"Haunting Image Of Drowned Boy Sums Up Consequences Of 'The Syrian War'"

LorMal · 03-09-2015 08:41AM

Streetwalker wrote: »

Ok i'll bite. I wouldn't have risked drowning him I'd have stayed in Turkey. Turkey is safe.

Utter nonsense. Millions in refugees camps in squalor and misery. Of course people are going to try to escape to Europe. (And not all of them are fully aware of the dangers - the criminal trafficking gangs are not going to tell them)

03-09-2015 08:42AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

The ignorance of some posters here is astounding and worrying.

These people are fleeing from countries which have been torn apart by war and are slowly being taken over by a radical Muslim terrorist group prepared to destroy anyone and everything standing in their way and all you can say is they are only coming to sponge of us and that we are clearly suffering much more than them?

The selfishness and wilful ignoring of the suffering of these people is beyond belief.

No child should die in freezing water fleeing in fear for their lives.

We can support these people and we, as good decent human beings, should stop and nothing to do so.

Nobody is denying it's a tragic situation. But taking migrants might makes us feel good in the short term. However, if we take every single migrant currently in Europe, then the problem will grow exponentially and twice as many will come over next summer, and hence there will probably be twice as many deaths from drowning etc.

Do we really want twice as many migrants to die on rickety old boats and freezer vans? Think about the consequences, not your own feelings and sympathy.

Sheep Lover · 03-09-2015 08:42AM

Sadly, this is very commonplace across the world and you could take a picture in basically any country that evokes the Helen Lovejoy types into a state of frenzy for 24 hours. But that's what will happen, another desperate picture will emerge and the focus will shift to the new problem. Leaving this one totally forgotten about.

LorMal · 03-09-2015 08:44AM

ComfortKid wrote: »

Funny how this 1 picture seems to upset so many people, but nothing of the thousands of Palistinian kids being slaughtered by Israel every year.

What a lot of crap.

There is plenty of international outrage against Israel - particularly here.

Secondly, 'thousands of Palestinian kids' are not being 'slaughtered' by Israel each year. Get a grip.

inforfun · 03-09-2015 08:45AM

wakka12 wrote: »

And for the record, anyone who thinks europe has been swarmed already.
United Kingdom, France, Iceland, Poland, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Italy and most eastern european countries have taken in 500 refugees or less each.
Ireland has taken in 610 refugees and we are a tenth the size of the UK so thats something.

Dont know where you get your "facts" but The Netherlands is dealing with 1700 new "refugees" each week. 12.000 Syrians currently in asylum centres

Picture from here

LorMal · 03-09-2015 08:47AM

Sheep Lover wrote: »

Sadly, this is very commonplace across the world and you could take a picture in basically any country that evokes the Helen Lovejoy types into a state of frenzy for 24 hours. But that's what will happen, another desperate picture will emerge and the focus will shift to the new problem. Leaving this one totally forgotten about.

How very cynical. This is an ongoing tragedy on an epic scale. This photo will hopefully help to mobilise public pressure on Governments to do more.

03-09-2015 08:47AM

Melisandre121 wrote: »

The ignorance and lack of empathy for human suffering on here is astounding.

I have empathy but don't believe we should be basing national policies on something as subjective as that. I have more respect for the law and the precedent it sets for future migrants.

If we take in all migrants then we are encouraging more to come. There's no reason to believe these will be the last wave of migrants, there are literally millions more displaced migrants waiting to see how Europe responds.

I think it would be better to be honest and send the message that as awful as the situation is, Europe is not one giant free hostel where you can stay for free. It is horrible in the short term but is more fair to migrants in the long run.

gandalf · 03-09-2015 08:47AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Nobody is denying it's a tragic situation. But taking migrants might makes us feel good in the short term. However, if we take every single migrant currently in Europe, then the problem will grow exponentially and twice as many will come over next summer, and hence there will probably be twice as many deaths from drowning etc.

Do we really want twice as many migrants to die on rickety old boats and freezer vans? Think about the consequences, not your own feelings and sympathy.

Allowing refugees in is a temporary solution. The long term fix is stablising Syria, their home. The majority will go home if their country is peaceful again.

Obviously that is very easily said but it will take time and international co-operation that may not be attainable to sort out.

That co-operation may involve putting boots on the ground.

