helping refugees

[Hope]

I was wondering if there was a catastrophe in say, Denmark, and thousands of Danes had to flee - would there be such a fuss at taking them in?

Where would they prefer to go; somewhere close to home - such as Germany, other Scandanavian countries, the UK; or South Africa?

[Udayana]

Many Jewish refugees moved to Palestine, eventually creating the state of Israel, ramifications of which have been a major factor in the rise in Muslim disaffection and extremism, and the current crisis.

The Kurdi family, including the toddler whose death has been leading the headlines, were heading for Canada, where their immigration application had already been turned down.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/world/europe/syria-boy-drowning.html?_r=0

[Shaker]

as we look back at the 1930s it is easy for us to recognise with hindsight that that attitude was dangerously wrong. And that may help us to rethink our approach now.

Some of us don't really need much of a rethink, though, seeng no difference worth mentioning between Jews in 1938 and Syrians in 2015.

[Shaker]

I was wondering if there was a catastrophe in say, Denmark, and thousands of Danes had to flee - would there be such a fuss at taking them in?

Where would they prefer to go; somewhere close to home - such as Germany, other Scandanavian countries, the UK; or South Africa?

Are you not following this thread at all? That's been addressed already.

The underlying implication of your comments consistently on this thread however speaks volumes.

[ProfessorDavey]

I was wondering if there was a catastrophe in say, Denmark, and thousands of Danes had to flee - would there be such a fuss at taking them in?

Where would they prefer to go; somewhere close to home - such as Germany, other Scandanavian countries, the UK; or South Africa?

Not really a sensible comparison to make if you are still digging a hole on your earlier point.

Germany and other scandinavian countries are developed affluent and able to support the aspirations of the hypothetical refugees from Denmark. The countries adjoining Syria aren't able to support those aspirations. So many refugees, although maybe still loving their homeland, will take a decision to make a new start somewhere which can give them a better life, not just compared to their current war torn homeland, but also their homeland before the conflict. Why is that such a difficult concept to get. And also why is it difficult to understand that a parent who will be bringing up a child in a new country might recognise that their new home will necessarily become their child's real home - their original homeland some vague early childhood memory for that child. And for the child home will be the UK, Canada, Germany, Australia etc, not Syria. And if their home isn't going to be Syria, better to be a country like UK, Canada, Germany, Australia that can help that child have a better life than relatively impoverished countries such as Lebanon or Jordan, even though they are nearer.

[Gordon]

You are over-thinking this, Hope.

The urgent problem is that people are fleeing in terror from places where they are unsafe and are likely to remain unsafe - so they need urgent help and support and then longer-term stability.

Whether they can ever return home because they will be safe there will depend on whether Syria etc can be ever be made safe again, and if so whether they would wish to return - and the longer it takes the more likely these refugees will have settled elsewhere.


 

[ProfessorDavey]

I was wondering if there was a catastrophe in say, Denmark, and thousands of Danes had to flee - would there be such a fuss at taking them in?

Where would they prefer to go; somewhere close to home - such as Germany, other Scandanavian countries, the UK; or South Africa?

Are you not following this thread at all? That's been addressed already.

The underlying implication of your comments consistently on this thread however speaks volumes.

And reading the article about the terrible Kurdi family tragedy it appears they were trying to get to Canada where the father's sister already lived, near Vancouver. If you have been displaced from your homeland, surely being with family (particularly family living somewhere safe who can help you) may be much more important than being somewhere near Syria.

So question for Hope - if there was horrific conflict in the UK and you were displaced, would you prefer to be housed in a temporary manner in France (perhaps for years and years as you have no idea when, if ever, it might be safe to return to the UK) or relocate to Canada if you had family already settled there.

[ProfessorDavey]

You are over-thinking this, Hope.

The urgent problem is that people are fleeing in terror from places where they are unsafe and are likely to remain unsafe - so they need urgent help and support and then longer-term stability.

Whether they can ever return home because they will be safe there will depend on whether Syria etc can be ever be made safe again, and if so whether they would wish to return - and the longer it takes the more likely these refugees will have settled elsewhere.

