Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee. I'm disgusted, but not for the reason you think.

[DetlefK]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/if-these-extraordinarily-powerful-images-of-a-dead-syrian-child-washed-up-on-a-beach-dont-change-europes-attitude-to-refugees-what-will-10482757.html



The picture is making the rounds on the media right now. It is billed as a symbol of the tragedy and as a symbol for Europe's failure to take care of the refugees. How dare european politicians get in the way of letting these refugees in? They are suffering! They are dying!

Hold on for a second.

Why exactly are those refugees Europe's responsibility? Why is this image a symbol for Europe's failure?

Those people aren't fleeing some natural, unstoppable disaster. Their suffering is man-made and accordingly it can be solved by man.

And who is contributing what to solve this crisis?

- Turkey willfully turned a blind eye when ISIS funneled their recruits through Turkey into Iraq and Syria, because Turkey wants to see Assad toppled. Turkey willfully turned a blind eye when ISIS-recruiters showed up on turkish campuses and threatened to kill turkish students who opposed them. Right now, Turkey is bombing the very guys fighting ISIS.

- Saudi-Arabia created the ideology of ISIS. Right now, Saudi-Arabia is fortifying its northern border to prevent the war in Iraq from reaching Saudi-Arabia. And they are bombing Yemen, together with other sunni countries, to prevent the overthrow of the sunni government. Saudi-Arabia likes to bill itself as a diplomatic heavy-weight, as the voice of reason. But all they do is calling for not doing shit. Bloody civil war in Libya? That's inner libyan business, better not meddle. Bloody civil war in Syria? That's inner syrian business, better not meddle. Except: Bloody civil war in Yemen? That's our business, we should totally meddle.

- Russia doesn't care. The "major world power" Russia, that demands to wield the same respect as the Soviet Union because it inherited the nuclear weapons of the Soviet Union, is selling arms and preventing international action against their lackey, the tyrant Assad. Impressive.

- China doesn't care as well. China likes to play the voice of moderation, of reason, of doing jack-shit, because they are afraid of taking a particular stance on secessionism and civil war. (Because China is afraid of its own population. If their economy keeps growing like this, and it has to to provide jobs for the still-rapidly growing population, they will run into a ressource-bottleneck 10-20 years from now. This will lead to domestic economic downturn. Their housing-bubble will burst, making the crisis even worse. And all this will have global consequences. Domestic downturn could lead to social unrest. The whole pseudo-communist system of party-elites systematically pillaging chinese state-property would collapse.)
The "major world power" China is hiding.

- What about Islam? The vast majority of Muslims are outraged about the crimes of ISIS. Yet somehow no religious leader is stepping forward to attack ISIS on a religious level, trying to prove their end-times doctrine of an extremist, apocalyptic Islam wrong. ISIS not only recruits from disillusioned fanatics. They also recruit from those Muslims who are attracted to a life of warfare, slavery and rape. Yet there is no attempt to attack ISIS with oral arguments.






This drowned 3 year old boy is not a symbol of Europe not doing enough for the refugees. It is a symbol for the callousness and cowardice of those who refuse to do anything.

[linuxman]

1. I love the assumed paternalism of it all.

Reminds me of some "white man's burden" era shit.

"Won't Europe please stand up and use its whitness to guide and protect the wretched savages from the east?"

Barf.

[whathehell]

10. What "assumed paternalism"? They are asking for help

Sometimes it's wise to actually know the facts before jerking your knee.

[leveymg]

34. France and UK were part of the regime change ops in Libya and Syria. They have a duty to refugees

generated, as does the US, KSA, Qatar and the other Sunni Gulf States who caused this to escalate into a regional war.

[MADem]

2. Jesus, put a warning on that. People who have lost young ones tragically will be traumatized. nt

[Locrian]

4. +1 on that! add a warning

[Blue_Adept]

9. People are traumatized by a nipple

Shit like this? People NEED To be seeing this and shocked and motivated into action.

[MADem]

20. That was a tasteless remark. Completely unnecessary, and crude.

If you've never lost a young child, it might not resonate with you.

I suppose it's too much to ask to be considerate of people here, these days.

[Blue_Adept]

37. I'm pretty sure someone that has lost someone would avoid it just based on the title

But we're all oh so sensitive these days to everything and must remain in our little bubbles.

And you've been here long enough to know asking people to be considerate is a pointless task. Look at the whole nipplegate fiasco a couple of years ago.

[MADem]

66. I am pretty sure you'd be wrong. And that "oh so sensitive" whining

doesn't sound very progressive to me.

Is it really that hard to not be an asshole? If the DAILY MAIL can manage it, of all publications, why is it so hard for you to think of others before yourself?

This isn't about "nipples." This is about dead children.

The fact that you're trying to compare the two is evidence that you just don't get it.

[awoke_in_2003]

77. "Is it really that hard to not be an asshole? "

Lately, it seems, that is the case.

[Thor_MN]

13. "Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee."

What did you think that might be about? Fluffy bunnies?

The subject line of the OP clearly defines the topic. I considered carefully if I wanted to open the thread.

[MADem]

19. Snark away. GRAPHIC IMAGE would do.

Most pictures of this event that are being published in international publications show the soldier cradling the body, and only the child's feet and legs are visible. It's not an image of his dead face smashed into the shoreline.

But you go on and assert your "right" to be controversial.

Pfft.

smh.

[Thor_MN]

96. No snark intended, what did you think a post that said photo of drowned child would be about?

If you think that a photo of a drowned child might disturb you, don't click the link.

Don't blame the poster because you clicked the link that said photo of a drowned child...

[MADem]

100. This is the picture most papers are using--not that one of the kid faceplanted in the surf.

But hey, your insistence that the feelings of others--and we do have DUers here who have lost young children, you know--take 2nd place to your "right" to slap that kind of shock/violence stuff up without a lousy warning is noted. Pat yourself on the back, that's a real 'liberal' attitude you've got working. Lots of compassion!

