Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cyclonic happiness

Mediterranean Refugee Crisis.

Recommended Posts

Thought I'd start a thread about this subject and how it's being handled.

 

The latest vessel had over a thousand people on board, and they say there could be as many or more than 3000 per day getting over!

 

Personally, I think it's high time the navies of Europe turned the boats back, rather than 'rescuing' them, which is what is being banked on by the people smugglers.

 

On the other hand I'm pretty torn that these poor folk have probably given up their life's saving for passage to Europe, and their plight is a terrible one.

 

The other thing that could be apparent, is the danger that ISIS could be sending people over to infiltrate Europe by the back door.

 

There are so many faces to this issue, I really haven not got a clue as to how it can be resolved.

I mean, the Libyan refugees we should be partially responsible for (mainly America though).

 

So.....what do you guys think? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why bother to rescue them? Why not simply strafe them with uranium-tipped 50 calibre ammunition? I assume that that's what 'sending them back' would avoid...

 

What a bloody horrible world we seem to be living in! :angry:  :angry:  :cc_confused:  :cc_confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its partly Europe's mess, we need to clean it up.

I just wish we stayed out of it, left America to their own devices just like they wanted to do with us during world war 2, till the Japs brought them into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wish we stayed out of it, left America to their own devices just like they wanted to do with us during world war 2, till the Japs brought them into it.

 

The yanks can't win with some of you. An isolationist policy is wrong. An expansionist policy is wrong. Let's not forget there are 125,000  American war graves in Europe and without them Europe might now be somewhat different place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The yanks can't win with some of you. An isolationist policy is wrong. An expansionist policy is wrong. Let's not forget there are 125,000  American war graves in Europe and without them Europe might now be somewhat different place.

I know that but I was against the middle east was from the beginning, and I still am, look what trouble we have caused instead of what was wanted to be achieved. Toni Blair should have held back, those weapons of mass destruction have not been found which means 1 of 2 things. They never existed or the enemy still have them. Either way I think things could have been handled differently, there have been changes but have they been for the better, I think not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that but I was against the middle east was from the beginning, and I still am, look what trouble we have caused instead of what was wanted to be achieved. Toni Blair should have held back, those weapons of mass destruction have not been found which means 1 of 2 things. They never existed or the enemy still have them. Either way I think things could have been handled differently, there have been changes but have they been for the better, I think not.

But Saddam was boasting that he did have WMD's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best option is to pick up the migrants, send them back to a safe spot on the north African coast (if possible) and process them, as for the vessels they came on, sink them would be the best option.

There are not really any progressive solutions we can implement over in Africa at this time so simply stopping the symptom at the source would be the best call for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why bother to rescue them? Why not simply strafe them with uranium-tipped 50 calibre ammunition? I assume that that's what 'sending them back' would avoid...

 

What a bloody horrible world we seem to be living in! :angry:  :angry:  :cc_confused:  :cc_confused:

We can't accommodate ever single person who tries to get to Britain (you can bet a lot will be heading for here too).

 

Like I said, I'm in two minds, it's not just a case of 'send the bu**ers back' , although I'm sure there are plenty of folk out there willing to do just that.

 

Africa is a vast continent, Europe is the smallest, We cannot keep accepting people, I haven't got the money to fund it....have you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The yanks can't win with some of you. An isolationist policy is wrong. An expansionist policy is wrong. Let's not forget there are 125,000  American war graves in Europe and without them Europe might now be somewhat different place.

Exactly, and many many many more people would have died in the Nazi concentration camps had the Americans not been instrumentally helpful in their liberation - and yes, Europe could have been a very different place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Exactly, and many many many more people would have died in the Nazi concentration camps had the Americans not been instrumentally helpful in their liberation - and yes, Europe could have been a very different place.

