General Chat

The people best qualified to sort out the world's problems are too busy as barbers and driving taxis.

All documents can be faked, and are, everyday and for even less honest reasons ( fraud, id theft etc) But that is no reason to suspect everyone or even the majority.

I am sure those coming to countries directly from refugee camps, will appreciate more than most how much of a burden they might be to the receiving country... after all some of them will have been in refugee camps for years, reliant on the goodwill of strangers.

Can't see what the argument is about.

I agree with what has been written by all.....so.....seems to me, we are all right.....But what the answer is or how to go about it is another thing....We would have to have more information to hand than Internet news.

And ....... if I may throw in my two penneth, I think Caroline has a few valid points which she put across quite well....what the answer is without coming across as heartless is beyond me. Let us just hope for miracles.

:-)

I love French-Canadian music. Lively stuff. :-)

Again I'm not bickering and I think Rambling Rose and Guinevere would agree with that.
Am I to be censored because I'm not following the common thread.
What have I stated that isn't intelligent ?

Thought I'd posted this already....there are many false Syrian passports out there right now so we really don't know how many are true Syrian refugees and how many are economic migrants. So far Canada is only taking people from the UN camps so their passports are more likely to be accurate.

To take it literally...a question can not be daft/stupid etc as it does not have a brain but one can only question the ability of the questioner.

As a teacher I'm sure you have had many interesting questions over the years.......

If i could give a definite answer on how to solve ( or even address) the problems of the middle east, I doubt I'd be sitting here now :-) But I have tried to answer all questions (if I've missed one ask again!)

I can speculate on what I might do/ might have done in the circumstances if I were a politician or a refugee, or even an economic migrant, but it would only be from the perspective of being outside the situation myself.

Do I think you can arm and train a group of young men ( and women) to take their country back.... yes, eventually, but not in the short term, so short term help is needed to give people refuge while others try to stabilise if possible the situation and give the young men and their families somewhere to go back to...as many refugees would wish to do I think?

There are hundreds of daft questions. And I've been asked most of them in my teaching career. :-D

Not sure how many times I stated stay and fight....and qualified it with arm them and train them and yet I keep getting told they can't stay and fight because they don't want to die; they're not armed and they're not trained.

I get you don't agree with me and that's fine.

But there's no such thing as a daft/stupid/wrong question.

Answered by both myself and Rose. Not ignored.

Okay obviously I took it too literally.......I am not daft just my questions...even when I back it up and it's ignored. Sorry.

Where is there a name call?

No one has called you a name, Caroline, I said you asked a daft question. That isn't name calling.

Caroline, the majority of refugees in the sea are from Syria.

"Over 500,000 people have arrived in Europe since January, according to the United Nations, and more than half of those are Syrians fleeing an escalating civil war in their home country. About 54 percent of all arrivals have been Syrians, according to the U.N., followed by 13 percent Afghans, and 7 percent Eritreans. Nearly everyone arriving from those particular countries qualifies as a refugee. Around 84 percent of all arrivals have come from the top 10 refugee-producing countries in the world."

I quoted from this article

http://www.ibtimes.com/refugee-crisis-2015-explained-who-coming-europe-where-theyre-headed-why-2112352

Margee I'm sorry you feel this is bickering, I have only ever stated my view which I fully understand differs from others. I have apologised if I was rude and yet the name calling goes on.

I have clearly stated I feel the locals should be armed and trained and yet some choose to ignore that and name call.

I am not aware of previous topics that Dermot may have been involved in, but I'm sure he's aware of any ants nests he made have trodden on.

Guinevere those risking their lives at sea are in the main not from Syria and are more likely to be economic migrants than refugees. Canada has only and will only ; as I believe the UK is doing; be taking refugees from UN camps not from across Europe.

That said I again state I hope we can agree to disagree in a pleasant manner.

I have removed my offending post. I don't wish to be a part of this bickering.

Dermot, did you delete your thread about big mouthed people? Or was it GR?

Dermot if you express your opinion sensibly, people respond I have seen many threads where opinions of the posters have differed wildly but it has remained civil.

But I have to say sometimes you must realise that your topics rather than your opinion per se are bound to be contentious...eg if you are going to post on abortion or homosexuality ( which I believe were recent topics?) it's inevitable that someone will find some of the opinions 'debateable' at best, offensive at worst. That's not just you of course other people have posted on as I say abortion, probably a difficult topic for any board which has a bias of women posters as it is intensely personal and a very emotive subject, and not just for religious reasons.

It was a daft question because the "local fit men" are not in any position to stand up to Da'esh. They don't have the resources or the training. Their cities are destroyed, their families killed. There is no infrastructure to begin to build on. That's why they are running for their lives and the lives of their children and risking death in the seas rather than stay and be killed in the bombing - whoever does it. They didn't create the war.

Who will stand up to Da'esh? Maybe the countries who armed the rebels in the first place should send some of their young fit men. The countries who made a fortune in arms sales to Arab and African countries - in Europe and in America - bear some responsibility for what's happening. It's fitting that they should accept refugees from this chaos.

Edit to say I cross posted with Rose.

Nothing to do with how often one is on the board whether ones opinion is more or less relevant. The only issue is whether ones opinion or solution 'holds water' ?

I don't think someone who holds a different opinion is "daft" but their argument might well be, because in some cases it hasn't been thought through ...and that applies to a lot of opinions on here, including at times my own, when I see that I have not thought it through myself and that someone else has applied better logic.

I can't answer your question "Who should stop IS". I don't know who can do so, I am neither a military expert or an expert on the region. A lot of people think there should be no military intervention, for good reasons. A lot, also with good reasons, think that military intervention is the only possibility, as IS cannot ( and should not) be negotiated with.

I would speculate that it might be already well trained and well armed forces rather than people who have never fought, I would suggest that along with that there has to be a bigger plan for what happens afterwards rather than leaving the place in limbo and that said bigger plan has to secure the involvement of all parties in Syria that can and will be able to debate and reach decisions and compromises.

I would definitely say it is a bit late in the day to be bombing the oil supplies and routes that IS have used to enable them to fund their campaign. But then 'we' the West were supporting Assad, despite his regime being less than pleasant weren't we, we also deal with the Arab states that tacitly fund and support IS.

Re equal treatment of refugees and the homeless for example though, before there was a Syrian crisis, before there was a necessity to take in refugees, there was still a homelessness problem in this country, it's grown, due to the recession, and government cuts amongst other factors.

Should we be doing an equal amount for those people, well of course, would we be doing it if there were no refugees, probably not... it is a problem which has been ignored and underfunded by government because it is easier not to see it.

That is perhaps one virtue, one might think, of there being an influx of refugees, it has brought to the forefront home grown problems which have been swept under the carpet?

"There is a growing frustration at the terrible waste of so many boarded-up properties in towns and cities across the country. The latest estimate from the Empty Homes Agency is that there are more than 635,000 empty homes in England alone, and more than 200,000 of them are empty long-term (six months or more).

This means there are 10 empty homes for every one homeless family in England. According to figures collated by The Guardian from agencies across the EU, more than 11 million homes lie empty across Europe – enough to house all of the continent’s homeless twice over.

Filling empty homes is not easy. It’s true that many of Britain’s derelict buildings are now in bad condition. Homeless people often have complex needs, requiring a lot of support even once they have a roof over their head. And yes, the ownership issues around unused second homes, vacant shops and public halls awaiting redevelopment are complex." (http://www.bigissue.com/features/5854/a-new-road-for-empty-homes)