Indeed, and their children will likely consider the place where they settle as 'home' rather than Syria. If you were brought up from the age of 5 in Canada (even though born in Syria) would you be thinking of 'returning' to Syria 15 years later as a return to home, or as being moved away from your home (i.e. Canada) - I think the latter.

[Rhiannon]

Right now I think the returning home question is an irrelevance. When you are in a fight for your existence you only want to get through the next few days, then months; five years away seems like an impossibility. Today it is about keeping  men alive, women safe from routine rape and children safe from torture. That's the beginning and end of it.

[Shaker]

Bravo.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Thread,

Double Bravo.

Gonnagle.

[OH MY WORLD!]

Udayana,
Just to be clear, immigration Canada received no application for the Abdullah Kurdi family. His brother Muhammed's application was rejected because it was incomplete.

[Udayana]

JC,
OK, I wasn't trying to criticize Canada particularly, just indicating a couple of points:

- Syrian and other refugees have a huge range of countries as eventual destinations, not only in Europe. There is no real reason they could not be flown directly from where they are to the destination, without use of people smugglers, toy inflatables etc to cross the Med.

- If they apply for normal immigration to any destination they are usually turned down

- There is  no clear way distinguish between "genuine refugees" and economic migrants, certainly without fully investigating each case. The debate in the UK often results in the conclusion that "genuine refugees are OK and deserve our help, other migrants should be left in France"

[Rhiannon]

My ex in-laws live in East London and repeated as truth the stories of 'Bozzos' stealing babies. They were the new gypsies and so the Syrian refugees will be. Skin colour irrelevant; we just love having people to scapegoat, hate and fear.

[Jack Knave]

I don't mind them coming here as long as they go to Cameron's constituency and stay in the houses of all the multimillionaire elites for life.

Not sure that there are all that many 'multimillionaire elite' residences in the Witney constituency, Jack.  Most of them live in the towns and cities, and aren't actually British anyway.

It wasn't a single statement. Any millionaires in Britain especially those in London and the southeast.

[Jack Knave]

I don't mind them coming here as long as they go to Cameron's constituency and stay in the houses of all the multimillionaire elites for life.

So you aren't moved by the sheer inhumanity of what is happening, Jack, if trite comments are all you can manage.

A fellow Scotsman said this a while back, and the last two lines still ring true today.

Many and sharp the num'rous ills
Inwoven with our frame!
More pointed still we make ourselves
Regret, remorse, and shame!
And man, whose heav'n-erected face
The smiles of love adorn, –
Man's inhumanity to man
Makes countless thousands mourn!

There are 7 billion people on this planet and that in itself is killing this planet and hence mankind. These people; all people, breed like rats and don't consider this consequence. What is the point of saving anyone if all it will do is encourage them to breed even more and hence drive us further into the mire?

So it is hard for me to really feel much for such people; or any people, though I'm not totally heartless and I can understand their many peoples' plights.

What I tend to focus on are the powerful; that just seems to be my nature, and as such those who have caused this mess i.e. western governments and powers, and who have got away with murder. This whole mess has come about because the western powers have for decades looked after their own in loading the trade dice. The EU has trade tariffs which make it near impossible for, say African countries, to trade fairly and sell their goods in the EU. We then take their best people to prop up our needs like their doctors, nurses etc., which impoverishes them further, and then pour in our 'aid' (waving the moral flag to show how great we are) as cheap food so taking their local produce out of the market equation so bankrupting their own industries and so forth. This 'aid' comes with strings attached and is used as a propaganda tool to preach the western way of life. The West often tries to have pro-West leaders/dictators in such countries who often are paid off and as such do not help their people and so wars and conflicts breakout. All these issues are used to control them for they have to basically beg or be sycophantic towards the west, just as people on benefits can be controlled in a similar way, hence the Lefties desire to give hand outs to the poor; to mother them in the bad sense. Because of all this we, that includes the person in the street in the western world as well as the other countries not counted as part of the western world, have no rule of law - international law is far from impartial!!!

None of this mass immigration that is going on now would have occurred if trade had been fair and reasonable and we hadn't had the nutters Bush and Blair to blunder into Iraq, to just to name an obvious case.
 

[Udayana]

If we are handing out blame for the situation with ISIS Russia and China should also be included, as their objections made it too difficult to push the Assad regime towards democracy and human rights. The civil war, with the rebels left without enough support to defeat Assad, left the vacuum for ISIS to occupy.