[Thor_MN]

104. Well, see, when I read photot of drowned child, I knew that there was going to be

a photo of a drowned child. I didn't click the link, thinking, "Oh, it probably would be that bad, there's no warning after all".

I knew that the was probably going to be a picture of a drowned child.

If you didn't want to see "Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee.", why did you open the thread? Crabassing about your own decision to open the thread is ridiculous.

[MADem]

107. Sorry--a graphic image is a graphic image. And it has been DU custom to warn people.

You can huff and puff all you want, but that HAS been our custom here, for fifteen years.

And trying to counter your own churlishness by accusing me of "crabassing" is a non-starter. Let your "Screw other people's sensitivities" flag fly if you must--and be noted for it. What's ridiculous is your inability to see anyone's POV but your own.

[Thor_MN]

108. Sorry, I can't help you if you can't comprehend what "Photo of Drowned child" means.

Nice that you are trying to co-opt a thread about a tragic death for your own delicate little feelings.

If it bothered you so much, why do keep coming back to it? Why are you going into other sources to see what photo other sites are using? Since the photo apparently does NOT bother you, why do you assume there are others who wouldn't understand what the title was saying?

Sorry, you are not the holder of DU's customs. Your profile says you are a member since 2004, is your mention of 15 years bogus or did you create a new profile in 2004? See, I have been around since 2003, and don't agree that that "custom" was widely held or was even not honored in this case.

Again, is "Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee." somehow less warning than "Graphic Image"?

It tells you exactly what the post is about !!

You are the person whining that your POV must be honored, project much? Numerous people have told you that the content was obvious, that avoiding this thread was simple for any that bothered to read. No one clicked that link for you, you did that yourself, either of your own choice or ignorance.

[MADem]

110. I "comprehend" you just fine. You think your "right" to be insensitive trumps long-held

custom here at DU. Not "my" custom--long-held, agreed-upon custom by the vast majority of caring, astute, and sensitive DUers. You plainly--by your actions-- don't count yourself among that number.

Do you think the headlines I provided in post 83 didn't "tell you exactly what the post is about?" They did--but they also provided the "GRAPHIC WARNING" tag so that people wouldn't be taken aback.

Good grief, keep digging. You are halfway to the other side of the earth, and so proud of it, too.

It's really interesting to see what passes as liberal/progressive in this day and age. When I was coming up, the idea was to be CONSIDERATE of the feelings of others.

You take great pride in being the OPPOSITE of that. Hmmm. And you've just GOT to toss that "ignorance" word at me, when maybe you should just hang on to it for yourself.

smh.

[Thor_MN]

111. Please try not ascribing your emotions on me, because... massive fail.

I do not think I have a right to be insensitive, that is you projecting yourself on me and others. I and many others have pointed out that the title accurately described the post and that your rants have been ridiculous.

I take no pride in the content of this post, but apparently you do, having tried so very hard to make it about your feelings.

I understood what the post was, you apparently did not.

The post has seemingly traumatized you so much, that you have to keep coming back to insist that your POV simply must be honored. Is this a Stockholm type syndrome? Maybe some time off?

Have a nice night. Maybe there will be other posts for you to be outraged at tomorrow. One can always hope for what they apparently need.

[MADem]

112. I'm not ascribing my emotions to you, I am describing your behavior.

There's a difference.

As for ascribing emotions, look at your post. My goal was to be considerate of others on this board who I know have lost children, you choose to make it all about me and describe me as "traumatized" and ascribe my purposes to my "feelings" or being "outraged" -- like having feelings is a bad thing, or like thinking that acting like an asshole is not a cool thing to do.

I have PROVED to you that DU has done this over the years--and that was the tip of the iceberg--there are many, many, MANY other posts with the same warnings in the headers. You stomp your foot and insist that it's "correct" to be rude and forsake a longstanding tradition. Feh. Just look. at. YOU. Most people in a hole stop digging -- but not you!

Now who is a little mixed up here, I wonder?

smh. One can always hope for "progressives" to act in a progressive manner. I won't hold my breath with you, though.

You have a nice night--maybe grow a little empathy for others. It doesn't hurt. Really. Try it sometime.

[Thor_MN]

114. Save your sarcasm for your personal life.

Your "Proof" would be laughed at by any reasonable person. Citing a handful of examples culled with a search out of millions of posts doesn't "prove" anything. If you want to prove a rule, you have to show that it holds true, at least in the majority of cases. What percentage of posts do you think your examples amount to?

You have been stomping your feet all day, insisting that a warning, to your precise specifications, must be present. And have been roundly told that the title contained all the warning that was needed.

Please cite where I have " insist(ed) that it's "correct" to be rude and forsake a longstanding tradition." Please. Where did I say that?

I have plenty of empathy, for those who capable of understanding what "Photo of drowned child" means. I feel for those that are incapable of reading those words, but believe that they should not be unsupervised on the open internet.

For those that click the link and then start whining that they were shocked to find that the post actually contained said photo? Not so much.

[MADem]

115. I am not being sarcastic--I am being very frank with you.

I think most of the reasonable people who spent any time here would agree with me and not you. You can do a search yourself; you'll see that I'm telling the truth. I told you that was just the tip of the iceberg--if I copied every post I'd still be at it.

You're the one who keeps going on about foot stomping--I think it's you that is doing what you ascribe to me, because I won't back down in the face of your rudeness--which is evident in every post you've made to me.

If you have empathy, you haven't displayed it in this thread. Not even slightly.

[Thor_MN]

117. As I said on the other thread, your actions are not logical.

Most reasonable, including a fair number that have told you here today, do NOT agree with you.

Again, and please do not ignore me this time, what does " Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee" means to you?

