but what about the infrastructure for such a place? You can't just dump lots of diverse people on an island and let them get on with it - it's not a reality TV game show. These are families with children. They need schools, hospitals, ways of creating, importing and distributing food... the list is endless. Dumping a load of refugees on an island with the only means of supporting themselves being handouts is hardly solving the problem.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 11, 2015 15:52:19 GMT
I agree, it is much, much more complicated.
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Sept 12, 2015 1:27:13 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2015 20:52:04 GMT
A lot of people here seem to be prejudiced and when they see refugees with smart phones, they make assumptions that these people can't be in such a desperate situation. But a lot of people are trying to help as well. I considered helping by giving Germany lessons, but on the day the voluntary teachers were supposed to meet, I had a migraine and I fear I might not be able to be as reliable as I need to be if I offer to teach German.
|
|
Yuki
Senior members
Posts: 632
|
Post by Yuki on Sept 23, 2015 20:37:47 GMT
That's all very well, but what about the infrastructure for such a place? You can't just dump lots of diverse people on an island and let them get on with it - it's not a reality TV game show. These are families with children. They need schools, hospitals, ways of creating, importing and distributing food... the list is endless. Dumping a load of refugees on an island with the only means of supporting themselves being handouts is hardly solving the problem. Sawiris did not just suggest dumping the refugees on a deserted Island. He said he would help them financially to build homes, schools, and other facilities, and give them jobs.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 23, 2015 20:42:39 GMT
I really like this idea and have a lot of respect for Sawiris for suggesting it but it makes me nervous.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 23, 2015 22:39:48 GMT
why nervous?
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 24, 2015 4:45:24 GMT
Because it's playing with fire, it's never been done before. It could turn out well or it could be a living hell for hundreds of thousands of people, and one that they can't escape from.
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Sept 24, 2015 16:55:48 GMT
Well, just look how well creating Israel worked...
The Netherlands have just agreed to take in 7000 refugees. We've already reached that number *rolls eyes*. Fortunately the people here are quite active in assembling relieve packages and finding room in their cities to put up more refugees both short and long term. It pissed me off immensely that this movement only started after that picture of the dead child was shown though. It was desperate before that and people just didn't seem to notice.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 24, 2015 18:56:54 GMT
*nods*
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Oct 2, 2015 17:35:34 GMT
A lot of people here seem to be prejudiced and when they see refugees with smart phones, they make assumptions that these people can't be in such a desperate situation. I've heard that stupid argument about cell phones too. But what has that got to do with anything? The Syrians are not fleeing from Mediaval times, they are fleeing from war. Of course they have cell phones. And of course they keep them to keep in touch with their families. Many Syrian refugees come to the Greek island Lesbos from Turkey. They are wet but happy to reach safety. They don't know how much they have ahead of them. When they reach Lesbos, they need volunteers to help them ashore. Some are so eager that they jump into the water and they can't swim. There are storms and they drown. On the shore, they need specail warm blankets, drinking water, dry clothes, fruits to eat. They need help to get across the island to register. They are not allowed to use the ordinary busses. I know a person who went there for a week, they are four brothers and a friend. www.lbc.co.uk/the-volunteers-saving-refugees-in-the-med-exclusive-117172
|
|