picture of the day

Teamwork

15 Comments

Syrian girls from the Zaatari refugee camp, in red, pose for a photo during a game of soccer with the Japanese Under 17 Women's World Cup team and five Jordanian girls, in Amman, Jordan, Wednesday. With support from UNICEF, the gathering is part of a program that brings together thousands of Jordanian and Syrian children in host communities through soccer and art activities.

© Japan Today

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

15 Comments
Login to comment

Kudos to all participants and sponsors!

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Good on them for keeping such a cheerful disposition under such difficult conditions.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

I really applaud the kids for their ability to care and understand each other. While adults spew politics, these kids are spreading love and friendship.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Good for them.

Now Japan should start letting in more of these refugees if that is what the refugees want.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

oldman: I disagree.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

oldman_13OCT. 06, 2016 - 10:26AM JST

no, america/russia/saudi should stop creating anymore refugees and so they can start rebuilding their home

5 ( +7 / -2 )

People in Syria have no reason to be evacuated thousands of miles away. All neighbouring countries can take them quite easily. Enough of this nonsense.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

People in Syria have no reason to be evacuated thousands of miles away. All neighbouring countries can take them quite easily.

What are you talking about?? In turkey, lebanon and Jordan alone there are OVER 5 million. Take a look

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@Aly Rustom: I know that. I was responding to oldman_13's silly comment.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Now Japan should start letting in more of these refugees -Oldman_13

In turkey, lebanon and Jordan alone there are OVER 5 million. -Aly Rustom

There's a very legitimate reason why the refugee burden should always be placed on neighbouring countries, and that's because these countries have the greatest incentive,ability and responsibility to create regional stability and diffuse conflicts before they get out of hand.

After the influx that Turkey, Jordan and Iraq have faced, I'm sure they will think twice about allowing America to use their airbases in any future conflict with Iran, or allow Saudi Arabia to continue funding extremist mosques. Paradoxically, if we distribute refugees across the globe it might just encourages even more armed conflict by lessening the consequences for those involved. For example, the main reason South Korea has never invaded the North after 1953 is because they fear the burden of millions of refugees streaming across the border. Remove that disincentive for war and you have a very dangerous situation.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@Aly Rustom: I know that. I was responding to oldman_13's silly comment.

I'm sorry, my friend. I misunderstood.

There's a very legitimate reason why the refugee burden should always be placed on neighbouring countries, and that's because these countries have the greatest incentive,ability and responsibility to create regional stability and diffuse conflicts before they get out of hand.

There's a very legitimate reason why the refugee burden should be placed on the western countries and Russia, and that's because these countries have the greatest incentive,ability and responsibility to create regional stability and diffuse conflicts before they get out of hand.

After the influx that Turkey, Jordan and Iraq have faced, I'm sure they will think twice about allowing America to use their airbases in any future conflict with Iran, or allow Saudi Arabia to continue funding extremist mosques.

That's just ridiculous. Who is in Syria causing all the misery, terror, and chaos? Iran, Russia, and the regime. And if you remove the ability of the refugees to escape the misery terror and chaos, what happens?? well, they'll have NO choice but to join IS as a means to save their families from self destruction. By not granting Asylum, you are creating new jihadis.

For example, the main reason South Korea has never invaded the North after 1953 is because they fear the burden of millions of refugees streaming across the border. Remove that disincentive for war and you have a very dangerous situation.

Then why have they pursued a path to unification?? No. the main reason South Korea has never invaded the North after 1953 is because they fear the burden of millions of CHINESE soldiers streaming across the border to help the north, which is EXACTLY what happened during the korean war when the south pushed back the north all the way PAST pyongyang.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@Aly Rustom

the refugee burden should be placed on the western countries and Russia, and that's because these countries have the greatest incentive,ability and responsibility to create regional stability and diffuse conflicts before they get out of hand.

If you are suggesting that the West and Russia should have helped crush IS and the islamist rebels long before they started issuing fatwas against baking croissants in Aleppo, then we are in full agreement. Stability means not waging a violent uprising in the name of religion for over half a decade, which has only destroyed the lives of an entire generation of Syrian children.

That's just ridiculous. Who is in Syria causing all the misery, terror, and chaos? Iran, Russia, and the regime.

The rebels and IS. Do you think trying to topple Assad and replacing him with something worse has been worth it Aly? Assuming that Assad will not be toppled, would you turn back the clock to 2011? I think most people would say yes. Stability is an underrated virtue.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If you are suggesting that the West and Russia should have helped crush IS and the islamist rebels long before they started issuing fatwas against baking croissants in Aleppo, then we are in full agreement

I am suggesting that we never should have dismantled the security forces and put in a sectarian like Almaliki or Saddam before him, which eventually led to the formation of alqaeda in iraq which then morphed into IS. And if you think force is the answer, you're in for the long haul.