If you will read carefully, I told you I don't have empathy for people who whine about a post contain exactly what was described in the title. You claim to have understood what "Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee" meant. Yet you clicked the link anyway and immediately started complaining that you found exactly that in the post.

You endless rants are not logical, please seek help.

[MADem]

119. My actions are entirely logical and consistent with DU standards over the last fifteen years.

I agree that you don't have empathy, but that's where I'll leave it with you.

The one engaging in endless rants isn't me--you keep going on and on about how you're right, despite all the GRAPHIC WARNING posts in the DU archives that prove me right and you wrong.

You obviously ARE feeling some of that discomfort--otherwise you wouldn't keep coming at me with the same lame argument. There's nothing to take pride in when you disrespect or disregard the feelings of others. The best thing to do is what DUers have done for the past decade and a half--give people fair warning.

You just think that gets in YOUR way, somehow, to be polite and do that sort of thing. Hmmm.

Oh, and "please seek help?" That's a sign of a failed argument, right there--you've got to go for the PERSONAL dig, because you can't make your case with "logical" (your favorite word--perhaps you might want to look up the definition) reasoning, so you resort to "You are crazy" suggestions.

Keep showing us what you're about, though--for those who wondered, the more you talk, the more we know.

[Thor_MN]

121. Keep those delusions coming. And ignoring questions, as you can't answer them.

Some day, you won't find anyone to talk to.

[MADem]

122. There you go again! Now it's "delusions!"

You're the king of personal insult--no wonder you don't want to warn anyone of any disturbing images. You like to say things designed to hurt people, apparently.

You don't talk "to" anyone--you talk "at" them.

I'm not looking for a friend like you, so don't you worry about me, now--worry about yourself.

[DetlefK]

14. The title says "photo of a drowned 3yo". How much more explicit should it be?

Also: There aren't enough characters left for a warning.

[MADem]

15. How about GRAPHIC IMAGE? Come on, it's not that hard. nt

[DetlefK]

44. As I said, not enough characters.

[WinkyDink]

53. Well, there would have been, minus your little cryptic addendum.

[MADem]

65. Seriously? You are seriously trying to insist that putting GRAPHIC IMAGE at the start of a

headline magically makes it IMPOSSIBLE for you to continue said headline into the "message text" block?

That somehow, you lack the skills to do such a complex thing? You have as many characters as you need, if you continue your headline into the text block.

Please. Insensitivity is what it is. It's no different than the "TRIGGER WARNING" that people expect nowadays.

Why is it so hard to be decent? What "rights" are abrogated by thinking of others?

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. It's not hard to figure out an image of a drowned child is likely to be disturbing, either.

FFS...

[MADem]

64. FFS, right back at you--once upon a time, DU used to give a shit about how others felt.

I think a little sensitivity to those among us who have lost a child young is not a "FFS" thing. It's the decent thing to do.

But hey, the "rights" to be boorish 'Trump' all--and the trump word is used with deliberate special context. He's setting the standard everywhere, apparently. Even here at DU.

[Lizzie Poppet]

72. It still does. The existing headline is a clear and obvious indication of what's inside.

It explicitly states that there's a photo of a drowned child in the post. If that's not obvious enough for someone, then I can't imagine how they get through life with such shockingly bad reading comprehension.

[MADem]

84. The photo that most papers are carrying is NOT that graphic one.

It is customary for DUers to use the phrase "Graphic Image" or Graphic: Warning" when posting distressing content. We've been doing it this way for fifteen years.

[Lizzie Poppet]

85. Who cares what the photo is elsewhere?

The one in this thread was clearly and explicitly described in the headline as a photo of a drowned child. You're being ridiculous.

[MADem]

87. Take a look at post 83. Then take a look at the TOS.

Re-acquaint yourself with this paragraph.

Don't post "shock content" or porn.
Do not post or link to extreme images of violence, gore, bodily functions, pain, or human suffering for no purpose other than to shock and disgust. Do not post or link to pornography.

Good grief, I should not be surprised that some people want to maintain their "right" to be rude to people and will even resort to personal insult to press home that "right." But I am. The one who is ridiculous is YOU.

[Lizzie Poppet]

92. Different issue entirely.

The issue you've been complaining about is that the warning about the content of the post wasn't in the form you prefer. Not that the post existed at all. If you want to move the goalposts, fine. But you are moving the goalposts.

[MADem]

93. No, it isn't--that is not the pic that most news outlets are using. That is a graphic image.

We, as a board, have tolerated shocking images with the caveat. All you have to do is use your search feature and you can see that. Without the caveat? Not so much.

[Lizzie Poppet]

94. I didn't say it wasn't an issue. I said it wasn't the one we've been discussing.

I reiterate: our conversation was, up until the point you moved the goalposts, solely about the fact that the OP didn't have the kind of warning you prefer (although it clearly described the content). In other words, it has a caveat...just not the specific one you insist on.

But I can see that this is (and has been from the start) a complete waste of my time. Buh-bye...

[MADem]

95. The headline leads one to believe it's the less offensive picture being used by the papers, NOT the

graphic image depicted in the OP.

No "goalpost moving" there. The picture of the soldier cradling the drowned child's body is sad and evocative, it's not brutal and harsh like the GRAPHIC IMAGE in the first post.

But hey, this is DU today. "Buh bye" and my right to be vicious "trumps" all.

[Thor_MN]

97. FFS, anyone with a bit of reading comprhension knew what the post was about from the title.

[MADem]

99. I'll tell you what I've told others--that is not the "drowned child" picture most papers are using.

They are using the one of the soldier cradling the child, where you only see the feet and legs.

And we've always used GRAPHIC IMAGE warnings here. Of course, we've gotten a large influx of people posting lately who don't seem to care about the polite conventions (which you should know about, since you've been here for awhile).

Congratulations, you've made the list of people who think that a polite warning is just too damn much trouble.

