INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

SYRIA

...on serious topics that don't fit anywhere else at present.
Message
Author
User avatar
animist
Posts: 6519
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: SYRIA

#281 Postby animist » December 1st, 2016, 11:24 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Nick wrote:
animist wrote:Even assuming that it's accurate to call France "socialist" (which it scarcely is even if the government goes by that name), there is no reason that a leftwing government should be more obliged to help refugees than a liberal capitalist one


Well, yes, I'm not France's greatest fan, and yes, France is not wholly socialist, even, as you say, the President puts himself forward as socialist, but it does seem to belie the idea of socialism, by ignoring the poor and wretched. Maybe governments of any shade are equally morally obliged to help refugees, but not to do so if you set out to claim to care for the people is more hypocritical, wouldn't you say?
not really, and this leads onto a bigger question of what socialism (or any form of political egalitarianism) is and entails. Since "the people" you mention are in fact the inhabitants of a particular nation state, there is no necessary connexion between leftwing national political structures and a concern for the welfare of foreigners, and although leftwingers probably do tend to be more internationalistic and altruistic than rightwingers, it ain't necessarily so (you personally for instance are in your own way extremely idealistic and altruistic, you just differ from many of us here on the means rather than the ends).
Nick wrote:[
This seems to be exposed by stories in the press of orphans wandering around Calais, seemingly ignored by the French authorities, to the extent that British charities were operating in France to cover that deficiency. Of course, it may be an unbalanced picture, I don't know, but I would think it rather strange if groups of French charities started, say, setting up soup kitchens in London. ISTM that the French authorities were much more interested in allowing refugees to pass through, than in following the Dublin convention. I really don't see the UK government allowing "jungles" to exist in Britain for months on end.

I don't see how this analogy works. The Calais jungle exists because refugees want to end up in Britain; there is no reverse flow and it is impossible to surmise what might happen if there were

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: SYRIA

#282 Postby jaywhat » December 9th, 2016, 4:04 pm


User avatar
animist
Posts: 6519
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: SYRIA

#283 Postby animist » December 14th, 2016, 1:24 pm

the war in Syria must end in an Assad victory. Any opinions to the contrary, such as Boris Johnson's implied hope that the war is not over even after the fall of Aleppo, are in a way worse, from the aspect of avoiding pointless death and suffering, than the sickening justifications of slaughter that we hear from Syrian and Russian leaders. The Middle East on the whole simply does not seem ready (maybe a better word is fit) for Western-style democracy

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: SYRIA

#284 Postby jaywhat » December 19th, 2016, 2:41 pm

It seems as if there is a chance of it all improving slightly but I dare not say that.

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6519
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: SYRIA

#285 Postby animist » April 14th, 2018, 10:32 am

more of the same, despite the new air strikes. Time that any states supporting the rebels realised that their cause is hopeless

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24017
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: SYRIA

#286 Postby Alan H » April 14th, 2018, 11:15 am

animist wrote:more of the same, despite the new air strikes. Time that any states supporting the rebels realised that their cause is hopeless
According to the BBC:
Russia's defence ministry says preliminary information suggests that there were no civilian or military casualties in the air strikes.

It says 71 of a total of 103 cruise missiles were intercepted by Syrian air defences. All the cruise missiles fired at four airfields were shot down while more than half of the missiles shot at two further airfields were also shot down.
Anyone else struggling to understand how 32 cruise missiles killed no one, even if they landed on airfields?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?


Return to “Miscellaneous Discussions...”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests