To be in tears over the news today?

[KnockMeDown]

71 migrants suffocated in a truck. Countless scores drowning in the Med. There doesn't seem to be an answer - they will keep coming, searching for a better life, wanting just the basics for their families.

I've kept it at bay up to now, but that truck... What were they thinking at the end

I don't know what to say, or think, or do, but I am incredibly upset over it.

We didn't want the jewish refugees coming either.

When googling I found this article from 2002, titled 'We've been here before'. It's interesting on a number of points.

www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/jun/08/immigration.immigrationandpublicservices

Of course, there are significant differences between the 1930s and today. For one thing, the terminology has changed - from refugee to asylum seeker. "Refugee" reminds us that they're seeking refuge from persecution; today's "asylum seeker" focuses on the place to which they want to come.

Now, in 2015 we call them migrants, not even asylum seekers. This helps perpetrate the idea that they could 'just' be economic migrants or illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants itself is a disingenuous word as it suggests criminality rather than desperation. They might even be ISIS! Probably 50% ISIS. We can't let them in. We mustn't let them in. They'll kill us all in our beds.

twisted - I don't need to imagine that scenario - we didn't intervene in Nazi Germany when we knew that Jews were being rounded up......

We declared war on Germany when they invaded Poland. We fought the Nazi regime - we didn't just run away from them.

will you be happy for your children to fight the good fight bmw? Or will you do whatever you can to protect them? like any other decent parents?

you talk like life means nothing to you.

Many are simply 'economic migrants'. They are not all in danger or being persecuted in their own countries. Many just want to come here because they think they will have a better life style here.

Wars in Eastern Europe are over - still migrants come because their countries are poor compared to Western Europe.
Many West Africans are the same- they are coming in hge numbers for financial reasons- because people are better looked after in Western Europe.
Their own countries do not look after their people and they do not like living there when they see it is better elsewhere.

Others come because they fear for their lives in their own country.

That is the difference between just opening borders to anyone who wants to come and taking in people who come because their lives are at risk from violence.

Its like the hydra. Admit 1000 and next week there will be 10 000 at Calais.

so what DO we do?

It is horrific. But the thing that brought me to actual tears yesterday was looking at the Britain First FB page. Yes, I know I shouldn't even click on the page, but I saw something linked and I had a look.

The comments

I know that these people are just thick neanderthals who are not interested in educating themseves, but i can only hope that most of the comments were just a minority of people.trolling, because if not, then the statement 'an atrocity like the holocaust would just never happen again' simply isn't true.

Gah, I worded that last bit terribly.but hopefully.you.know what I mean.

Theoriginal We need to be clear as a country what we are prepared to do and then work towards that. It is not a one off crisis. It is going to be a crisis for the next 10 years at least.

It is tied up withour position in the EU- the government are holding a referendum on that. Are we going to stay? If we are then there will have to be negotiation about our responsibilities and the quotas they will give us. If we are not, we will have to make our own decision and then police our own borders. The French will move the border from Calais to our side of the channel tunnel which means they will take no responsibility at all for migrants in Calais getting into trains, lorries etc. We will find them once they have crossed our borders and are here. What hapens then? We'll have to decide and resource that whether it is transporting them back to their own country -if they will take them. Or whether it is allowing them to stay in which case we need to put billions into housing, social care, health care, education, benefits.

The referendum is two years away- what are we doing until then?

At the minute we are just fannying on. We are all horrified by what we are seeing and there is lots of emotion around. We are ineffectively trying to stop migrants at Calais but they are just released down the road and start again. We aren't doing aything that us very effective to eithet help the people or prevent them.

I think a referendum would be very interesting in terms of guaing public feeling. I suspect the outcome would be to leave the EU and a driving factor would be immigration.

We want to be seen to help people, just not to come here. We are happy to give funding to their countries but we can't solve any problems doing that. Most of these countries are corrupt and have no desire to change.

The government is pussyfooting around signing agreements about border controls but not actually saying what it really wants to say because they will be flamed across the world. What they really want to say is 'No, we will not take any migrants unless they are billionaires We are closing our borders and will not be taking anyone.' That is what they really want to say but the wrath of Europe (Angela Merkel) will rain down on them and David Cameron likes to see himself as a big player which he isn't

sounds to me like angela merkel is the one to follow here.

can we not set up decent borders at calais? with decent serviceable accommodation. Then people stay there while their application for asylum is processed?

i am probably missing something but that could work couldn't it???

