We think we have refugee problems....

[Aaron Sice]

The camp location looks like a nice desert like plain in a remote area. "Open arms" at a distance? The camp provides symbiotic economic benefits to Jordan in sustaining and maintaining the camp?

in case you kinda missed geography in an earlier life, most of Jordan / Syria is a "nice, desert like plain in a remote area". Zaatari is close to the border because MOST refugees, including the elderly and children, travel by foot across that "nice, desert like plain in a remote area".

the camp is now the fourth largest city (CITY) in Jordan.

who funded the accommodation? the infrastructure? the UN costs to deliver a tarpaulin is 20,000euro and a 16 month wait.

i didn't see Serco putting their hands up to provide the infrastructure and triple charge the Jordanian tax payer for the privilege of sweeping the refugee problem under the political carpet.

i see the international community providing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaatari_refugee_camp

 

[Strannik]

From the article you linked to, Jordan is now regulating refugee intake until a second camp is constructed which will accommodate a further 130,000 refugees.
Many Syrian refugees are now heading to Lebanon which has an open door policy.
The persecution must be of an extreme nature for so many to flee their homeland.

they are not fleeing from persecution, they are fleeing from civil war, which was ignited by EU/US. if we want to resolve the issue with refugees we should stop meddling in other countries affairs, so there aren't millions of them in the first place.

every time western countries intervene somewhere it ends up with lots of dead and displaced people, and even harsher regimes come to power.

 

[Francesco]

they are not fleeing from persecution, they are fleeing from civil war, which was ignited by EU/US. if we want to resolve the issue with refugees we should stop meddling in other countries affairs, so there aren't millions of them in the first place.

every time western countries intervene somewhere it ends up with lots of dead and displaced people, and even harsher regimes come to power.

Yazidis are persecuted by ISIL:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ht-raped-as-Isil-sex-slaves-finds-report.html

The vulnerable and innocent should be protected from the jihadis. Intervention is required when a country is in chaos and does not have a viable and democratic government. Direct intervention is a viable option to accepting the remediation of the mess later on.

 

[Aaron Sice]

why does it have to be democratic? should we board the freedom train for Saudi Arabia? Denmark? United Kingdom?

 

[DEC]

Serco

There are some absolute animals working for that bunch, I had the sad misfortune of meeting a few of them at a xmas party a few years back.
All wanted to be either cops or in the military but thankfully were rejected.
Unfortunately for others they ended up as bouncers or working for serco.

 

[DEC]

Another 700 migrants dead yesterday
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/19/italian-prime-minister-matteo-renzi-emergency-summit-700-drown-mediterranean
.

Poor buggers
And then you get sick ***** making comments like this

Some even get media space

http://gcaptain.com/westerners-seemingly-rejoice-as-hundreds-die-on-the-high-seas/

 

[Strannik]

Yazidis are persecuted by ISIL:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ht-raped-as-Isil-sex-slaves-finds-report.html

The vulnerable and innocent should be protected from the jihadis. Intervention is required when a country is in chaos and does not have a viable and democratic government. Direct intervention is a viable option to accepting the remediation of the mess later on.

how many of the refugees are yazidis?

there were millions of refugees running away from civil war before ISIL managed to build up power there. in case you forgot, the war has been going on for several years now, ISIL only became a problem in the last year or so.

in fact the only reason ISIL became a problem, is because western countries supported rebels fighting against Assad.

now the thing you said about intervention is total BS. who are you to decide that democracy is the only type of political system that should be allowed to exist? what would you say if china decided to "intervene" in Australia on a basis that only "viable communist governments" should be allowed to rule countries?

USA directly intervened in iraq and afghanistan. they are still sorting out the mess from that intervention.

 

[Francesco]

how many of the refugees are yazidis?

there were millions of refugees running away from civil war before ISIL managed to build up power there. in case you forgot, the war has been going on for several years now, ISIL only became a problem in the last year or so.

in fact the only reason ISIL became a problem, is because western countries supported rebels fighting against Assad.

now the thing you said about intervention is total BS. who are you to decide that democracy is the only type of political system that should be allowed to exist? what would you say if china decided to "intervene" in Australia on a basis that only "viable communist governments" should be allowed to rule countries?

USA directly intervened in iraq and afghanistan. they are still sorting out the mess from that intervention.

Succinct and conclusive to you. LOL.