The rebels and IS.

They're not the ones dropping barrel bombs and shelling cities. They don't have that firepower.

Do you think trying to topple Assad and replacing him with something worse has been worth it Aly?

You would have to ask the people living there now. Neither of us is in a position to answer that.

Assuming that Assad will not be toppled, would you turn back the clock to 2011? I think most people would say yes.

Again, you have to ask the people that. If it were up to me, I would have had stronger arab league intervention and not Russia and US intervention. That would have been the best I think. But turning the clock back? no. Because you would have just postponed the inevitable. People cannot live under oppression forever.

Stability is an underrated virtue

Try living in fear 24 hours a day and wondering if the police will come knocking on your door in the middle of the night becasue of something they think you might have said. You might think otherwise.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@Aly Rustom

You would have to ask the people living there now.

Well, I'm asking what you think Aly because you've said before that you are part Syrian. What do you think about the rebels turning your country into a failed state for generations to come? Was it worth it? Especially considering Syria used to be one of the most stable, secular, educated and multi-ethic/religious countries in the middle east. It's a real shame. I'm no fan of Assad, and I don't think anybody is, but there is a reason why many people still support him. It's because they see that the alternative is worse. Do you think female students in mixed gender classes at Damascus University are looking forward to life under rebel control?

Try living in fear 24 hours a day and wondering if the police will come knocking on your door in the middle of the night becasue of something they think you might have said. You might think otherwise.

I'm lucky enough to have never lived under these conditions, but my parents are from a country that used to be a dictatorship (secret police, disappearances, interogations, everything). Eventually the people rose up in revolution. The government put tanks on the streets but everyone, including government soldiers, had had enough and crucially, they saw a better alternative. The revolution succeeded within a few months and less than 100 people died. There were no beheadings, no suicide bombers, no looting, burning and raping of minority religions, no holy warriors, no martyrs brigades, no fatwahs declared.

In Syria, it may eventually take a revolution to oust Assad, but it will have to be a revolution that has unanimous support of all people, all religions, all social classes and even the military. The current rebel revolution does not. The way I see it, the rebels are just needlessly tearing the country apart because they want to die in what they see as a holy war.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Well, I'm asking what you think Aly because you've said before that you are part Syrian. What do you think about the rebels turning your country into a failed state for generations to come? Was it worth it?

The rebels didn't turn my fathers country into a field states. That was completely the fault of the dictatorship. Remember these people did not start is rebels but it's peaceful protesters for three whole months as they were massacred. You have to remember that and put it into perspective.

Especially considering Syria used to be one of the most stable, secular, educated and multi-ethic/religious countries in the middle east. It's a real shame. I'm no fan of Assad, and I don't think anybody is, but there is a reason why many people still support him. It's because they see that the alternative is worse. Do you think female students in mixed gender classes at Damascus University are looking forward to life under rebel control?

I would still put that as the fault of the regime. The reason is because the regime's brutality was what caused the secular and peaceful protests to turn into the monster you see today. please understand this was not an Islamic uprising at all. None of the uprisings in the Middle East were . However when people get slaughtered they do tend to turn towards the one source of comfort they can find. In the case of the Middle East and it's majority Muslim population that comfort is God. But again, this was not a religious uprising until the regime begin to butcher it's people. So all the blame lies solely on the regime

I'm lucky enough to have never lived under these conditions, but my parents are from a country that used to be a dictatorship (secret police, disappearances, interogations, everything). Eventually the people rose up in revolution. The government put tanks on the streets but everyone, including government soldiers, had had enough and crucially, they saw a better alternative. The revolution succeeded within a few months and less than 100 people died. There were no beheadings, no suicide bombers, no looting, burning and raping of minority religions, no holy warriors, no martyrs brigades, no fatwahs declared.

And that was because the government of the country you are speaking about did not behave in the same way as the Syrian army behaved. So that just proves my point that the onus is on the Syrian government.

In Syria, it may eventually take a revolution to oust Assad, but it will have to be a revolution that has unanimous support of all people, all religions, all social classes and even the military. The current rebel revolution does not. The way I see it, the rebels are just needlessly tearing the country apart because they want to die in what they see as a holy war.

i'm sorry my friend but the way you see it is totally wrong. The war would've ended in 2012 if Iran and Russia had not gotten involved. They've been in there from the very beginning supplying the government with weapons money and logistics. So it really makes no difference even if every last Serien is against the regime, The Iranian and Russians will come to his defense and you will have a Civil War

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites