Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[McLaren]

Super

For starters I live in a one bedroom flat. But I think you know that it should not take the people of a nation putting refugees up in their house before the government is required to do anything about it.

For example the government could easily rent 50 premier inns and put the refugees there until they can be given homes.


"Of course it matters. They have a far greater responsibility than the UK does"

So you are saying that because those countries closer to Syria have neglected their responsibilities the UK has the right to do nothing? You are saying that one country doing nothing is sufficient for another country to justify doing nothing?


bob

WTF was that?

[Mad for Chelsea]

erm, super, you do know almost half of Lebannon's current population is currently made out of Syrian refugees? Not sure that counts as doing nothing TBH... Actually one of the good things the UK is doing about the crisis is the aid they are sending to help with the refugee camps in Lebannon, Jordan, etc.

Their response to the flood of refugees arriving in Europe is of course wholly inadequate, but they are not the only country guilty there. What was really needed was a fast, coordinated, European-wide response to the phenomenon, but that didn't happen, and it's probably too late now.

The safety of the refugees (or rather, lack thereof) should be of particular concern, as Mac points out. There are many unaccompanied children and young women, and the dangers of these people being sold into human trafficking is worrying. Again, the collective response has let these vulnerable people down.

Of course, rather than cheap point scoring on a message board, it might be better to get out there and make a difference. There are many humanitarian associations attempting to help as best they can in the crisis, a quick internet search should find one near you, and a myriad ways in which you can help: it could be by donating money, or clothes/other essentials, or just time to sort through donations and pack them before they're shipped off to wherever they're most needed. You could even get yourself off to Calais/Lesbos/wherever and provide help and support on the ground, though in that case it's strongly recommended you get in touch with a team there already beforehand, to see if a) they need you and b) in what way you could be most helpful.

More simply, you could petition your local MP, or anyone with the power to make a difference. I wrote to the French President a few weeks ago about the situation in Calais, and got a reply, albeit not a particularly helpful one (though it was a proper reply, rather than a pre-written response). I'm not sure these things help very much, but pretty sure if enough people raise awareness it can't hurt.

Basically, talk is cheap, actions are more important, so if you are concerned, get out there and DO something...

EDIT: I see Bob's post has snuck in in the meantime, he raises some valid points...

[super_realist]

Super

For starters I live in a one bedroom flat.  But I think you know that it should not take the people of a nation putting refugees up in their house before the government is required to do anything about it.  

For example the government could easily rent 50 premier inns and put the refugees there until they can be given homes.


"Of course it matters. They have a far greater responsibility than the UK does"

So you are saying that because those countries closer to Syria have neglected their responsibilities the UK has the right to do nothing?  You are saying that one country doing nothing is sufficient for another country to justify doing nothing?


bob

WTF was that?

Mac, you really are a dolt, I did not excuse Britain from doing nothing (they aren't doing nothing) I'm suggesting that the neighbours of Syria aren't sufficiently pulling their weight.

[Mad for Chelsea]

OK looks like I may have over-stated the number of Syrian refugees in Lebanon... There's still over a million there, 2.6 million in Turkey, more than 600k in Jordan, and nealry 250k in Iraq. In contrast, the UK has pledged to take in... 20 000 over the next four years. But sure, it's the neighbours of Syria who "aren't sufficiently pulling their weight"...

http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php

[McLaren]

I am confused.

You don't excuse the UK for doing nothing yet do not think our politicians have done anything wrong in handling the crisis.

You have also said you think the UK's response is in some way dependent on what Syria's neighbors do? Which as Mad for Chelsea points out is actually quite a lot, so shouldn't the UK be doing a lot more be your reasoning?


Why not be clear instead of being cagey and state your position, covering some of the points below along with any other thoughts you have.

For example, do you think the UK should be doing more?

Is it the governments (+oppositions) responsibility to make this happen?

Why does the behavior of other countries effect what humanitarian response the UK takes?

Are there any reasons not to provide safe heavens for refugees?

[super_realist]

I am confused.

You don't excuse the UK for doing nothing yet do not think our politicians have done anything wrong in handling the crisis.  

You have also said you think the UK's response is in some way dependent on what Syria's neighbors do?  Which as Mad for Chelsea points out is actually quite a lot, so shouldn't the UK be doing a lot more be your reasoning?


Why not be clear instead of being cagey and state your position, covering some of the points below along with any other thoughts you have.

For example, do you think the UK should be doing more?

Is it the governments (+oppositions) responsibility to make this happen?

Why does the behavior of other countries effect what humanitarian response the UK takes?

Are there any reasons not to provide safe heavens for refugees?

Mac, ONE country has done something, what about all the others in the region? These are their Muslim brothers after all, and they have a religious duty to do so.
You have simply asserted that Britain is doing nothing. Prove it.

