Be sensible, where are they going to get the materials, the weapons, etc.?
And why would they target the people that had come to save a babies life?
- Status
And why would they target the people that had come to save a babies life?
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,581
- Reaction score
- 2,674
- Country
err its a war zone?
David Haines may have also made that incorrect assumption.
There is a larger picture here, that ought to be discussed.
I did see on the news last night, several women, just been ousted from the last ISIS stronghold, their husbands killed or captured, their homes destroyed, all their remaining belongings wrapped up in a blanket. Sure they were hostile to the reporters. Understandable, no-one wants to be filmed in their hour of defeat and desperation, being turfed out of their home, such as it was.
But that isn't the point I want to consider. It's more the impact on the children, the ones that have been, are now, and will continue to be brought up with the hatred and bitterness shown towards the defeating powers.
These children have already been, are being and will continue to have that bitterness instilled into them.
We already see the after effects of war on other populations, the older Koreans still harboring bitterness towards their enemy, the older Vietnamese still perceiving the other side as the enemy. We even see it on these forums, some of the older NI and Irish still maintaining the bitterness. We even see, in this forum, some older UK people still harboring bitterness towards Germany, (even towards Europeans but where this comes from, who knows? The Napoleonic era?)
The new attitudes and policies in NI is working in educating and encouraging young people especially, in social cohesion.
This is an insight that ought to be extended towards the potential new terrorists of the future, these children in the refugee camps, suffering and being indoctrinated by the teachings of their peers and the hardships of the refugee camps which can only reinforce that bitterness.
The education of these children, the attempts at re-integrating them into a normal society ought to be happening at the earliest opportunity.
The responsibility of individual countries, to take back their problem adults, (dealing with them appropriately) along with their children, could allow such work to begin in earnest. We owe it to these children, the potential terrorists of the future, to at least try to reintegrate them into society.
To simply take the children away form their parents , if the children have reached an age where they would resent such separation, is not the answer. The parent(s) need to be treated appropriately, and the children given proper care.
Investment in the children now will save money and lives in the future.
I did see on the news last night, several women, just been ousted from the last ISIS stronghold, their husbands killed or captured, their homes destroyed, all their remaining belongings wrapped up in a blanket. Sure they were hostile to the reporters. Understandable, no-one wants to be filmed in their hour of defeat and desperation, being turfed out of their home, such as it was.
But that isn't the point I want to consider. It's more the impact on the children, the ones that have been, are now, and will continue to be brought up with the hatred and bitterness shown towards the defeating powers.
These children have already been, are being and will continue to have that bitterness instilled into them.
We already see the after effects of war on other populations, the older Koreans still harboring bitterness towards their enemy, the older Vietnamese still perceiving the other side as the enemy. We even see it on these forums, some of the older NI and Irish still maintaining the bitterness. We even see, in this forum, some older UK people still harboring bitterness towards Germany, (even towards Europeans but where this comes from, who knows? The Napoleonic era?)
The new attitudes and policies in NI is working in educating and encouraging young people especially, in social cohesion.
This is an insight that ought to be extended towards the potential new terrorists of the future, these children in the refugee camps, suffering and being indoctrinated by the teachings of their peers and the hardships of the refugee camps which can only reinforce that bitterness.
The education of these children, the attempts at re-integrating them into a normal society ought to be happening at the earliest opportunity.
The responsibility of individual countries, to take back their problem adults, (dealing with them appropriately) along with their children, could allow such work to begin in earnest. We owe it to these children, the potential terrorists of the future, to at least try to reintegrate them into society.
To simply take the children away form their parents , if the children have reached an age where they would resent such separation, is not the answer. The parent(s) need to be treated appropriately, and the children given proper care.
Investment in the children now will save money and lives in the future.
Sponsored Links
It's a refugee camp.
Its about as far as it's possible to be from the war one and still be in Syria.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2015/05/syria-country-divided-150529144229467.html
The refugee camp is in the far NE of Syria.
Last edited:
S
sodthisforfun
No, but perhaps ISIS were still going strong and she wasn't homeless and in a camp when the other two were born so she didn't want help. She was quite happy being an ISIS bride, til it went wrong.
Perhaps (in her head) she was entitled to be both.
S
sodthisforfun
I take it that other papers reporting this as well is good enough for Himmy, the newspaper snob?
"Asked whether there was any plan for Ms Begum's son, Mr Javid told the Commons Home Affairs Committee it would be "incredibly difficult" for the Government to facilitate the return of a child from Syria.
"If it is possible somehow for a British child to be brought to a place where there is a British consular presence, the closest place - it might be Turkey for example - in those circumstances I guess potentially it is possible to arrange for some sort of help with the consent of the parent," he added.
"Inside Syria, whether in a camp or maybe somewhere else, there is no British consular presence."
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...laims-her-newborn-baby-has-died-a4086656.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...begums-british-baby-could-return-uk-suggests/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ot-able-use-babys-british-citizenship-return/
It was well known that hospitals were targeted in Syria (disgusting). I would imagine that the hospitals still standing would be under huge pressure, trying to function in a war-torn country and will be working hard to get things back to normal.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ing-of-hospitals-sparks-human-rights-protests
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/mideas...nd-increased-bombing-syrian-hospitals-n847961
The baby went to hospital, according to reports, it died in hospital.
https://inews.co.uk/news/shamima-begum-isis-bride-baby-son-dead-syria-hospital/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ath-son-isis-syria-lawyer-court-a8814091.html
And babies being born to a mother with a passport in a country which wasn't a war zone and has a British consular aid that is functioning is different to the ISIS bride case. You're not comparing like for like.
What British officials? Read above the bit about it being incredibly difficult to return a child from Syria where there is no consular presence.
Which is what I've been saying all along. Working within such a short time frame in the mess that is Syria is so much harder than some of you make out. You really do seem to think there was a magical way of sorting this. There wasn't and sadly the baby became a victim of war, a war that destroyed a lot of the country. A war that the baby's mother had a part in which makes it even more sad.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,581
- Reaction score
- 2,674
- Country
I would suggest London (where the people you'd like to send currently reside) is further away.
Of course he's going to say that. It justifies his approach.
What do you expect him to say. "it's slightly difficult, so we won't even bother."
You resorted to that tactic of descending into silliness.
S
sodthisforfun
Bingo! You have indeed resorted to silliness.
If it's so simple, you go over to Syria.
I accept my comment was flippant and sarcastic, but there was a comment in there.
SJ did not even bother to try, and he had no intention of trying. His approach was to leave them to whatever fate befalls them.
As I suggested in another post, that policy is shortsighted and will probably cost more in both money and lives in the future.
Suggesting that officials and security would have to travel from London is more than flippancy. It is just silly.
- Status
Sponsored Links
