This unfolding tragedy around Europe

We pay politicians to act on our behalf, throughout Europe and the rest of the developed world the plight of those fleeing war, famine, religious persecution etc is being ignored. Surely it is not beyond the realms of sensibility for us to expect, even demand a collective humane response by the international community to agree action in those countries where terrorists reign. Allowing and encouraging the victims to flee is wrong, they deserve and should be given the right to live peacefully where they were born and like the rest of us have the freedom to travel abroad and see other cultures. The Russians and Chinese stand by and watch while quietly selling weapons to these terrorists. The west interfered yet never considered the impact they would have. It is time the UN grew up and did what it was formed to do.

Message 1 of 234
See Most Recent
233 REPLIES 233

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@merehazle wrote:

He is posting to you.   An opinion that is his. Some might even think YOU protest too muchMan Wink  Compassion regardless of ''practicality's'' will not stand. Except for BH. 

 

I would like to know what kind of profiling measures the clueless May person has implemented before allowing a single person into our country? Will the Home Office carry out thorough background checks? Will any new arrivals have to claim asylum as opposed to affording each and everyone indefinite leave to remain with a  British passport? Also will the right to claim benefits be withdrawn until each application has been processed? Lastly we have a massive housing shortage, will Miss May confirm that nobody from Syria will be given preferential treatment over our own homeless and destitute?

 

Our local Pontins are keeping the summer staff on through the winter months as apparently they have agreed to accept the refugees. Nice 6 months in a holiday camp free board and lodgings, swimming pool entertainment and tv in every room. They never thought of that for our homeless. Perhaps BH will go along to advise them too? 


I'm sure the staff could do with the peace compared to this lot.

 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/police-called-pontins-southport-holiday-8988114

 

As i've previously mentioned, people who constantly try to frame the "debate" as a case of "us" vs "refugees" are either being a little bit simplistic, or a little bit Fascist (see how it works?).  I guess it depends on their past form and susceptibility to 'group think'.

 

I've always argued against things like the bedroom tax, and the right-wing press demonising anyone on welfare as "scroungers".  How about you? And why the sudden concern of homeless people in the UK? Or to "frame" another false dichotomy, why are canines in China and Romania more of a priority to you than homeless people in the UK? Surely "charity begins at home"?

Message 161 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

Far from seeking harmonious conformity I simply believe that complex situations involving so many factors require a greater degree of understanding than the evidence rammed down our throats by a biased media or a part time psychologist with delusions of academic superiority following the reading of a few paperbacks and exposure to a minute aspect of the real world. 

Below is another view of this crisis, it's cause and a potential starting point to repairing the damage. I do not present this as my own thoughts but instead chuck it into the debate to further broaden understanding and then allowing the debate to expand as robustly as we may wish.

 

 

We should be asking one question over the rest: why do these men and women flee their countries? I believe one reason stands above others: a devastating extreme poverty which destroys all hope of a normal life. That is what we should be devoting ourselves to tackling.

We must create the conditions that will eradicate extreme poverty in areas not blessed with the rule of law. How? By assuring universal access to Global Public Goods: clean water, food, vaccinations and essential medicines provided through systems of primary health care, education and sanitation.

One of the essential factors often found at the origin of violent conflict is poverty and its consequences - malnutrition, infectious diseases, a lack of education, and no prospect of a better life. In some parts of the world, misery has also proven to be a fertile territory for extremist recruiters.

In turn, violent conflicts and civil wars can, in a matter of months, destroy all the achievements of years of patient effort in constructing schools, clinics, wells and so on, plunging millions into poverty. That is why we are seeing migrants from Iraq, Syria and South Sudan risking their lives to reach Europe.

Only by resolving to providing Global Public Goods we can we break this vicious cycle of poverty causing violence, civil war and conflict, and being a consequence of those calamities. Only that way can the poorest be given a chance to build a decent life.

It has been argued that aid dependence never solved anything. I do not regard handouts as the only answer. Only a flourishing private economy can provide the jobs to allow people to climb all the way out of poverty. But participation in the economic system is impossible if children die before the age of five, suffer brain damage due to chronic malnutrition or never learn to read.

There will be a unanimous surge of enthusiasm during next month's General Assembly of the United Nations, as the Sustainable Development Goals are launched, replacing the Millennium Development Goals.