Either way it isn't going to be a simplistic solution like sorting out this migrant crisis isn't going to be sorted by building bigger barriers.

speedboatchase · 03-09-2015 08:49AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Over the last few tens of thousands of Irish people have boarded boats and planes in search of better lives and they have been welcomed into other countries with open arms, as they should.

Yet many in this country think it is acceptable for us, now in the position of being looked to for help, to turn our backs?

The self entitlement and lack of empathy in this country really worries me sometimes.

They did so through legal means. You can't compare legal emigration to a combination of genuine refugees (who should be welcomed, full stop) and economic migrants who legally should not be allowed in the EU. There is no logical justification for allowing simply any non-refugees outside the EU into Europe, unless you want to make human smuggling even more profitable than it already is.

My girlfriend is not from the EU and outside of marriage, this highly educated journalist hasn't a hope of getting a green card and legally living here unless she gets a job offer of 60k per year (not happening) within certain fields - that's the Irish law and much as the two of us realize it isn't the ideal situation for us right now, it makes sense for Ireland and ensures that the country gets the brightest and best outside the EU within fields where Ireland do not have enough EU potential employees and/or graduates.

To believe some of the posters here, she would be better off joining the chancers from non-warzones such as Eritrea and Pakistan hopping on a boat in Libya. Hell, she probably have even bothered with getting an education or speaking English - just being poor and "seeking a better life" is enough for some people to want to open the floodgates to millions.

handlemaster · 03-09-2015 08:49AM

Streetwalker wrote: »

Putting them up in your gaf are you?

Yes.

Sheep Lover · 03-09-2015 08:49AM

LorMal wrote: »

How very cynical. This is an ongoing tragedy on an epic scale. This photo will hopefully help to mobilise public pressure on Governments to do more.

Will it really? What are you doing personally to mobilise the public?

03-09-2015 08:55AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Over the last few tens of thousands of Irish people have boarded boats and planes in search of better lives and they have been welcomed into other countries with open arms, as they should.

Yet many in this country think it is acceptable for us, now in the position of being looked to for help, to turn our backs?

The self entitlement and lack of empathy in this country really worries me sometimes.

How many should we take?

There will always be people suffering in the world. There are limits to what we can do. I suggest that rather than appealing to emotion, why don't you describe a basic practical solution?

Do we take 1000? Do we take 10,000? A million?

How many should we take? Or should we take an infinite number that manage to arrive here?

We have to be responsible when we start doing things like this. Be aware of the precedent and also assimilation within the local community which is now in favour of free speech and same sex marriages. Do the new arrivals share these views? Does the electorate get a chance to vote on what our government does?

Let's be adults about it and confront HARD choices, not just wring our hands and talk about how sad and shocked we are (which ultimately means very little).

LorMal · 03-09-2015 08:56AM

Sheep Lover wrote: »

Will it really? What are you doing personally to mobilise the public?

That's a stupid question - and totally irrelevant.

While it is appalling that a little child dies in such fashion, we have learned that it is vitally important that such images make it into the mainstream media in order to place the refugee crisis in context and to mobilize the public to act.
(As happened in 1985 with the images of starving children in Ethiopia).

handlemaster · 03-09-2015 08:56AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How many should we take?

There will always be people suffering in the world. There are limits to what we can do. I suggest that rather than appealing to emotion, why don't you describe a basic practical solution?

Do we take 1000? Do we take 10,000? A million?

How many should we take? Or should we take an infinite number that manage to arrive here?

We have to be responsible when we start doing things like this. Be aware of the precedent and also assimilation within the local community which is now in favour of free speech and same sex marriages. Do the new arrivals share these views? Does the electorate get a chance to vote on what our government does?

Let's be adults about it and confront HARD choices, not just wring our hands and talk about how sad and shocked we are (which ultimately means very little).

Lets be human first !

handlemaster · 03-09-2015 08:57AM

Beautiful little boys gone.Photo in the indo

http://m.independent.ie/world-news/middle-east/two-little-boys-alyan-3-and-his-brother-galip-5-are-now-the-symbols-of-europes-migrant-crisis-31498938.html

03-09-2015 08:58AM

gandalf wrote: »

Allowing refugees in is a temporary solution. The long term fix is stablising Syria, their home. The majority will go home if their country is peaceful again.