There are always a few people at calais trying to get through. Some will be 'simply' economic migrants who have risked their lives to get there. When you get massive spikes in migration that coincidentally coincide with war then you tell yourself that many of them are economic migrants if it let's you tell yourself we shouldn't help when you see them drown on TV.

The UK isn't even willing to 'do their bit' let alone at any risk of sinking under the weight of refugees desperate to save their lives and their children.

You are right BMW6 and waffly - I did not mean that we did treat jewish refugees well either- but it was the idea of saying to them, 'sort it out youself' which seemed to be part of the essence of BMW6's argument that I was wanting to pick up on.

Because now that the holocaust in germany is in the past, we rightly condemn it as one of the biggest atrocities of the 20th century- it is unthinkable that most people would talk of the plight of jews in germany during that period in the same way they are talking about refugees from Syria, Africa etc now.

But actually these people are being tortured and murdered. We talk about 'our' country as if we have the right to safety just due to the luck of birth place, while these other human beings don't.

I can't read the news. It upsets me so much. But that doesn't mean I don't think about this daily.

No one has the answers. But I feel the answer must lie in helping ensure that people don't feel so desperate that they want to leave their home country in the first place.

And until the Middle East stabilises, this isn't going to happen

Baltimore that's an interesting idea that we have room for millions of migrants if they all come to Scotland!

Completely unworkable of course as the reason there are large swathes of Scotland with a very low population is that those areas are unsuitable for living in. No jobs, no infrastructure, no agriculture (apart from a few sheep), and a lot of hills and mountains. I suppose you could force all migrants into those areas, build some tent cities and then watch them freeze to death in the winter

I've had the same thoughts as the previous poster regarding why more don't stay and fight. If ISIS or another invading/ occupying force started up in this country I would do everything I could to fight against them and would be encouraging my husband and children to do the same. Perhaps it is easy to think that but the reality is different? I do hope that I never have to find out.

Someone posted the pictures of the drowned children on Facebook and it came up on my feed. Little bodies in the surf where they'd washed up. Some of them still had nappies on.

why more don't stay and fight. If ISIS or another invading/ occupying force started up in this country I would do everything I could to fight against them
But the 2 are not analogous, if there were a network of people traffickers offering a better life elsewhere and you saw no hope of improvement in your country of origin then you may well decide that it was in your best interests to flee?

If we were invaded we would probably see a strong possibility of returning to our previous lives, if all you've ever known is conflict and instability then there is no good life to return to

I think the way to see it is 'What would make me do what they are doing?' Then assume that's the least bad it is for them.

suzanne I don't think all of the migrants are fleeing places where all they've ever known is conflict. People smugglers are the problem though, much more needs to be done to stop them as so many of the people they are taking large sums of money from are dying.

Traffickers are a symptom. You don't get traffickers of British people to Sweden or Turkey or wherever because there is no demand.

The Syrian mother holding her baby above water and the excellent piece written below on Facebook has made me cry this morning.

Imagine brushing your daughter's hair on the morning and then strapping her into a life jacket,reassuring her all the while knowing she was facing a high probability of death but a much better option than what you are leaving behind. Trying to lie to my most intuitive son.Words fail me.

This transcends all the debate. They are mothers just like us. We would have to do the same. It's so wrong to just turn a blind eye and wrangle for days,weeks,months whilst more human heartbreak goes on under our noses.

I've had the same thoughts as the previous poster regarding why more don't stay and fight. If ISIS or another invading/ occupying force started up in this country I would do everything I could to fight against them and would be encouraging my husband and children to do the same. Perhaps it is easy to think that but the reality is different? I do hope that I never have to find out.

Crikey, exactly, you will never have to find out, and I'm very dubious of the idea that you would choose to stay and fight people who are behaving those you love in front of you when someone offers you an alternative.

I understand the emotional responses to this. But to the posters saying this - what is your suggestion? That Western Europe opens its borders to all that wish to come?

If the UK was invaded what country would we be tempted to flee to for a better life?

I think it's easy to say you'd stay and fight when you don't actually have to. I look at my son, who is only little, and imagine he is a teenager or a young man. Would I say to him 'stay and fight' knowing there is a strong possibility he will die, or would I say 'get the hell out, any way you can. A single male can escape much easier than an entire family'. I'd go for the latter every time.

You don't have to be a teenager to become a soldier in many places.

Who to fight with? ISIS? Assad? I'm not keen to put my life on the line for either.