See post 83.

[Thor_MN]

101. And you have made the list of people who think "photo of drowned child"

doesn't mean "picture of dead child"...

[MADem]

102. No, I haven't. I've shown you the picture most papers are using. You're just angry because

I've likely given you a twinge of discomfort by pointing out that there are people who use this board who have the capacity to be traumatized in a very real way by that kind of picture, as opposed to the other one that I provided in this thread.

But no--it's all about how you have got to be "tough" and how kindness is somehow weakness, being considerate is just "too much trouble" for you, apparently.

Yeah, I got your number.

[Thor_MN]

103. You are the one with the angst. I have no discomfort.

You know absolutely nothing about me.

If you don't want to see "Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee.", don't click the link. It's quite simple. The title clearly described the content, and you are upset the content was what the title said. Anyone who clicks the link, will see what the title said.

[Lizzie Poppet]

106. Give it up, amigo.

This is one of those "tireless rebutter" types...

[MADem]

113. Bingo, there it is... "I" have no discomfort. Because it's all about YOU, isn't it? nt

[Thor_MN]

116. Wow, projection, again...

I have pointed out, repeatedly, as have others, that the title contains all one needs to know. You have repeatedly ignored that fact, and have claimed to seek out multiple sources for photos about which have spent all day ranting about.

These actions are not logical. Please. If you find the picture of this dead child so disturbing, STOP SEEKING THEM OUT. Stop obsessing about them. If you need to, seek help.

[MADem]

118. Projection? Do you even know what that means? I was repeating your OWN WORDS back to you!

What's not logical is your proud doubling down on being inconsiderate to other DUers, like it's a point of pride with you.

But apparently you ARE feeling some of that discomfort, otherwise you wouldn't persist in trying to convince me that being a jerk and not putting a warning on graphic material is somehow the "good" thing to do. You keep trying that on for size, there, sport. It's not been the DU way in the history of this site, but you keep trying to sell it.

smh.

[Thor_MN]

120. I have said no such things. Are you hearing voices?

I have told you the title said exactly what was in the post? You have been told that by many people. Those are FACTS.

You completely ignore those facts and insist on trying to tell me what I am feeling. You are not being rational. You are trying to claim that I have said the title was somehow "good". Again, please cite where I claimed that. Oh wait, you are going to ignore that and continue on with your rants.

I have said the title accurately described the posts. I have not offered an opinion of the title other than is factual.

Apparently, you are attention seeking and have to tilt at windmills to find validation.

Good night, Don Quixote, I have given up trying to reach through your delusion.

[MADem]

123. Follow the thread, pal--you most certainly have said that.

Your definition of "many" is kind of meager, but knock yourself out with that excuse.

How many personal insults in one post? Are you hearing voices? You are not being rational! You are attention seeking! You have to tilt at windmills to find validation! RANTS!! (How many times are you going to use that word in this thread? It's your second favorite, after "logical," apparently.)

With every post you reveal your true nature.


Look in the mirror and say all that stuff --your remarks might hit their target. For a change!

[yeoman6987]

80. I hadn't seen the picture yet

I know it was all over the Internet yesterday but I missed it somehow. Some of us have t seen the picture yet.

[WinkyDink]

51. See: UK Daily Mail: BLURRING.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3219553/Terrible-fate-tiny-boy-symbolises-desperation-thousands-Body-drowned-Syrian-refugee-washed-Turkish-beach-family-tried-reach-Europe.html

[melman]

109. They also showed it unblurred

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3221090/PIERS-MORGAN-Don-t-shut-eyes-picture-did-make-right.html

[rtracey]

21. Warning?

The title ...."Photo of a drowned 3yo syrian refugee" really should be warning enough, no? What would we take from a photo of a 3 yo drowned child?

[MADem]

27. Back when DU was a place of decency, it was customary to warn people

if images were graphic in the subject line.

Most publications are not using THAT picture -- they are using one of the soldier holding the child, only his feet and legs are visible.


I wish I could say I'm stunned at the crassness of people here of late, but I'm not.

[pscot]

39. Because this thread is all about you

[MADem]

68. Listen to you. Good grief.

This thread is about anyone who has lost a child.

And you just showed everyone what you're made of.

[Egnever]

75. .

Good lord.

DU has never been a place.of peace and serenity. What in the world are you going on about.

[MADem]

83. Straight out bull. You want examples? Here ya go. We've been civil for years. Pay attention.

smh at so many complaints regarding the "right" to crap on your fellow DUers:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026355075

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1021683

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017131317

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x735340

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=231x19205

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121836750

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x20893

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025475681

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022760583

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1711486

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025384918

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x467


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1655038
That's just the tip of the iceberg. I don't know where you've been posting but "good lord" we've always had a minimum standard of decency and decorum. THAT's what I'm "going on about." That a very small number of people are thinking it's "totally kewl" to act like selfish jerks without a thought for the feelings or experiences of anyone save themselves. That kind of shit makes DU suck.

[Egnever]

88. Exceptions do not make a rule

Just because you can point to someone formatting a post according to your ridiculously rigid formula does not mean that is how all posts were done ever.

You seem to be under the impression that you are the hall monitor that is in charge of what is and is not acceptable and you are losing it all over this thread because apparently you don't have the common sense to figure out from the title of the op that there is a picture of a dead child in the body of a post despite it saying there is.

If find your histrionics at the same time completely ammusing and utterly sad.

I don't know what is going on in your life that makes you feel the need constantly wag your finger at people from your high horse but I do hope you can find a way to let it go. This is not the first time I have seen you lose it over your sense of moral superiority but while it is somewhat amusing to watch. The tone of your posts when you are doing it makes me worry for your health.

[MADem]

89. Check the TOS. You are in the wrong. nt

[Truprogressive85]

3. wow

US/ EU has no problem bombing and supplying rebels, yet they didn't think there would be innocent bystanders trying to fleeing the war zones.