I'm sure lots of countries could help, but there are a lot of unpleasant things happening in the world, yet, I don't see you saying that it is Britain's responsibility to do something about those. You only go on about one issue. You just like to be seen to be considerate and caring, I doubt whether you really care at all.

If you don't even know the difference between "affect" and "effect" I'm not sure it's worth a debate.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Mac, ONE country has done something, what about all the others in the region? These are their Muslim brothers after all, and they have a religious duty to do so.

I'm sure lots of countries could help, but there are a lot of unpleasant things happening in the world, yet, I don't see you saying that it is Britain's responsibility to do something about those. You only go on about one issue. You just like to be seen to be considerate and caring, I doubt whether you really care at all.

If you don't even know the difference between "affect" and "effect" I'm not sure it's worth a debate.

Erm, did you read the link I posted?

Lebanon - over 1 million
Turkey - 2.6 million
Jordan - 637k
Iraq (hardly the world's safest haven) - 245k

Heck, even Egypt has taken in 120k which is 6 times what the UK has pledged over the next 4 years (so 24 times what the UK will take in this year).

These are only the stats for neighbouring countries of course, which is the point you raised. In fact, only Israel in the region isn't doing anything, perhaps unsurprisingly...

[super_realist]

So the point is that the UK hasn't done nothing. Ok, case closed.

[Mad for Chelsea]

So the point is that the UK hasn't done nothing. Ok, case closed.

[McLaren]

Supers neoconism shining out like a beacon today.

To really close the the case will you agree to the following statement.

Whatever the solution to helping Syrian refugees is the UK has done all it needs to do and need not take any further action.

[super_realist]

No, I'm simply responding to your claim that Britain has done nothing. Not true, you might want to look up Neocon too, as it's clear you don't understand the meaning.

The grammar in your closing statement doesn't even make sense. Instead of watching Pointless, you should probably read some books.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Actually, super, Mac's initial question was the following: "what do you think about the UK's response to the migrant crisis and have politicians done enough to ensure the safety of people displaced from Syria?"

You responded on a tangent that it should be up to Syria's neighbours in the region to do something. When it was pointed out to you that they already do a heck of a lot, and far far far more than the UK, you came back with "so the UK don't do nothing, case closed". So you still haven't responded to the initial question, despite your tenuous counter-argument being proved completely and utterly false.

I'm always amazed by people's complete inability to ever admit they can be wrong, even when by their own admission, they're coming out with statements on subjects they don't know much about... This of course goes for Mac too on other subjects, but on this one he asked a perfectly reasonable question which for some reason you don't want to answer?

[McLaren]

If Douglas Murray is a neocon I think my usage of the word is fine.


Would you be happier if we said the UK had done very little to help Syrian refugees?

Ok, will try and rephrase the statement.

The UK has fulfilled all possible responsibility it has towards helping syrian refugees and does not need to take any further action.

Would you agree with that?



And as MFC points out you did not answer the original question. "what do you think about the UK's response to the migrant crisis and have politicians done enough to ensure the safety of people displaced from Syria?"

It would be great if you could address both the above questions.

[super_realist]

Actually, Mac's initial question was the following: "what do you think about the UK's response to the migrant crisis and have politicians done enough to ensure the safety of people displaced from Syria?"

You responded on a tangent that it should be up to Syria's neighbours in the region to do something. When it was pointed out to you that they already do a heck of a lot, and far far far more than the UK, you came back with "so the UK don't do nothing, case closed".

I'm always amazed by people's complete inability to ever admit they can be wrong, even when by their own admission, they're coming out with statements on subjects they don't know much about...

Actually, It was only pointed AFTER I made that statement that they have done something, albeit, not as much as they could in my opinion.
Mac asserted that Britain has done nothing, which translates more like "they haven't done as much as Mac would like" whilst he only seems to have Syria as his pet project for smearing Britain, yet doesn't care about all other aspects Britain may be helping with, or be able to help with.

Has Britain done nothing? No. Has it done enough? Well, that's a  matter of opinion.

Actually I did answer your question, I said I hadn't been following Britain's involvement to make comment.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Just to come across as slightly balanced, Mac, while it's all very well and good claiming the moral high ground on a golf message board, it would be even better if you
a) extended this to the wider world. Go out, raise awareness of the issue on social media, in the street, petition your MP, whatever.
b) actually contributed to helping the refugees.

(see previous post)

Talk is cheap.

Apologies if I'm coming across strongly and aggressively at times, but this is one of the causes which has really touched me deeply, so...

[McLaren]

If it is a matter of opinion can we please hear what your opinion is?

I guess if you answered this question "what do you think about the UK's response to the migrant crisis and have politicians done enough to ensure the safety of people displaced from Syria?", we might hear your opinion.

Please move on from has the UK done nothing or very little argument and engage in the more important element of the debate.