In this century at least, mainly democratic countries have stepped up to face the global problems like refugees and asylum seekers. Refugees seem to select democratic countries to go to - desperately, get in or bust, literally life and death! Democracy seems a good start because all the others look lame? I live in one and prospered in one, which enabled me to help those not living in one?

Communist countries opt for more democratic versions too! It seems very remote that China will endure another Cultural Revolution and re embrace communist economic theories. More likely is the scenario that China will one day give Australia lessons on how to thrive in a capitalist economy.

Finally, Churchill said it. From Churchill by Him*self, page 574:

"Many forms of Gov*ern*ment have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pre*tends that democ*racy is per*fect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democ*racy is the worst form of Gov*ern*ment except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.?"

 

[Strannik]

democracy as we know it is less than a 100 years old.
also democracy is only good during prosperous times. as soon as something happens - democracy pretty much fails.

democracy lost to nazis, where communism won.

out of more recent examples, democracy failed everywhere in africa and middle east, where western countries tried to introduce it. it also made things worse

 

[Francesco]

democracy as we know it is less than a 100 years old.
also democracy is only good during prosperous times. as soon as something happens - democracy pretty much fails.

democracy lost to nazis, where communism won.

out of more recent examples, democracy failed everywhere in africa and middle east, where western countries tried to introduce it. it also made things worse

I think you must have very selective interpretations to draw that conclusion, but I agree that democracy allowed nazis to ascend in power. How did communism win over nazis - as in the war? So did the democratic allied powers, such as Britain and America.

Adopting a political system is no panacea for creating an effective and competent government. Compare Malaysia and Singapore - both largely democratic but with significant political differences and eventually significant economic outcomes since their foundations. They show the gradations available in the range of democracies. Singapore is miles ahead because of the differences - stable law and order, low corruption, meritocracy, competition, non discrimination, freedom of religion.

I personally feel that I would be more happy in a democratic society as "all are created equal" than one where I am hindered from "freedom and the pursuit of happiness".

 

[Aaron Sice]

in fact the only reason ISIL became a problem, is because western countries supported rebels fighting against Assad.

because they were one and the same.

I will never forget sitting down watching the news with my wife, when the US, and the UN to some extent, announced they will be supporting the rebels against Assad in Syria.

I turned and said to her - within 2 days, Baghdad will be under siege.

I was wrong - it was within 24 hours.

 

[BayView]

Originally Posted by Strannik
in fact the only reason ISIL became a problem, is because western countries supported rebels fighting against Assad.

I thought ISIL had a problem with anyone who is not a Muslim - or at least; a Muslim as per their version of it?

Of course; they seem to have a deep-seated hatred of anything that is "Western" as well.

 

[Francesco]

I thought ISIL had a problem with anyone who is not a Muslim - or at least; a Muslim as per their version of it?

Of course; they seem to have a deep-seated hatred of anything that is "Western" as well.

I don't think you are wrong there. ISIL's branch in Libya rounded up and beheaded about 30 Egyptian Christians and others at the coast. They like to do things as done 1400 years ago. Not much tolerance for anyone, including moderate Sunnis!

 

[Ausprop]

I don't think you are wrong there. ISIL's branch in Libya rounded up and beheaded about 30 Egyptian Christians and others at the coast.

they love beheading hey? I just read this, sort of explains why

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

 

[Strannik]

I don't think you are wrong there. ISIL's branch in Libya rounded up and beheaded about 30 Egyptian Christians and others at the coast. They like to do things as done 1400 years ago. Not much tolerance for anyone, including moderate Sunnis!

and if we rewind to the time when West decided to intervene and support rebels in Lybia, has anyone heard about ISIL in lybia back then? or millions of refugees trying to flee to europe?

i think the pattern is quite clear here:

1) Lybia. Uprisings started inspired by western countries. When the government crushes them, west intervenes and support the rebels. Government is overthrown, country is in chaos, lots of people are killed or become refugees. Radical islamists gain a foothold, acquire weapons, military training and source of recruits.

2) Egypt. Uprisings started inspired by western countries. When the government crushes them, west intervenes and support the rebels. Government is overthrown, radical islamists come to power via elections (!). People get sick of it and army intervenes, ousting the elected government.

3) Syria. Uprisings started inspired by western countries. When the government crushes them, west intervenes and support the rebels. Civil war starts, radical islamists capture significant chunks of the country with support from the west and sunni gulf states. They get weapons, source of recruits, funding from selling the oil, they even get trained in military camps in Jordan, by USA instructors. Millions of refugees.