[Quantess]

5. Why does Sweden need to take in all the asylum seekers?

What did specifically Sweden do to cause the problems?

The nationalistic Sweden Democrats are enjoying a huge spike in popularity right now, gee I wonder why?

[Truprogressive85]

7. So political ramification is your only concern?

If Swedes want to take in asylum seekers good for Sweden for doing the humanitarian thing

[Quantess]

8. I'm just giving you a little bit of my local perspective, dear American.

Sweden is a sparsely populated country that takes in the lion's share of asylum seekers. More and more, swedish voters are wondering, how is that fair? And this is how the RW parties gain popularity.

[Truprogressive85]

11. We part of global community period !

France, UK, etc also need to take in these refugees

Sounds to me like some Swedish voters have drinking the same kool-aid & sharing the same talking points of the American right wing when it comes to refugees

What do you propose ? round them up and send them back?

[Quantess]

17. How about, the US take in more of them?

Germany takes in the most asylum refugees, followed by Sweden. Germany has a huge population compared to Sweden, so Sweden actually takes in more asylum seekers as a percentage of te population.

I'm not in the mood to debate anyone who isn't actually here in europe, since that would be pointless and a waste of my time. I am just giving my local perspective. I am telling you that the nationalist Sweden Democrats are now the most opinion-supported political party, in a very recent poll.

Denmark, Finland, Norway have already cooled down their acceptance of foreigners and asylum seekers, because their voters have said so. I am sure other european countries have also become less accepting, but I am more acutely aware of the neighboring countries than I am of, say, Hungary.

The Sweden Democrats are going to win the next election by a landslide.

[Truprogressive85]

28. have a good day

don't reply to

I stated my opinion on the situation you replied to me , if you don't like so be it

nor do I want even debate you

[Quantess]

31. No, of course you aren't in a position to debate what Sweden should do or how swedes should vote

in the next election. That wasn't the pint.

My opinion is that not every conversation on the DU needs to be about winning the argument. Sometimes, it can just be an exchange of perspectives.

[Surya Gayatri]

32. Thank you, Quantess. Being a European/American, I am disgusted by sanctimonious

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:45 AM - Edit history (1)

finger-pointing Americans.

How about, the US take in more of them?

INDEED.


See here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027135527#post30

Where is the US response to this catastrophe of global proportions?

Chris Hayes said it so well the other night on his MSNBC show: (paraphrase) "What would be the American reaction if there were hundreds of thousands of desperate people setting sail for US shores, with thousands dying on the way?"

What if a good percentage of Cubans, Mexicans and Haitians suddenly began sailing across the Gulf and landing on American shores? Would they be rescued during their crossing and welcomed in the way that Europe is trying to do?

[dixiegrrrrl]

45. There ARE hundreds of thousands of desperate people trying to get to teh USA!

From So. America and other countries via the Mexican border.
And the USA reaction is to build a damn wall, and make it illegal to give water to those dying of thirst in the desert.

[Egnever]

76. Well it is not like that hasn't happened in the past

We can see exactly what happened when all of the things mentioned happened.

Some of it was good some bad.

A large portion of Florida's population is of Cuban heritage from a very similar exodus.

That said I certainly wouldn't point fingers at Europe for anything they are doing.

[BarstowCowboy]

125. That happened one time

In 1994 tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians did indeed set sail for America seeking refuge. They were indeed rescued, but they weren't welcomed into America as refugees. Instead, they were held in open tents on Guantanamo Bay in camps surrounded by concertina wire. When there were too many, they were moved to an American military range in Panama. There were riots. People died. Amazingly, it was never widely reported. CNN had no interest in the story.

[DetlefK]

18. We? How many thousands of syrian refugees has the US taken in?

[Truprogressive85]

23. Beacon of hope

The US can take some refugees as well

Sorry that I actually care about people and don't want to see them die

[w0nderer]

25. couple of thousand

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/06/16/414898818/of-4-million-syrian-refugees-the-u-s-has-taken-fewer-than-1-000
claims a couple of thousand
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/resettling-syrian-refugees/
same claim
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/11/us-accept-thousands-syrian-refugees


against a population of 350 million or so vs 8-10 million and 40k refugees from Syria for Sweden

oh and the 'benefits' for a refugee/immigrant in euro zone (specially UK Germany Sweden) don't ahem quite compare either

[whathehell]

16. Dear American Expat..

If I'm not mistaken, you too are an American -- One who recently used her "right of return"

status to move to Sweden.

P.S. I actually agree with your viewpoint on this matter, FWIW

[pampango]

42. At least Assad does not bomb civilians and Russia does not keep supplying him?

Is Russia accepting many of the refugees? Did Russia think that Assad's military would put away the protesters quickly and no civil war would ensue?

[leveymg]

71. As we later found out, the armed opposition included Qatari Special Forces leading armed rebels

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 05:35 PM - Edit history (1)

from the early months of armed clashes with the regime.

From the beginning, this has been a covert activity by a coalition of foreign forces (including the US) that was intended to overthrow the Assad regime and predictably led to a widening civil and religious war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html?_r=0

[pampango]

73. Your link makes no such claims. It references events in 2012 long after the peaceful protests

of 2011 which were put down violently by King Assad II. (I think when you inherit absolute power from your father you deserve to be called a "king".) Your link does provide evidence that the King was pursuing a military victory over the protesters right from the start.

When you are a dictator with a large army and air force, you feel like you must put them to good use when confronted with "spontaneous, indigenous, centered on dissatisfied youth" protests from the people that the rest of the world thought must have loved you but were really just afraid of.

Top Ten Myths about the Arab Spring of 2011

The Arab Spring is a Western plot. This allegation was made by the Qaddafis in Libya and is currently asserted by many in Syria’s Baath Party. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is quite clear that the upheavals in the Arab world came as a surprise to the G8 nations, and were mostly at least initially unwelcome. France’s minister of defense offered help with police training to Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s Tunisia once the demonstrations got going last year this time. The US initially signalled support for Hosni Mubarak during the rallies against him of late January. Hillary Clinton said she was sure that the Mubarak regime was “stable.” Vice President Joe Biden was constrained to deny that Mubarak was “a dictator.” Obama only saw the writing on the wall with regard to Egypt at the last minute, and was starting to be a target of protest posters in Tahrir Square. The US was reluctant to lose an ally against al-Qaeda in Yemen such as Ali Abdullah Saleh, and still has never sanctioned him for killing hundreds of innocent protesters. Washington was likewise unhappy with the uprising in Bahrain, and at most urged the king to find a compromise (the US Fifth Fleet is headquartered in the capital, Manama, and so the US did not feel itself in a position to support the protesters strongly). Obama was famously reluctant to get involved in Libya. There is substantial ambivalence over the upheaval in Syria, and so far the main form of intervention is targeted financial sanctions. If there is anything that is already clear as we catch history on the run here, it is that the uprisings were spontaneous, indigenous, centered on dissatisfied youth, and that and presented the status quo Powers with unwelcome challenges.

http://www.juancole.com/2011/12/top-ten-myths-about-the-arab-spring-of-2011.html

[leveymg]

74. Various agencies of the US and other governments were running Syrian exile groups. That was

ongoing from Day One of the first mass protests in March, 2011 -- calls for the so-called Days of Rage were beamed in by exile groups operating with state sponsorship abroad -- training and guidance to Syrian opposition groups goes back years before that, and continued until overt military aid was provided later that year. I'll have to dig out the links on US, UK and French aid to the Libyan opposition predating the insurrection.

Covert foreign involvement certainly predated and continued throughout the uprising.

The armed uprising and lethal response didn't start until May. Qatari special forces were on the ground in Libya from Day One of the armed insurrection, as were intelligence officers of a number of other countries, including the US. Reports and video of third-party snipers killing policemen and demonstrators came in from early summer on. The evidence of foreign military aid to the armed opposition before the latter months of 2011 is thus far indirect. I have updated my post above.

[leveymg]

78. Then there was the role of the other Sunni militia, al-Qaeda, in Syria dating from the start

This was reported by the WaPo in February 2012. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/al-qaeda-infiltrating-syrian-opposition-us-officials-say/2012/02/16/gIQA9LDJIR_story.html

[Smarmie Doofus]

6. And would ANY of this be going on if there had been no Iraq War Resolution of 2002?

(Alert: content possibly traumatizing for the the easily and/or selectively disturbed.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/senaterollcall_iraq101002.htm

Actions have consequences. And we don't need to look as far as Turkey, China or friggin' Saudi Arabia.

[Surya Gayatri]

33. Precisely, who set this tragedy in train?

And would ANY of this be going on if there had been no Iraq War Resolution of 2002?

[Blue_Adept]

38. It's all Hillary's fault. EVERYTHING.

[Surya Gayatri]

58. Who said anything about Hills? (I'm a HRC supporter, FWIW.) The IWR

was a great hoax perpetrated by the Bush/Cheney criminal cabal against the Congress and the American public.

[Blue_Adept]

60. Anytime you see IWR mentioned around here this year...

it almost invariably leads back to HRC and her voting for it.

[Surya Gayatri]

61. Believe me, given the climate on DU these days, I understand your sensitivity.

[FlatBaroque]

12. Pathetic post. Just don't blame the country

that has been bombing the shit out of region for the past 25 years. Pathetic post.

[DetlefK]

22. Sorry that I made the article about refugees and not america-bashing.

[FlatBaroque]

35. No you absoutely didn't make it about the refugees

You simply used a graphic picture of a dead boy for shock value and then sputtered some blame everyone but the criminals.

[davidn3600]

46. The mid-east has been in war and violence for 1,000+ years

The Christians, Jews, and Muslims were killing each other in that region for centuries before Columbus ever set sail for the New World.

It didn't start just 25 years ago. That's just when we officially joined the party.

[FlatBaroque]

57. I'm not even going to try and correct your

profound ignorance. You'll have to take the initiative.

[jtuck004]

48. Careful. Truth around here makes people anxious. n/t

[jamzrockz]

40. Couldn't agree more

He tried to blame everyone but the people fueling the conflict. He even blamed Russia for doing nothing, when Russia has been the only country helping Syria society from being completely overrun by the same type of people that turned Libya into a hell hole.

I wanna feel sorry for Europe but I cant, they start wars around the world and cry when the refugees comes knocking at their doors. If I remember correctly, Sweden even though they weren't NATO members volunteered to join the international group that destroyed Libya. What they probably didn't know was that many non Libyan Africans worked in Libya and the wars they started destroyed jobs that they had in Libya, so that put more pressure on people seeking jobs to come to Europe.

Also the weapons from Libya went to Syria, Central African, Nigeria, Chad etc which created even more crisis and loss of jobs. So yea, Europe, America and the Western colonialists deserves every single refugees that come their way and they are to blame for that poor boy's death.

If you don't want to be blamed for refugees, next time don't volunteer your services to wars of aggression.

[dembotoz]

24. wonder how this would be handled by the us....would trump and the gop cheer?

[whathehell]

26. Trump and the GOP don't represent more than a franction of the US

so please don't equate the two.

[Snarkoleptic]

29. The root is religious fundamentalism.

The world will be a better place when we abandon iron-age rubbish and encourage everyone to establish a personal relationship with reality.
IMHO

[Arugula Latte]

70. Agree. Sick of people bending over backward to never say a negative word about "faith."

"Faith" = bullshit. It's believing something fervently in the complete absence of supporting evidence. It's certainly not deserving of its special status. In so many places we see the fruits of propping up mythology. That idiot Kim Davis is one of the more recent examples in the US.