And would have been this way if not for Japan, is my point. They were willing to let this happen till the war came to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we really need to do is invest in these countries that people are desperate to leave, create economic wealth that is self sustaining, solidify a middle socio-economic group at least and this will encourage people to stay. This sounds simple, you just incubate enterprise - there'll be plenty of aspiring entrepreneurs just like Taiwan and Vietnam etc. - but what the latter had was relative stability and freedom from fear - no religious extremism and brutality. We could offer the resources, but we'd have to stop (not just the UK and the US but worldwide) spending our money on killing machines which perpetuates the whole process anyway. Since this is unlikely to ever happen, there is no sign of a solution - and I'm afraid I have none either. Until the human race becomes civilised and learns the benefits of cooperation from species lower than themselves (in the absence of a visit from a more intelligent form of life) then we are condemned to witness this unutterable suffering and be powerless to prevent it.

 

Crikey..this is depressing evening material...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, and many many many more people would have died in the Nazi concentration camps had the Americans not been instrumentally helpful in their liberation - and yes, Europe could have been a very different place.

I don't agree, SC: had the UK and the USA bombed Auschwitz, Sobibor and Belsen in 1943 - when everyone knew what was going on - we could have saved millions of Jewish lives...But we chose not to!

We can't accommodate ever single person who tries to get to Britain (you can bet a lot will be heading for here too).

 

Like I said, I'm in two minds, it's not just a case of 'send the bu**ers back' , although I'm sure there are plenty of folk out there willing to do just that.

 

Africa is a vast continent, Europe is the smallest, We cannot keep accepting people, I haven't got the money to fund it....have you?

No, we can't. But 'sending the buggers back' is not the answer. Where is our humanity!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And would have been this way if not for Japan, is my point. They were willing to let this happen till the war came to them.

Interesting - now you are questioning moral motivation. Is it still good if you are pushed into it or if the good is in your self interest? Or does good have to be purely motivated by the desire to do good? I think not - good, if it's defined by preventing many people from rotting alive in their thousands, emaciated and in agony is good. If Japan's provocation was a prod, then it's still good.

 

BTW I think we agree with each other, just differently!  :friends: - please!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we really need to do is invest in these countries that people are desperate to leave, create economic wealth that is self sustaining, solidify a middle socio-economic group at least and this will encourage people to stay. This sounds simple, you just incubate enterprise - there'll be plenty of aspiring entrepreneurs just like Taiwan and Vietnam etc. - but what the latter had was relative stability and freedom from fear - no religious extremism and brutality. We could offer the resources, but we'd have to stop (not just the UK and the US but worldwide) spending our money on killing machines which perpetuates the whole process anyway. Since this is unlikely to ever happen, there is no sign of a solution - and I'm afraid I have none either. Until the human race becomes civilised and learns the benefits of cooperation from species lower than themselves (in the absence of a visit from a more intelligent form of life) then we are condemned to witness this unutterable suffering and be powerless to prevent it.

 

Crikey..this is depressing evening material...

I agree!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree, SC: had the UK and the USA bombed Auschwitz, Sobibor and Belsen in 1943 - when everyone knew what was going on - we could have saved millions of Jewish lives...But we chose not to!

We cannot torture ourselves over decisions made without hindsight - it is not a human faculty. Choices were made on information and national and personal interest. Last year I visited the site of the Nuremberg rallies which has much of the history of the Nazi regime. Other than Potsdam, I have not visited an actual camp but will within my lifetime. What I concluded was that however horrific, you can analyse history, you can't change it, but you can bloody learn from it - the first two we keep pursuing, the latter we seem to ignore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Saddam was boasting that he did have WMD's...

 

And the last UN weapons inspection in 1998 before they were kicked out listed WMDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the last UN weapons inspection in 1998 before they were kicked out listed WMDs.

Ergo, he got what he deserved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG there are some heartless fcuks out there. Really makes you proud.

 

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/the-replies-to-this-tweet-about-rescuing-migrants-in-the-mediterranean-will-make-you-despair--WkD0NneZWx

 

The replies to this tweet about rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean will make you despair

 

 

This is good:

 

17499-3ysvn.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG there are some heartless fcuks out there. Really makes you proud.

 

 

This is good:

 

17499-3ysvn.jpg

Where did you find that? Brilliant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be frank, the current flow of refugees from the shores of N Africa is a cluster f of our, the West's, own making. I'm never going to defend the likes of Gaddafi, Assad, Hussein etc, they undoubtedly are/were nasty dictators, but maybe that's the most stable form of government in that region. If we're playing a pure numbers game in terms of deaths there is no doubt there are more people dying in North Africa, the Med and the Middle East now than there ever were under the previous dictatorships. WMD or not, and I doubt they ever had any of any worth, they were never a serious military or security threat to 'the West' and anyone who believes that the military actions carried out under that banner were honestly 'to protect our way of life' are being naive.