But it must be emphasized that none of these splendid ambitions have any financing in place, which is a shame because when the money is provided, ambitious objectives can be achieved - remember that child mortality has been halved in the past 20 years.

With richer countries feeling the squeeze, new financing mechanisms must be created to fight against extreme poverty. Innovative financing for development will have a crucial role to play.

To give just one example: a levy of just €1 or $1 per plane ticket in 12 countries over the last eight years has raised over $2.2 billion, which has been used to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of children suffering from infectious diseases. And this microscopic levy is totally painless for the countries and airlines involved.

In the same way, a solidarity micro-contribution levied on those activities which benefit the most from globalization (financial transactions, Internet, extractive resources) could go a long way towards achieving our development goals. Soon several African countries will agree to set aside for development a fractional sum levied on hydro-carbon transactions.

This is the real challenge that faces us if Europe wants to avoid the chaotic influx of millions of the desperately poor.

 

Huffington Post.

Message 162 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

My point is ... it won't make a big difference (if any) to you and me, but it will to some people.  You and I have nothing to lose.  We have housing, we don't need food banks, we aren't scrabbling for zero hrs contracts.

 

Football fans are not comparable as they bring income upfront and in their wake, their arrival can be predicted and catered for in advance to minimise disruption, and their stay is limited to a couple of hrs.   It's a different ball game!

 

Yes, there are far right groups, and it would be preferrable if the media did not fan the flames.  

 

Again, I repeat, I'm not saying we should not take people, although I do think it should only be an intermediate step on the road to a longer term solution because the potential number who might seek to migrate over the next decade (say) is vast.


It strikes me as being very patronising and condescending to assume that those who are in need of housing, use food banks etc share the point of view of those against accepting refugees into this country!

Message 163 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@fallen-archie wrote:

Far from seeking harmonious conformity I simply believe that complex situations involving so many factors require a greater degree of understanding than the evidence rammed down our throats by a biased media or a part time psychologist with delusions of academic superiority following the reading of a few paperbacks and exposure to a minute aspect of the real world. 

Below is another view of this crisis, it's cause and a potential starting point to repairing the damage. I do not present this as my own thoughts but instead chuck it into the debate to further broaden understanding and then allowing the debate to expand as robustly as we may wish.



Thanks for the read. I see it written by a UN official. The same UN you criticised in your OP.   If "complex situations involving so many factors require a greater degree of understanding than the evidence rammed down our throats by a biased media or a part time psychologist with delusions of academic superiority following the reading of a few paperbacks and exposure to a minute aspect of the real world" then why have you made a post making a psychological analysis along with your own contradictory choice of reading? You should check out some Yoda:

 

"Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering".

 

I think we need to be wary of those who try to exploit these issues for their own sinister agenda. Be it the president of Hungary, "Guns 'n' Gods" brigade, Britain First & co, ISIS, or even 'those at the bottom', such as bunny boilers on social media: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/10/hitler-quotes-in-the-comments-of-daily-mail-articles_n_79...

Message 164 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@fallen-archie wrote:

Far from seeking harmonious conformity I simply believe that complex situations involving so many factors require a greater degree of understanding than the evidence rammed down our throats by a biased media or a part time psychologist with delusions of academic superiority following the reading of a few paperbacks and exposure to a minute aspect of the real world. 

Below is another view of this crisis, it's cause and a potential starting point to repairing the damage. I do not present this as my own thoughts but instead chuck it into the debate to further broaden understanding and then allowing the debate to expand as robustly as we may wish.

 

 

We should be asking one question over the rest: why do these men and women flee their countries? I believe one reason stands above others: a devastating extreme poverty which destroys all hope of a normal life. That is what we should be devoting ourselves to tackling.

We must create the conditions that will eradicate extreme poverty in areas not blessed with the rule of law. How? By assuring universal access to Global Public Goods: clean water, food, vaccinations and essential medicines provided through systems of primary health care, education and sanitation.

One of the essential factors often found at the origin of violent conflict is poverty and its consequences - malnutrition, infectious diseases, a lack of education, and no prospect of a better life. In some parts of the world, misery has also proven to be a fertile territory for extremist recruiters.