[awoke_in_2003]

79. Yep

Europe is have to deal with religious fundamentalism. People leave their shithole of origin, get to their new country, and want to bring along all their religious baggage with them. Here, most of our fundamentalists are of the native born christian ilk, who want their own flavor of sharia here. Religion is the cause of way too much BS. Hopefully one day we will evolve, but I won't bet money on that.

[Surya Gayatri]

30. "It is a symbol for the callousness and cowardice of those who refuse to do anything."

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:52 AM - Edit history (1)

Including, at the top of the list, the USA, which has misjudged the Mid-East and mishandled its relationships there for the last 40+ years, thus setting in train this most recent and unprecedented tragedy with its criminal invasion and decimation of Iraq--government, infrastructure and military, in 2003. Europe is largely a hapless geopolitical victim of the same mistaken US policies.

Where is the US response to this catastrophe of global proportions?

Chris Hayes said it so well the other night on his MSNBC show: (paraphrase) "What would be the American reaction if there were hundreds of thousands of desperate people making their way by boat and over land into the US, with thousands dying on the way?"

What if a good percentage of Cubans, Mexicans and Haitians suddenly began sailing across the Gulf and landing on American shores? Would they be rescued in their crossing and welcomed in the way that Europe is trying to do?

[7wo7rees]

86. +1000 nt

[malaise]

36. All imperialists fighting for the spoils from these countries are responsible

For the record the vast majority of dictators are Western backed

[jamzrockz]

41. Yes yes and yes

Blame the people starting conflicts and backing hardcore jihadists rebels.

[WinkyDink]

50. And yet, and yet, were there these refugees under Qaddafi or Hussein?

[malaise]

55. Precisely

The war criminals unleashed this mess and it has continued unabated.
Proverbs have meaning - we reap what we sow - and they unleashed CHAOS for cash - not caring a flying fuck who died, who lost their family, homes, lives, etc. All that mattered were the profits of war

[pampango]

56. Juan Cole disagrees: "the uprisings were spontaneous, indigenous, centered on dissatisfied youth..."

Top Ten Myths about the Arab Spring of 2011

The Arab Spring is a Western plot. This allegation was made by the Qaddafis in Libya and is currently asserted by many in Syria’s Baath Party. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is quite clear that the upheavals in the Arab world came as a surprise to the G8 nations, and were mostly at least initially unwelcome. France’s minister of defense offered help with police training to Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s Tunisia once the demonstrations got going last year this time. The US initially signalled support for Hosni Mubarak during the rallies against him of late January. Hillary Clinton said she was sure that the Mubarak regime was “stable.” Vice President Joe Biden was constrained to deny that Mubarak was “a dictator.” Obama only saw the writing on the wall with regard to Egypt at the last minute, and was starting to be a target of protest posters in Tahrir Square. The US was reluctant to lose an ally against al-Qaeda in Yemen such as Ali Abdullah Saleh, and still has never sanctioned him for killing hundreds of innocent protesters. Washington was likewise unhappy with the uprising in Bahrain, and at most urged the king to find a compromise (the US Fifth Fleet is headquartered in the capital, Manama, and so the US did not feel itself in a position to support the protesters strongly). Obama was famously reluctant to get involved in Libya. There is substantial ambivalence over the upheaval in Syria, and so far the main form of intervention is targeted financial sanctions. If there is anything that is already clear as we catch history on the run here, it is that the uprisings were spontaneous, indigenous, centered on dissatisfied youth, and that and presented the status quo Powers with unwelcome challenges.

http://www.juancole.com/2011/12/top-ten-myths-about-the-arab-spring-of-2011.html

There are some liberals who wish we had supported King Assad II when protesters hit the Syrian streets in 2011.

[jalan48]

43. I don't think most American's can be shocked into caring for more than just a few minutes.

What's the saying about walking a mile in another person's shoes?

[WinkyDink]

49. I've seen other news stories that at least blur the boy's face, FGS. NOT a welcome vision.

[jeff47]

52. Actually, it is a natural disaster.

The Syrian civil war started due to a drought. Loss of income and potential famine caused the "simmering pot" to erupt into civil war.

[Surya Gayatri]

62. But, we have misguided American militarism to thank for ISIS, in large part.

The Syrian civil war created a chaotic power vacuum that ISIS was ready and willing to exploit.

[jeff47]

63. Yes, but ISIS still needed the civil war to start. And that was started by a natural disaster.

One that was likely caused or exacerbated by climate change.

It's going to be a "fun" century.

[Glassunion]

59. Your last point is not accurate at all.

- What about Islam? The vast majority of Muslims are outraged about the crimes of ISIS. Yet somehow no religious leader is stepping forward to attack ISIS on a religious level, trying to prove their end-times doctrine of an extremist, apocalyptic Islam wrong. ISIS not only recruits from disillusioned fanatics. They also recruit from those Muslims who are attracted to a life of warfare, slavery and rape. Yet there is no attempt to attack ISIS with oral arguments.

A very common, and often repeated mantra (see: Fox News) is that Muslims haven’t roundly condemned the extremism committed in Islam’s name. I cannot count the times where I have heard “Where are the Muslim voices in condemnation?” “Why aren’t Muslims speaking up against extremists like ISIS?”

Well, the fact is, Muslims have been speaking out against ISIS and other extremist groups. The problem is, some times, people either don’t know or choose not to know this fact.

The Secretary General for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which represents 1.4 billion Muslims in 57 countries around the world, condemned the Islamic State’s persecution of of Christians and other religious minorities in Iraq, saying the “forced deportation under the threat of execution” is a “crime that cannot be tolerated.”. The Secretary General also distanced Islam from the actions of the militant group known as ISIS, saying they ‘have nothing to do with Islam and its principles that call for justice, kindness, fairness, freedom of faith and coexistence.’