[super_realist]

My opinion is that I don't really care about the situation Mac, but that doesn't mean I can't call you out on your claim that Britain has or continues to do nothing.

What are YOU doing to help with the situation?, I presume nothing, other than being so keen to appear holier than thou, which makes you just as bad as the politicians you are so keen on denigrating.

For such a political person, or at least one who pretends to be, I doubt you do anything about all these campaigns you claim to be so interested in.

[McLaren]

MFC

True, I probably haven't done enough.  Although I believe pressure on elected officials to do something is the only way to properly solve the problem.

[Mad for Chelsea]

here is a succession of quotes from you super.

"I'd be more interested to hear why the immediate neighbours of Syria are seemingly doing nothing at all."

I respond with a comment about how much Lebanon has done.

"Mac, ONE country has done something, what about all the others in the region?"

Link to point out that all their immediate neighbours are doing a heck of a lot, far far far more than the UK.

"So the point is that the UK hasn't done nothing. Ok, case closed."

There's not much debating going on...

It would have been easier had you just posted the previous point with "I don't really care enough"...

[McLaren]

Wow, a million posts and Super finally admits he doesn't care about those people from Syria being forced to live (and die) in totally inhumane circumstances.

[McLaren]

MFC

Great deconstruction of Supers non-argument.

[Mad for Chelsea]

MFC

True, I probably haven't done enough.  Although I believe pressure on elected officials to do something is the only way to properly solve the problem.

A fair enough attitude to have, so again: write to your local MP, get involved with local and national pressure groups - a simple internet search will reveal some near you. Heck, I'll even help you write to the French president if you like - best to focus on Calais, perhaps, in that case - link here
http://www.elysee.fr/ecrire-au-president-de-la-republique/
and if you PM me your message I'll be more than happy to translate it into French for you (our esteemed Monsieur le President doesn't speak English).

[super_realist]

Wow, a million posts and Super finally admits he doesn't care about those people from Syria being forced to live (and die) in totally inhumane circumstances.

What use has your caring done Mac? If you have done nothing, you are no better than me.

[McLaren]

MFC - I have done some of the things you mention above. I am not sure if you have ever written to an MP or MSP but the generic response you receive can sometimes be rather galling.

Although obviously I haven't written to the French president.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Fair enough. I don't genuinely expect you to write to the French President of course I did in response to planned evictions from Calais, not really knowing what else to do. I have written to my local MP in the past (not often, I only moved to the UK in July), and I agree about the generic response, or complete lack of any response whatsoever (which I got on the Syrian bombing, albeit my local MP voted the way I was urging him to anyway), though they must receive many many e-mails so it's understandable. Still, it can't hurt to try.

“I wondered why somebody didn’t do something. Then I realized that I am somebody” sometimes attributed to Lily Tomlin apparently, though not with any great certainty.

[McLaren]

Not sure I buy that argument super.

Lets have a think about this.

Lets say there are four types of response.

1. Do a little (sign a petition, write to an MP etc) - Where I am at.

2. Do a lot (go to the sites where aid needs to be given, organize a protest/march etc)

3. Do nothing but care

4. Do nothing and don't care.


Now image everyone or a lot of people carry out each response and see where that gets you.

Everyone doing 1 should result in enough political pressure that those seeking re-election would have to act.

If everyone did 2 the same applies and refugees get all the care they need.

Is there a difference between 3 and 4?

Yes, I think there is. Because we are in position 4, the number of people in the Uk who don't care has given the political class the implicit instructions that they don't have to care either.

Whereas if it was known that this is an issue people care about a subtle but crucial pressure to do something would exist. Position 3 is a milder form of position 1 when scaled up.

[super_realist]

Be honest Mac, have you ACTUALLY done anything? If so, what exactly was your course of action and what did you state?

[McLaren]

As I said. Signed a few petitions and written to MP + MSP. Again I admit not a lot. Still don't see why ad homming me changes the argument whether or not the UK is doing enough.

It would also be good if you could address my argument that not caring does matter?

[super_realist]

What ad-hom?

3 and 4 are the same to me, because neither of them get to the people who can make changes.

Are you an American by the way Mac? Your spelling is full of American spelling.

[McLaren]

So you don't think political parties try and monitor what the mood of the people is when forming policies?


No I am not American but do have terrible spelling and grammar. The google auto correct must use american spellings.

[super_realist]

If all you do is claim to care as per number 3, without taking any action, the political parties have no idea of the mood of the people in order to form any policies.

[McLaren]

Memphis. WTF?

[McLaren]

Lucky wee wankstain.

Tiger Woods Witnesses the First Hole-in-One at The Playgrounds:

[Roller_Coaster]

Saw that story on the BBC. Hope he bought everyone a drink!