In turn, violent conflicts and civil wars can, in a matter of months, destroy all the achievements of years of patient effort in constructing schools, clinics, wells and so on, plunging millions into poverty. That is why we are seeing migrants from Iraq, Syria and South Sudan risking their lives to reach Europe.

Only by resolving to providing Global Public Goods we can we break this vicious cycle of poverty causing violence, civil war and conflict, and being a consequence of those calamities. Only that way can the poorest be given a chance to build a decent life.

It has been argued that aid dependence never solved anything. I do not regard handouts as the only answer. Only a flourishing private economy can provide the jobs to allow people to climb all the way out of poverty. But participation in the economic system is impossible if children die before the age of five, suffer brain damage due to chronic malnutrition or never learn to read.

There will be a unanimous surge of enthusiasm during next month's General Assembly of the United Nations, as the Sustainable Development Goals are launched, replacing the Millennium Development Goals.

But it must be emphasized that none of these splendid ambitions have any financing in place, which is a shame because when the money is provided, ambitious objectives can be achieved - remember that child mortality has been halved in the past 20 years.

With richer countries feeling the squeeze, new financing mechanisms must be created to fight against extreme poverty. Innovative financing for development will have a crucial role to play.

To give just one example: a levy of just €1 or $1 per plane ticket in 12 countries over the last eight years has raised over $2.2 billion, which has been used to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of children suffering from infectious diseases. And this microscopic levy is totally painless for the countries and airlines involved.

In the same way, a solidarity micro-contribution levied on those activities which benefit the most from globalization (financial transactions, Internet, extractive resources) could go a long way towards achieving our development goals. Soon several African countries will agree to set aside for development a fractional sum levied on hydro-carbon transactions.

This is the real challenge that faces us if Europe wants to avoid the chaotic influx of millions of the desperately poor.

 

Huffington Post.


One of the comments after that article:

 

"Could it be that recent jump in migration from Libya and Syria has something to do with physical destruction caused by overt bombing by certain military powers, and no so covert funding of insurgents to overthrow current governments in these countries."

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/philippe-dousteblazy/the-migrant-crisis-in-eur_b_7977292.html

 

Surely the millions spent on munitions and other "non lethal supplies" would have been better used to aliviate poverty in those countries?





We are many,They are few
Message 165 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@upthecreekyetagain wrote:


It strikes me as being very patronising and condescending to assume that those who are in need of housing, use food banks etc share the point of view of those against accepting refugees into this country!


If anything, it is those who are the most removed from the direct impact of immigration that hold the most hostile views to it.

 

"The further away you are from the impact of immigration the more anti-immigration you tend to be. People who are anti-immigration tend to have views which are furthest away from reality – either in terms of economic performance, current policy or migrant behaviour."

 

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/06/17/the-fewer-immigrants-you-know-the-more-you-ll-fear-them

Message 166 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

@**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

My point is ... it won't make a big difference (if any) to you and me, but it will to some people.  You and I have nothing to lose.  We have housing, we don't need food banks, we aren't scrabbling for zero hrs contracts.

 

Football fans are not comparable as they bring income upfront and in their wake, their arrival can be predicted and catered for in advance to minimise disruption, and their stay is limited to a couple of hrs.   It's a different ball game!

 

Yes, there are far right groups, and it would be preferrable if the media did not fan the flames.  

 

Again, I repeat, I'm not saying we should not take people, although I do think it should only be an intermediate step on the road to a longer term solution because the potential number who might seek to migrate over the next decade (say) is vast.


It strikes me as being very patronising and condescending to assume that those who are in need of housing, use food banks etc share the point of view of those against accepting refugees into this country!


I don't assume they do.  My point is if they do, they are not necessarily being unreasonable ... or fascist.  

 

Books, there are simplistic arguments made by both sides of the for and against debate.   

 

 

Message 167 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

@**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

My point is ... it won't make a big difference (if any) to you and me, but it will to some people.  You and I have nothing to lose.  We have housing, we don't need food banks, we aren't scrabbling for zero hrs contracts.

 

Football fans are not comparable as they bring income upfront and in their wake, their arrival can be predicted and catered for in advance to minimise disruption, and their stay is limited to a couple of hrs.   It's a different ball game!