Obviously that is very easily said but it will take time and international co-operation that may not be attainable to sort out.

That co-operation may involve putting boots on the ground.

Either way it isn't going to be a simplistic solution like sorting out this migrant crisis isn't going to be sorted by building bigger barriers.

Yeah boots on the ground really worked in Iraq. And funding and supplying weapons to any and every enemy of Assad turned out great didn't it? I mean, "evil" Assad and his stability and religious freedoms are on the way out which is what we want isn't it?

Get real. Assad is "evil" because his weaponry says "made in Russia" or "made in Iran" , and no other reason. It's petty geopolitics and Europe and particularly Ireland would do well to stay the hell out of creating even more misery for these people.

Sheep Lover · 03-09-2015 08:58AM

LorMal wrote: »

That's a stupid question - and totally irrelevant.

So you'll do nothing then? Which is what I thought.
The usual "this is shocking and I'm totally outraged we should all does this to sort it" and in effect do nothing and wait for someone else to do it.

Lucky not everyone is like that.

AudreyHepburn · 03-09-2015 09:00AM

Deleted User wrote: »

How many should we take?

There will always be people suffering in the world. There are limits to what we can do. I suggest that rather than appealing to emotion, why don't you describe a basic practical solution?

Do we take 1000? Do we take 10,000? A million?

How many should we take? Or should we take an infinite number that manage to arrive here?

We have to be responsible when we start doing things like this. Be aware of the precedent and also assimilation within the local community which is now in favour of free speech and same sex marriages. Do the new arrivals share these views? Does the electorate get a chance to vote on what our government does?

Let's be adults about it and confront HARD choices, not just wring our hands and talk about how sad and shocked we are (which ultimately means very little).

And I suggest you stop talking down to me.

I don't how many we should take, and I honestly don't know what the best solution to the problem is....but that is not for you or I to decide, it is for those in power, those who know the law, know how to draft legislation to deal with these situations etc.

As much as you'd like to think otherwise, simply cracking down on numbers and basing who you let into the country on how well you personally think they will assimilate won't work.

Yes we need to be practical about it, but no so much that we lose our empathy and humanity....despite what you seem to think these are just as important in dealing with crisis....if practicality was all we needed to fix this then we'd end up sending these people home to die.

gandalf · 03-09-2015 09:05AM

Sergio Georgini wrote: »

Yeah boots on the ground really worked in Iraq. And funding and supplying weapons to any and every enemy of Assad turned out great didn't it? I mean, "evil" Assad and his stability and religious freedoms are on the way out which is what we want isn't it?

Get real. Assad is "evil" because his weaponry says "made in Russia" or "made in Iran" , and no other reason. It's petty geopolitics and Europe and particularly Ireland would do well to stay the hell out of creating even more misery for these people.

LOL talk about sensitive. I mention the Assad regime and automatically it's a "you're saying that Russia is bad" reaction. Pathetic.

What failed in Iraq was the complete dismantling of the Iraqi Government and Armed forces by the US led invaders and then prematurely withdrawing before they had ensured a stable and robust Government and Army were in place.

I was totally against their actions in the second gulf war and I felt at the time it would destablise the whole region. Alas I was right.

03-09-2015 09:05AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And I suggest you stop talking down to me.

I don't how many we should take, and I honestly don't know what the best solution to the problem is....but that is not for you or I to decide, it is for those in power, those who know the law, know how to draft legislation to deal with these situations etc.

As much as you'd like to think otherwise, simply cracking down on numbers and basing who you let into the country on how well you personally think they will assimilate won't work.

Yes we need to be practical about it, but no so much that we lose our empathy and humanity....despite what you seem to think these are just as important in dealing with crisis....if practicality was all we needed to fix this then we'd end up sending these people home to die.

Sorry you might not like my proposal but I'm trying to get an idea as to what CONCRETE actions we should take, and what limits we should set out.

As far as I know we were all shocked and saddened at images of starving children in Africa, which I don't think we fully solved yet. We have children suffering with radiation problems in Chernobyl not to mention those homeless in eastern Ukraine. The world is full of suffering but there are limits to what we can do.

Let's not allow short term emotion to dig a big hole for ourselves that will ultimately turn into a quagmire. We need to think about the consequences of our actions.