4) Iraq. USA decides to overthrow Saddam. A secular state, which once was one of the most educated arab countries, becomes an arena for a fight between different muslim factions. All the things that Saddam was accused of still continue, now under democratic banner. Iraq becomes a breeding ground for various terrorist groups.

5) Bahrain. Uprising started but were quickly crushed by Saudi army, that was asked to help by bahrain government. As they are both western allies, no support from the west came to rebels.

6) Yemen. Uprising happened supported by western countries. A new president was elected but then another uprising happened. As the second uprising wasn't sanctioned by western countries, a coalition of gulf countries started bombing the rebels upon request of the ousted president.

7) Ukraine. Opposition, supported by western countries and radical nationalists staged the protests which ended in a coup and the elected government overthrown. The tensions escalated to a civil war and a country sliding into nazi dictatorship. memebers of opposition are now being jailed and/or killed for speaking against the government, journalists killed, head of police and secret services openly saying that anyone with a different view should shut up or risk being killed. there is even a website where they collate personal details of all who speak against government and suggest that those people should be killed. the website is promoted by an advisor to police chief even though it's against the law to publish personal details.

again, millions of refugees and displaced people, and the country is falling apart.


as you can see, every time western countries intervene somewhere, they make it worse.

 

[Strannik]

Adopting a political system is no panacea for creating an effective and competent government. Compare Malaysia and Singapore - both largely democratic but with significant political differences and eventually significant economic outcomes since their foundations. They show the gradations available in the range of democracies. Singapore is miles ahead because of the differences - stable law and order, low corruption, meritocracy, competition, non discrimination, freedom of religion.

i'm glad you touched on singapore. it's not quite a democracy. it was benevolent dictatorship, which is why it could achieve what it did. had it been a traditional democracy, it would probably still be like all the other asian countries, with corruption and all the other perks of democracy in third world countries.

 

[Francesco]

i'm glad you touched on singapore. it's not quite a democracy. it was benevolent dictatorship, which is why it could achieve what it did. had it been a traditional democracy, it would probably still be like all the other asian countries, with corruption and all the other perks of democracy in third world countries.

I do not think Singaporeans are any less sophisticated in endorsing decidedly the authority of the incumbents. There may be criticisms of authority being vested through political and judicial manipulations, dynastic links, elitism or cronyism. All may be true. One thing you cannot fault is that democratic processes have been upheld and willingly ceded by the majority in the electorate. You cannot fault the incumbents for qualifications for the positions.

Democracy as practised in Australia is like a free for all and loving the process regardless of the outcome! The saving grace in Australia is the intolerance for corruption!

 

[Strannik]

i suggest you google what benevolent dictatorship is

 

[BayView]

as you can see, every time western countries intervene somewhere, they make it worse.

The key words there is intervene.

From my understanding, isn't it that the West (USA and others such as us and the UK, etc) usually intervene to try and put a stop to widespread genocidal, world endangerment (nuclear threat, world/religious domination wars, etc) activities?

In hindsight, many of the interventions by the USA should not have been undertaken, because many of the scuffles they have become involved in are between crowds who have been carrying on and fighting amongst themselves since god was a kid, and these folks will still be carrying on until all our collective backsides don't point towards the ground any longer.

Obviously; they have made some mistakes.

If all these clowns around the world learned to get along and be accepting of others, stop the endless violence and so forth, I'd wager the USA would stay home.

The USA has one of - if not the most - diverse representation of religions, cultures, races and colours in the world - as do we.

We are not the problem for these places that can never end their scuffles, but we - as do the USA - feel a moral obligation to help out when things start to get very ugly for the defenseless.

Of course; we should probably simply turn our backs, mind our own business and protect our own shores and citizens only.

Yep; that'd work.

 

[Francesco]

they love beheading hey? I just read this, sort of explains why

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

The article is rather long but it explains why ISIL is the way it is. I have read half way through it and finds no contradiction with my understanding.

Unlike Christians' acceptance for the divine inspiration of the Bible, the Koran is accepted by Muslims as recital of the actual words of Allah. If beheading was specified then any other mode of execution is deviation and heresy. However, if generalised killing were specified then any modern means can be employed. To the devout Muslim, it is as simple as that.

Australians should read the article to understand Muslims. For example, it can explain why Indonesians prefer to slit the throat of cattle without electric stunning first.

By the way, Abu Bakar Baghdadi, the proclaimed caliph heading ISIL mirrors the name of the first caliph, Abu Bakar, who was the father-in-law of Muhammad.