 

Yes, there are far right groups, and it would be preferrable if the media did not fan the flames.  

 

Again, I repeat, I'm not saying we should not take people, although I do think it should only be an intermediate step on the road to a longer term solution because the potential number who might seek to migrate over the next decade (say) is vast.


It strikes me as being very patronising and condescending to assume that those who are in need of housing, use food banks etc share the point of view of those against accepting refugees into this country!


I don't assume they do.  My point is if they do, they are not necessarily being unreasonable ... or fascist.  

 

Books, there are simplistic arguments made by both sides of the for and against debate.   

 

 


. . . . and if they don't does that give their opinion any more or less weight than those in a different situation?

 

If it doesn't make any difference then why highlight that group and if it does then isn't it even more imperative to ascertain their opinion before speculating about it.

Message 168 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

@**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

@**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

My point is ... it won't make a big difference (if any) to you and me, but it will to some people.  You and I have nothing to lose.  We have housing, we don't need food banks, we aren't scrabbling for zero hrs contracts.

 

Football fans are not comparable as they bring income upfront and in their wake, their arrival can be predicted and catered for in advance to minimise disruption, and their stay is limited to a couple of hrs.   It's a different ball game!

 

Yes, there are far right groups, and it would be preferrable if the media did not fan the flames.  

 

Again, I repeat, I'm not saying we should not take people, although I do think it should only be an intermediate step on the road to a longer term solution because the potential number who might seek to migrate over the next decade (say) is vast.


It strikes me as being very patronising and condescending to assume that those who are in need of housing, use food banks etc share the point of view of those against accepting refugees into this country!


I don't assume they do.  My point is if they do, they are not necessarily being unreasonable ... or fascist.  

 

Books, there are simplistic arguments made by both sides of the for and against debate.   

 

 


. . . . and if they don't does that give their opinion any more or less weight than those in a different situation?

 

If it doesn't make any difference then why highlight that group and if it does then isn't it even more imperative to ascertain their opinion before speculating about it.


and in this system how do we ascertain opinion ? and this is the whole problem we all face in this country ,media outlets telling us what 'All '  our opinions are,without actually having a survey...or if they do, they do what politicians do and juggle it up to look like something so far from the actual truth of the matter,its a biased guess at best and no one seems to know where the truth starts or ends.

I personally would love to have a country wide poll on everything that effects the majority...whether thats country wide or local ,not this well we got voted so we can do as we please for 5 years minimum.

 

 

Message 169 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

I was speaking with our local Muslim group this morning. They brought the subject up, as we actually were talking about the failed attempt to have a new mosque built on a great site suggested by residents, but which was blocked by the council, and the problems with a new High School. They say most are not refugees, but economic migrants. They know people from Pakistan, for example, who are travelling to Libya to then be able to 'flee'. A bit like the family of that boy whose picture went viral and whose father had been living safely in Turkey for 3 years. They think any Christian refugees should be allowed in, but Muslims should find a Muslim home. I was surprised, I have to say. They are not sympathetic to the fighting among migrants that they see. They were generally hostile to the Arab states that they say are to blame for encouraging ISIS and those who are arming them.

Message 170 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

There are posts on this thread that imply that one side of the opinion debate is "right" and the other is "wrong".  But, in reality, all opinions on the matter are along a continuum.   There must be a point at which even the most vocal pro-migrant posters would stall.  Whether that point comes at ...

 

1) one migrant 

2) a thousand

3) a hundred thousand

4) a million

5) a hundred million

6) anyone anywhere who wants to come, total open door

 

... is the variable.  Personal circumstances may or may not influence where one is on the continuum.  If it does, then should this be dismissed as simplistic, ill-informed prejudice?

 

I have made no assertions about anyone's opinions counting for more than anyone else's.   Neither do I denigrate anyone else's contribution as patronising and condescending.

 

  

Message 171 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


**caution**opinion_ahead wrote


I don't assume they do.  My point is if they do, they are not necessarily being unreasonable ... or fascist.  

 

Books, there are simplistic arguments made by both sides of the for and against debate.   

 


I didn't say "unreasonable", I said "simplistic".

 

How else would you describe people who share fabricated scare stories originating from the Far-Right and religious fundamentalists from the States?