Lebanese paper The Daily Star reported that Al-Azhar’s Grand Mufti Shawqi Allam, Egypt’s highest religious authority, denounced the Islamic State as a threat to Islam and said that the group both violates Sharia law and humanitarian law: “(They) give an opportunity for those who seek to harm us, to destroy us and interfere in our affairs with the (pretext of a) call to fight terrorism.”

On August 11, Nabil al-Arabi, the Arab League Chief, denounced acts committed by the Islamic State in Iraq as “crimes against humanity,” demanding that they be brought to justice. According to Al Arabiya News, he said in a statement that he “strongly denounced the crimes, killings, dispossession carried out by the terrorist (ISIS) against civilians and minorities in Iraq that have affected Christians in Mosul and Yazidis.”

Turkey’s highest ranking cleric, Mehmet Gormez, decried the Islamic State’s declaration of a “caliphate” and argued that the statements were damaging to the Muslim community, according to Reuters: “Such declarations have no legitimacy whatsoever,” Mehmet Gormez, head of the Religious Affairs Directorate, the highest religious authority in Turkey. Gormez said death threats against non-Muslims made by the group, formerly known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), were hugely damaging. “The statement made against Christians is truly awful. Islamic scholars need to focus on this (because) an inability to peacefully sustain other faiths and cultures heralds the collapse of a civilization,” he told Reuters in an interview.

In a July 7 statement, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called the terrorist group “un-Islamic and morally repugnant,” noted that the Islamic State’s “human rights abuses on the ground are well-documented,” and called on other Muslim community leaders to speak out against the violence. CAIR reiterated the condemnation of the Islamic State as “both un-Islamic and morally repugnant” on August 11, and on August 21, CAIR once again condemned the group, calling the killing of American journalist James Foley “gruesome and barbaric”: "We strongly condemn this gruesome and barbaric killing as a violation of Islamic beliefs and of universally-accepted international norms mandating the protection of prisoners and journalists during conflicts."

The list goes on and on...

[smirkymonkey]

81. Maybe I missed something, but why aren't the more stable, peaceful middle eastern and Asian

countries taking in thees refugees. They have much more in common, culturally, socially and religiously. It would be much easier to assimilate AND they have a LOT more space. I might have been absent the day this was discussed, but I really don't understand why they aren't at least doing their fair share.

Europe is the most densely populated continent on the planet. They can only be stretched so far. Central Asia maybe?

[Glassunion]

90. You'd have to ask them.

Asia is pretty far from Pennsylvania.

And that has zero to do with what I posted.

[smirkymonkey]

124. sorry, I was reading your post when I meant to reply to the OP.

It was not a response to your post. Apologies.

[Glassunion]

130. Read my sig line...

Yep... Been there.

[Nevernose]

91. Who are these "stable, peaceful Middle Eastern countries?"

Because if you can think of of one, the rest of the world would sure love to hear about it. And what makes you think these Arab refugees have anything in common with Indonesians other than religion?

In your OP you made some good points before totally blowing it with the last one. Maybe admit the error and focus on one of your other points?

Also, I've been to Central Asia. Besides having a very different culture than the Arabs, there ain't shit there. Central Asia is a total fucking dump, a real shithole, and I bet some of them would rather live on the Syrian coast. (Nice people, though)

(Sorry for hopping onto someone else's dialogue)

[Rex]

67. If only humans cared, but they don't.

This was a failure of humanity and just one of countless numbers.


Nobody tried to stop GWB and his murderous thugs after this pic came out.


Did anyone demand the bombing in Iraq stop so the kids would be safe? No.

So please DON'T stick a pic of a dead kid on here and think it is going to change anything. Humans are too full of bloodlust to care about what happens to children. Don't take my word for it just ask some of the millions of families that no longer have a child running around the house.

[eissa]

69. Totally agree with you, and this from someone whose family arrived on those shores

Fortunately, the human smugglers we helped pay for my husband's family used alternate routes and were able to make it in safely. They are now on the journey of seeking asylum in any country that will take them. Slovakia has stated they will take in a handful of Christian refugees, so they are trying their luck there first.

I think Europe should be commended for at least taking in the VAST majority of these refugees. Countries like Turkey, the Gulf Arab nations and Saudi -- who have contributed more than anyone to the chaos in Syria, have done NOTHING. The least they can do is take in some of their Muslim brethren, but they have refused even that. Lebanon and Jordan -- countries with far less resources than them -- are shouldering most of the responsibility and they're already overwhelmed with Palestinian and Iraqi refugees.

[lpbk2713]

82. I hope you are all reunited safely and soon.

I'm glad at least part of the ordeal is behind them.

[JCMach1]

98. Where is the Arab world in dealing with the refugee crisis...?

Wealthy Gulf Countries AWOL completely after helping create the ISIS monster. Jordan and Lebanon do help, but it' the help of second-class treatment and misery. Ask any Palestinian living in a camp in Lebanon.

[notspecial]

105. Egyptian Billionaire Ready to Step Up

http://www.sabreakingnews.co.za/2015/09/03/egyptian-billionaire-wants-to-buy-an-island-to-house-migrants/

[TeamPooka]

127. Welcome to DU! nt

[JustAnotherGen]

128. He's awesome!

I know nothing of this man - but what I do know? He's awesome!

He's serious.

[MattSh]

126. Well, if you get all your news from USA and Europe mainstream media...

It's not surprising you're blaming everyone else.

If the USA and the EU didn't back the rebels, then and now, the rebel armies would fall apart. That's the only reason there still is a war going on there. Who else backs these rebels? Why, there's our old friend Saudi Arabia!

[pampango]

129. True but it takes two sides (at least) to have a war. Are both sides at fault or just one? n/t