Germany will accept around 800,000 migrants; there is little doubt that gainful employment will be created for them, and they will eventually boost the German economy well beyond the costs of integrating them into it.

[Shaker]

My ex in-laws live in East London and repeated as truth the stories of 'Bozzos' stealing babies. They were the new gypsies and so the Syrian refugees will be.

That's very interesting - 'Bozzo.' I've never once heard the term before in my life, but I do happen to known that the surname Boswell is common in the gypsy community. And donkey's years ago it used to be an urban myth that gypsies stole babies. Coincidence?

Skin colour irrelevant; we just love having people to scapegoat, hate and fear.

Yeah 

[OH MY WORLD!]

Seems some are on a blame game here so I'll tell ya this, the Syrians themselves must shoulder some of the blame for what has happened to their country.

Believe it or not they are the same as here. You have decent people and despicable people. I know a Syrian lady who falls into the latter. Her father was a diplomat for Assad's father. So she was raised in privates schools and by nannies in Paris and Rome and Damascus. So her step mother and little half brother are in Damascus and are desperate to get out. She called Sh..a pleading for help to escape. Sh..a told her no, stay there and die. They very well might be now.

[Jack Knave]

If we are handing out blame for the situation with ISIS Russia and China should also be included, as their objections made it too difficult to push the Assad regime towards democracy and human rights. The civil war, with the rebels left without enough support to defeat Assad, left the vacuum for ISIS to occupy.

Germany will accept around 800,000 migrants; there is little doubt that gainful employment will be created for them, and they will eventually boost the German economy well beyond the costs of integrating them into it.

The reason why Russia didn't back the situation in Syria was because of what the West did in Libya. The Security Council agreed to stop Gaddafi doing the civilian slaughter in Benghasi but nothing else, but the West went on to remove Gaddafi by doing bombing raids where it had no sanction to do so - again no rule of law brought them to account, giving a freehand for them to do what they want. As Russia has a vested interest in Syria they were not going to trust the West not to do the same to Assad. The West only has itself to blame for the mess we see in the Middle East and the swarm of migrants now trying to enter Europe.

Why can't Germany take 2 million if they love them so much?

[Udayana]

True, Libya is just more evidence that the USA/EU are incompetent at handling these conflicts and do so only to their own, short term, advantage.

It's not that Germany loves the Syrians, just that they are more able to see and grapple with the longer term issues. I don't know if they have any ideas about how to halt ISIS and the conflict in Syria and the ME itself, but does anyone?

[Nearly Sane]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/we-need-to-look-after-our-own-first-say-people-who-would-never-help-anyone-20150907101741

[Nearly Sane]

http://www.panarabiaenquirer.com/wordpress/syria-only-weeks-away-from-bono-charity-single-warns-un/

[Sassy]

Andy, ids taking them into a culture that is a world away from that to which they are accustomed as helpful as helping them set up home somewhere close to home from where they will be able to return to their homes once this whole thing ends (if it does)?  I'm not trying to argue against the migrants - just wondering which it is the best thing that we can do.

Why do you think their needs and desires are so different to ours to justify the claims that we'd be 'taking them into a culture that is a world away from that to which they are accustomed'.

I imagine the core things they want are identical to ours - security, a home and a job to provide for themselves and family. A chance to make their lives a bit better and to ensure that the chances that their children have in their lives are better again. Sounds pretty universal to me. How is that somehow alien to our culture Hope?

Why is there country so different to ours? Dictators or people who have never advanced themselves or their country? Why did they fail to make themselves better lives in their own countries? We managed it on an Island. I am asking because if they come here will they expect it all for nothing and want to change our country to be like the one they are escaping?


When we have so many living on the streets should we be housing foreigners not refugees above our own people? We need to get our own off the streets first into decent living accommodation and ONLY then look to help those coming here. Charity begins at home. Get our homeless and mentally ill off the streets and then look to what we have left for the foreigners coming here.

[Anchorman]

The Wee Ginger Dug is atheist.
There's nothing wrong with that...but his attitude in his commentary today should shame many who try to call themselves Christian.

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2015/09/06/the-precious-little-princess/