 

How else would you describe people who have a meltdown if the media shows the refugees in a sympathetic light, yet say nothing when migrants are verminised as "cockroaches"?

 

How else would you describe people who have a *sudden* concern for the "indigenous" poor and homeless in the UK when it comes to discussing immigration, but don't give a stuff when migrants are taken out of the equation?

Message 172 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

Not sure who is responsible for the terms Verminise or Cockroaches, such descriptions are unacceptable regardless of the context.

 

Lynda made an interesting point above and I wonder how many Economic migrants are taking advantage of this dreadful situation, very few have any legitimate form of identification So where do we start? Shoud we Just say welcome or should we try to differentiate between those who face persecution and those who don't. I wonder if BH would like to share his wisdom on the subject because for me I don't know how we should procede or frankly how to stem the tide. I would genuinely like to do what I can but where do you draw the line?

Message 173 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe


@fallen-archie wrote:

Not sure who is responsible for the terms Verminise or Cockroaches, such descriptions are unacceptable regardless of the context.

 

Lynda made an interesting point above and I wonder how many Economic migrants are taking advantage of this dreadful situation, very few have any legitimate form of identification So where do we start? Shoud we Just say welcome or should we try to differentiate between those who face persecution and those who don't. I wonder if BH would like to share his wisdom on the subject because for me I don't know how we should procede or frankly how to stem the tide. I would genuinely like to do what I can but where do you draw the line?


https://www.nuj.org.uk/news/nuj-condemns-ipso-decision-on-describing-migrants-as/

 

Believe it or not, I think Cameron's call to accept those from refugee camps surrounding Syria is a good one. Anything that encourages those to cross the sea is inviting more disaster and tragedy.  

 

People complain 20,000 Syrians is putting too much pressure on the UK's infrastructure. But, by doing nothing, the increased pressure on the *millions* in surrounding refugee camps, Lebanon, Turkey etc is in real danger of expanding the instability. Which, even if the humanitarian aspect is disregarded, could end up being far more costly for the UK in an economic sense.

Message 174 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

What about the difficult decision in Europe trying to decide who is and who is not a genuine migrant which to clarify I mean escaping persecution rather than poverty alone which could be dealt with if the will was there.

 

Message 175 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

That's going to vary from country to country. Also, some 'hardline' govts will try to make political capital out of this, others will welcome the distraction from the economy or other 'bad news'. Others will dither and hope the problem just 'goes away'

 

Of course you're going to get some who migrate for economic purposes, however, it is no co-incidence that large scales of migration occur during wars.

 

Scenes on TV 'today' may seem apocalyptic to some, but in terms of 'numbers' for the UK, I don't think it's anywhere near the scale from late 90s/early 2000s as a result of war in the Balkans & Afghanistan.  The only thing that's changing nowadays is technology - both how it influences migrations patterns, as well as how it is used to shape and influence public perceptions.

Message 176 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

Watching the news this evening it was heartening to see thousands of desperate people arriving in Munich and then moving on to a new life via coaches provided or taxis. As hundreds poured into the German city an emotional Syrian thanked god for he opportunity to come to Europe, he said he was very happy to be in Germany but wouldn't mind going to the UK or Holland, however he had no desire to go to France?

The asylum seekers the reporter said had made precarious journeys to get there most had arrived from three countries, Syria, Nigeria and India. I need to be enlightened on who is bombing India, isn't it the worlds biggest democracy? And the Nigerians seemed to be mainly from the areas not currently involved in the Boko Haram areas. Are we seriously expected to house allcomers from the latter two countries and if so where are they to be housed?

Message 177 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

I wonder, if the two architects of this debacle, i.e. the Inspector Clouseaus...Bush jr and Blair, are losing any sleep over this "unfolding tragedy around Europe" ?

After all, it was they who, by going in with 'guns blazing', opened this can of worms !

Their 'accomplishments' are all too evident now !

___________________

"Non Recuso Laborem"


Message 178 of 234
See Most Recent

This unfolding tragedy around Europe

A very good video as regards explaining how this crisis came about. Not so good when it begins telling us what we should do and how we should react. I prefer to decide those things for myself, and not be influenced by any propaganda video.

Message 180 of 234
See Most Recent