sisters in Syria

If they have the wherewithal to organise and carry out an escape to Syria then they ought to be able to do that, I agree jingl

BTW was it just me or did the interviews with their husbands seem a bit 'off'? All that hand wringing and whiney voices. I have some experience of seeing people grieving and it didn't come across as genuine, but then perhaps it's a cultural difference.

They just have stood up for themselves by going to Syria. That must have been a very brave thing for them to do, to go against their families in that way.
It might not be what you would do, but staying in this country would probably not provide them with any more safety than they have now.
Who's to say what is sensible?

Didn't know Syria was safer than the UK?

I thought it was a war zone?

And one set of protagonists delight in beheadings.

I presume it's a cultural difference but I still wonder how bad their home life must have been to decide Syria is better!
Either they're incredibly naive, stupid or brainwashed by the brother who's already out there. And has anyone heard anything about this from their parents (or are they deceased?)?

And another set use air strikes.

I know Bradford is a bit rough but really...

And Anya, a country that's killing anyone trying to leave the country (over 500 allegedly killed by ISIS for trying to escape)

Sensible? In this case to involve innocent children is hardly sensible!

no their parents are still alive and shocked

Read the sentence again, Anya. "Any more safety than they have now" does not mean they are safe.
Women who leave their husbands in this situation in this country can be killed by their families. You must have read about it.

How would any of us, as grandparents, feel knowing our grandchildren (in this case all 9 of them) had been taken to a place like this

Of course they have more safety in this country than in Syria. Yes, we've all read the type of thing you mention, but really Jen try for a sense of proportion for once!

Somewhat extreme statement dj, it does happen very rarely.

The horrific lives those children are likely to have makes me feel sick - forced marriage from the age of 8 or 9 for the little girls, unbelievably savage training for the boys including being forced to watch beheadings. The women must be completely irresponsible to put it mildly.

I can't begin to imagine how I'd feel were it my GCs.

To imply women taking their children to an ISIS occupied country on the spurious grounds that they will be safer there, the words of Diane Abbot spring to mind, although not in this context "you can't defend the indefensible".

DJ do you really think that those children will fare better there than here?

Well, now they've gone to Syria they will be imprisoned when/if they come back here for fear they have been radicalised.
Anyway, we do not want Syrian refugees, do we? Lots of you said so on the Italy thread.

Does it not worry you that the mothers thought they would be better off there than here? Isn't that what this country has made them feel?

It's only indefensible looked at from a white christian anglo-saxon viewpoint.
Is there anyone on here who can look at it from a different viewpoint?

Another thought, how, if the women were so suppressed here, did they get the money to fly?
Either someone had funded them, or (and I think more likely) they've been planning this for sometime so it isn't a spur of the moment decision bearing in mind they've already tried once before.

I would imagine safety is the very last word to be used with Syria and ISI

Loopy, it's an extreme statement, but it's an extreme occurrence, fortunately.

You don't know they would be imprisoned if they came back.

If this country had made them feel so unsafe then perhaps they need to look to their own religion first. I refuse to believe that's a valid reason otherwise Muslims would be leaving in droves for Syria, wouldn't they?

How do we know the mothers thought they would be better of there than here? In what way 'better off'? That might not be their motive at all...

I've read your link, Anya. I've also read some of the comments under it. This is one of them.

"When all the isis bearded cowards are dead or running with their beards tucked between their legs and Iraq and Syria return to some normality none of these women or their desensitised children should ever be allowed back into Europe let alone the UK"

This is the sort of comment that probably made them go in the first place.

"When all the isis bearded cowards are dead or running with their beards tucked between their legs"

Godspeed the day.

Still waiting to hear in what way you think the mothers thought they'd be 'better off' in Syria, dj.

"UNCHR has asked the international community to resettle at least 130,000 Syrian refugees. The EU has pledged to resettle 45,000 but can respond more generously to the Syrian crisis as well as to other protracted refugee crises, Human Rights Watch said."

In the meantime, you do not want 130,000 of them who are trying to escape to come to Europe?
You want to send them back where they came from, do you?