LorMal · 03-09-2015 09:07AM

Sheep Lover wrote: »

So you'll do nothing then? Which is what I thought.
The usual "this is shocking and I'm totally outraged we should all does this to sort it" and in effect do nothing and wait for someone else to do it.

Lucky not everyone is like that.

Listen, will you ever send us a postcard when you arrive in Damascus. Give 'em hell.

AudreyHepburn · 03-09-2015 09:07AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Nobody is denying it's a tragic situation. But taking migrants might makes us feel good in the short term. However, if we take every single migrant currently in Europe, then the problem will grow exponentially and twice as many will come over next summer, and hence there will probably be twice as many deaths from drowning etc.

Do we really want twice as many migrants to die on rickety old boats and freezer vans? Think about the consequences, not your own feelings and sympathy.

Of course not, but I also don't want to see anyone else forced to stay in worn torn countries at the mercy of ISIS and the like because we are too caught up in ourselves to help them.

It's not about making ourselves feel good and you know it. It's about helping out desperate people who need more from us than just simple hand wringing.

Sheep Lover · 03-09-2015 09:08AM

LorMal wrote: »

Listen, will you ever send us a postcard when you arrive in Damascus. Give 'em hell.

No you're acting the goat because you've been caught out. Pontificating to the rest of us claiming you're holier than thou whilst in reality you won't be doing anything yourself. Fair play

AudreyHepburn · 03-09-2015 09:09AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry you might not like my proposal but I'm trying to get an idea as to what CONCRETE actions we should take, and what limits we should set out.

As far as I know we were all shocked and saddened at images of starving children in Africa, which I don't think we fully solved yet. We have children suffering with radiation problems in Chernobyl not to mention those homeless in eastern Ukraine. The world is full of suffering but there are limits to what we can do.

Let's not allow short term emotion to dig a big hole for ourselves that will ultimately turn into a quagmire. We need to think about the consequences of our actions.

Unless I've missed something you've made no real proposals as far I can see, except to severely limit the amount of people we take in and think of the consequences....but neither of those are going to solve the problem.

03-09-2015 09:09AM

handlemaster wrote: »

Lets be human first !

Are you being sarcastic?

I say let's be grown ups first. Not bury our heads in the sand and hope that big Daddy US and UK will fix the problem for us and we won't have to deal with it.

LorMal · 03-09-2015 09:10AM

Sheep Lover wrote: »

No you're acting the goat because you've been caught out. Pontificating to the rest of us claiming you're holier than thou whilst in reality you won't be doing anything yourself. Fair play

Drink bottled water only. Bring sunscreen. And be careful of trucks carrying black flags.

03-09-2015 09:10AM

gandalf wrote: »

LOL talk about sensitive. I mention the Assad regime and automatically it's a "you're saying that Russia is bad" reaction. Pathetic.

Eh... What? I didn't say anything even closely resembling that. "Pathetic"

03-09-2015 09:12AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Unless I've missed something you've made no real proposals as far I can see, except to severely limit the amount of people we take in and think of the consequences....but neither of those are going to solve the problem.

My proposal is that as far as possible Europe should be united in investing as much money now to deport as many of the migrants as possible. By boat, bus and train they should be deported or else they should claim asylum.

I know it won't be possible at this stage to find and deport every single one of them. But the problem will multiply if we don't make an effort on this.

jank · 03-09-2015 09:13AM

Eugene Norman wrote: »

In taking people in we must do this fairly. Empty property first. Nama is sitting on lots of that. Holiday houses next. People with spare bedrooms and no kids next.

Not adding to rent or social housing lists. Time the middle classes had some pain.

Ah so it's more about class war fare then actually looking at a permanent solution. How will we administrate this? Will the state force people to take in migrants? Should we ignore the Irish constitution?

namloc1980 · 03-09-2015 09:23AM

Deleted User wrote: »

My proposal is that as far as possible Europe should be united in investing as much money now to deport as many of the migrants as possible. By boat, bus and train they should be deported or else they should claim asylum.

I know it won't be possible at this stage to find and deport every single one of them. But the problem will multiply if we don't make an effort on this.

Deport them to where?

"Haunting Image Of Drowned Boy Sums Up Consequences Of 'The Syrian War'"

Comments