[McLaren]

Quite a lot of people (including some on here) were up for giving Ched Evans a second chance after his release from jail, just wondering if anyone on here would be ok with AJ playing for your club if his sentence isn't too long and he has a bit of career left in him after his release?

[I'm never wrong]

Mac
You often pose questions on the forum, asking for opinions of others. I would be more inclined to answer if you posted your opinion along with the question.

[super_realist]

Legally, there would be no reason not to, morally and commercially though, it wouldn't be advised.

[McLaren]

Mac
You often pose questions on the forum, asking for opinions of others. I would be more inclined to answer if you posted your opinion along with the question.

As a soft liberal I clearly think rehabilitation is one of the best ways to lower the number of people who become victims of crimes. But currently we don't have a system that can reform sex offenders so there is no reason to believe AJ won't be a recidivist.

He has had to sign the sex offenders register which leaves certain career paths closed to him. Professional footballer probably isn't on the list of jobs a sex offender cannot do but there are reasons not to allow him to return to such a high profile position. The main one being the impact it will have on the victim(s) of his crimes. This falls into ethical and not legal grounds but I would not consider it a particularly good moral act to put AJ in a position to cause further distress to victims through placing him in a highly paid and high public profile job.

This doesn't have to be about what he deserves we can fully focus on what is optimal for the victims.

[super_realist]

As long as people don't claim he's a "role model" I don't care.

[I'm never wrong]

Mac
Apart from your first paragraph - where I am at the opposite end of the "punishment" spectrum - I agree with your comments. Consideration of the victim must come first. My view on that once he has finished his sentence he takes up employment where he works for the community or a charity.

[McLaren]

I assume you agree that we can't/don't currently rehabilitate sex offenders?

[super_realist]

He's rich enough I presume he won't ever have to work again.

[I'm never wrong]

I assume you agree that we can't/don't currently rehabilitate sex offenders?  

Not the point I was trying to make Mac, I just think more prison time is the best deterrent to committing crimes.

[McLaren]

I assume you agree that we can't/don't currently rehabilitate sex offenders?  

Not the point I was trying to make Mac, I just think more prison time is the best deterrent to committing crimes.

Ask our yank friends about that if you want some real world examples of how wrong that idea is.

[Roller_Coaster]

As long as people don't claim he's a "role model" I don't care.

Interestingly on that point, the police officer does. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35711213

Speaking after the verdicts, Det Insp Aelfwynn Sampson from Durham Police praised the victim for her bravery.

She said: "In our football-obsessed region, Adam Johnson had a responsibility as a professional footballer to be a role model, a role he did not fulfil."

I'm not arguing against your stated/known opinion in this respect (or trying to go over old ground) but I think that there is a general public perception that such high profile persons are taken to be role models, whether they should be or not. Unfortunately public perception is or can easily become what the expected "norm" is.

[McLaren]

For anyone else teased by the new ghostbusters trailer.  You gotta hear the full tune.

Spoiler:

One of the themes of my childhood. Our local cinema replayed it in the early 90's at some point and I was hooked.  As a kid I used to tell people it was my dream to visit NY as I loved it so much.

[super_realist]

As long as people don't claim he's a "role model" I don't care.

Interestingly on that point, the police officer does. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35711213

Speaking after the verdicts, Det Insp Aelfwynn Sampson from Durham Police praised the victim for her bravery.

She said: "In our football-obsessed region, Adam Johnson had a responsibility as a professional footballer to be a role model, a role he did not fulfil."

I'm not arguing against your stated/known opinion in this respect (or trying to go over old ground) but I think that there is a general public perception that such high profile persons are taken to be role models, whether they should be or not. Unfortunately public perception is or can easily become what the expected "norm" is.

It's a terrible cliche to use, and one which is used in completely the wrong context. Footballers when in the media, are hideous people and are anything but role models.
What I hate most about the "role model" cliches is that it presumes that only such people should behave decently and that the general public can't possibly live up to those standards, when in fact it should be that everyone ought to behave in a decent manner, being a footballer, even in the dump of the north east, shouldn't mean that your behaviour is held above that of the general public.
We put too much emphasis on these people, and not enough on the behaviour of normal people.

[kwinigolfer]

Be careful what you say about the north-east, Sunderland in particular; Diggers is only a "send" click away.


I bet hundreds of "role models" (agree super, ridiculous use of the phrase) are thinking there but for the grace of . . . goes me.

[raycastleunited]

For anyone else teased by the new ghostbusters trailer.  You gotta hear the full tune.

Spoiler:

One of the themes of my childhood. Our local cinema replayed it in the early 90's at some point and I was hooked.  As a kid I used to tell people it was my dream to visit NY as I loved it so much.

First tune I ever owned, still great.

You must have grown up somewhere really backward if you saw this in the cinema in the 90s. It explains a lot.

[McLaren]

Ray

It was probably just an independent cinema, they often show older movies.

[Sponsored content]