It's only since we meddled and destabilised the region that the people traffickers have managed to set up thier operations, and have the vast number of 'customers' that they do. That said, we can't absolve ourselves of responsibility and let them drown en masse. Neither should we be granting them residency in our countries unless they're is a very good reason to as that does nothing to deter the flow for one thing. I'd advocate a rescue policy but with them being returned to the country they last departed from. But that's easier said than done because it's unlikely those countries are going to accept them, even if they have an effective government to discuss the possibility with.

As I said at the start, it's a real cluster f with no easy and humane solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we really need to do is invest in these countries that people are desperate to leave, create economic wealth that is self sustaining, solidify a middle socio-economic group at least and this will encourage people to stay. This sounds simple, you just incubate enterprise - there'll be plenty of aspiring entrepreneurs just like Taiwan and Vietnam etc. - but what the latter had was relative stability and freedom from fear - no religious extremism and brutality. We could offer the resources, but we'd have to stop (not just the UK and the US but worldwide) spending our money on killing machines which perpetuates the whole process anyway. Since this is unlikely to ever happen, there is no sign of a solution - and I'm afraid I have none either. Until the human race becomes civilised and learns the benefits of cooperation from species lower than themselves (in the absence of a visit from a more intelligent form of life) then we are condemned to witness this unutterable suffering and be powerless to prevent it.

 

Crikey..this is depressing evening material...

Trouble is, the more people there are, the less civilised we become. 

 

Makes you wonder what the next method of mass murder will involve, but it will certainly be efficient and evil.

 

There aren't many 'civilised' people on earth, we're just educated, violent animals.....worse than animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be frank, the current flow of refugees from the shores of N Africa is a cluster f of our, the West's, own making. I'm never going to defend the likes of Gaddafi, Assad, Hussein etc, they undoubtedly are/were nasty dictators, but maybe that's the most stable form of government in that region. If we're playing a pure numbers game in terms of deaths there is no doubt there are more people dying in North Africa, the Med and the Middle East now than there ever were under the previous dictatorships. WMD or not, and I doubt they ever had any of any worth, they were never a serious military or security threat to 'the West' and anyone who believes that the military actions carried out under that banner were honestly 'to protect our way of life' are being naive.

It's only since we meddled and destabilised the region that the people traffickers have managed to set up thier operations, and have the vast number of 'customers' that they do. That said, we can't absolve ourselves of responsibility and let them drown en masse. Neither should we be granting them residency in our countries unless they're is a very good reason to as that does nothing to deter the flow for one thing. I'd advocate a rescue policy but with them being returned to the country they last departed from. But that's easier said than done because it's unlikely those countries are going to accept them, even if they have an effective government to discuss the possibility with.

As I said at the start, it's a real cluster f with no easy and humane solution.

Was what I was trying to say but I'm not very articulate, went for the how we messed up approach. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of nonsense. What the fcuk are you on about! Do you really believe that that is all we stand for?

Seeing your overly aggressive and ironic responses, I stand by my statement!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WMD or not, and I doubt they ever had any of any worth, they were never a serious military or security threat to 'the West' and anyone who believes that the military actions carried out under that banner were honestly 'to protect our way of life' are being naive.

 

Sure, it was all about oil. That's why Iraq and Libya got the cavalry, but e.g. Zimbabwe doesn't.

 

But then we knew that.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/20/iraq-war-oil-resources-energy-peak-scarcity-economy

 

Iraq invasion was about oil
 
Maximising Persian Gulf oil flows to avert a potential global energy crisis motivated Iraq War planners - not WMD or democracy.
 

 

 
But then the US didn't care that much about the grand mess that was made in Libya and Iraq recently because hey, they had shale oil! But now that's going belly up we are all looking at one mother of a potential oil price rise in the not to distant whilst ISIS compound that and send more fleeing to Europe.
 
I'm not sure the UK and US could have screwed this up better if they had tried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...