Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Davy51

Victims of the storm...

Recommended Posts

Seems a bit strange to me all this with the migrants coming to Europe in boats to escape the broken societies  that could well be the result of western meddling in the political regimes that were previously in power. For all their tyrannical shortcomings the dictators did at least maintain a kind of law & order ,which has now gone & is promoting the advance of IS into the vacuum. What i think needs to happen is for the west, NATO, the EU or the UN to step in & repair the affected countries so there is no need for these designer clad refugees to flee the lands of their birth.

 

What i do find very strange is that the main instigator of trouble in the region , the good old US of A ,are keeping the situation very much at arms length while their European cousins get sucked into the aftermath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we've had wall to wall coverage on the news; with plenty of hand wringing from the bleeding hearts Brigade; including the hand wringer in chief (the Pope).  But none provide answers/solutions to the problem, other than to just let them in.  If we rewind a few years, in the Libyan insurrection, Gadaffi was threatening to kill his own people (just like Assad); well that's been the natural self preservation response of threatened dictatorships throughout history. So, Cameron and Clegg, bending to the "humanitarian" plight of besieged insurgents in Bengazi; got us involved in actively bombing him out of power; in the naïve belief that this would somehow produce a model of western liberal democracy; from a cultural background where some are still living in the ideology of the middle ages. So, with all stability gone (however tyrannical), the gate keeper to Europe was taken out; leaving us with the present anarchy, that enables human traffickers to operate at will. So again, the bleeding hearts call for more efforts to "rescue" these migrants, which would be fine, if they were then returned to Libya; but no; they are helped to complete their journey to Europe; which can only encourage more migrants.  Listening to an ex-RN Admiral on TV, it would be perfectly reasonable and legal, to blockade the coast of Libya, returning these unseaworthy boats to Libyan ports - so why aren't they doing it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's remarkable how many stable Arab governments with strong leaderships and an opinion on how the oil rich Middle East should be run have been overthrown by medieval muppets who don't give a toss about the international petrocurrency as long as everybody shoves their backsides in the air five times a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just watched a very good BBC programme about the rise of IS ,The World's Richest Terror Army, very revealing where its funding comes from. It was on earlier in the week so will be available on catch up or iplayer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, no answers, just the usual infantile cartoons, plus the inference that the bleeding hearts would swamp this country with immigrants as they sleep walk from one crisis to the next.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you have answers?  Just the usual name calling when someone has enough human decency to disagree with your jingoism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course; I'm suggesting answers to those who want some control on migration (the majority of public opinion), and an end to the insanity of myopic policies born out of knee jerk emotion rather than rational thought. Now if you want a complete open door policy, just let us all know, that your really a member of the Green Party, at least they're open about it !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does that stop these poor people from drowning?  not an answer rather a final solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"That"?   Think I was suggesting, in line with the advice from a retired RN Admiral, that the EU blockade the Libyan coast, turning back all migrant trafficking vessels, any rescued migrants being returned to Libya or their country of origin.  Meanwhile, the traffickers and their boats taken out by special forces. All illegal migrants located in centres and camps in Europe, rounded up and deported. Now is that too much for the combined resources of W/Europe?  Seems we seem to be putting a lot of effort into stopping folk leaving the UK and heading for ISIS;  which shows just how confused the policy makers are on this issue.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right , so as a country we go in, destabilise the entire region, and cause mayhem when we abandon whats left.  Then we are shocked when families try to flee the civil war and persecution and we dehumanise these PEOPLE.  Then, once they have finally escaped their fate you suggest we round them up and send them back?  Sleep well.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That happened in Iraq, there were no boots on the ground in Libya or Syria; BUT they were still "destabilised".  Those "fleeing civil war" should seek safety in the next nearest safe country; In the case of Syria - Jordan or Turkey; and this implies that we should be funding aid to such camps.  The idea that all these migrants are fleeing "civil wars" is frankly nonsense; most are economic migrants seeking "a better life"; I don't blame them for trying, I blame Governments for allowing them in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The neighbouring countries of Syria have admitted over 3 million refugees from the war .  Lebanon and Turkey both have over a million each with Jordan over 600000.  Britain had admitted 90 up to the latest figure I can find which is September 2014.  Good to see those with the broadest shoulders bearing the most weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way to prevent these countries producing refugees is to drag them kicking & screaming into their own versions of tolerable democratic society ,where the ballot box out weighs the bullet. It may mean major investment to improve conditions in these countries but if mass migration was stopped it would be Euro money well spent. Of course one of the best indicators of intent would be for the rich arab states to step in & sort out their failing brothers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davy, our trying this and being crap at it and botching the job is what is leading to the humanitarian crises.  Also aren't Saudi Arabia doing a bit of their own meddling?  I am all for investing in third world countries to improve their lot.  Many on here will baulk at your mention of foreign aid though and then accuse you of being myopic :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's deal with "neighbouring countries" first: of course they will take the bulk, if not all refugees in line with international law.  So while there may be a moral argument for us to fund these camps via the UN; there's certainly no legal argument to allow migrants from these areas to the UK or EU.   The majority of migrants are economic migrants, seeking "a better life"; nothing to do with the civil war in Syria. The last TV interview I watched from Italy, was with four boys from Nigeria; Nigeria has just had a democratic election, so no civil war there;  and guess where they were heading for? Sorry, but the life boat is full, even though you may wish to sink it. As for Saudi Arabia, perhaps the broadest shoulders in the M/East; they've encouraged and funded the Sunni uprising in Syria; so perhaps they have the major responsibility to take in their Sunni compatriots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lifeboat is full?  those 90 Syrians must be big folk.  

 

over 3 million Syrians have been displaced by war.

 

At least 51.2 million people are now living under forced displacement, a U.N. agency says, announcing its tally of people who are seeking refuge or asylum, or who are internally displaced. It's the first time the number has topped 50 million since World War II.

 

People from impoverished sub-Saharan countries traveled previously to Libya to find work, but the civil war is forcing them to seek work in Europe.

 

But clearly wars  can't possibly have anything to do with migrants risking a deadly journey to escape their fate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never been to the likes of Syria & neighbouring  countries so i don't know if there is a  manufacturing base in the area or whether their economies are based on farming ,tourism, warfare or whatever, but there must be a lot of scope to bring the region into the global economy may be by mass irrigation of the area to turn it into a major food producer. The global economy is crying out for sustained food production &  major investment ,not aid,could turn the region into an African power house ,able to supply the continents struggling masses. Maybe sustainable prosperity would snuff out political & religious excesses & bring stability to the region.

I don't for one minute believe the Islamic masses in a modern world are so set in the ways of their religion to be intolerant of others ,but IS have come along with a well judged intervention into a region that is in the depths of despair & filled the vacuum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Those "fleeing civil war" should seek safety in the next nearest safe country; In the case of Syria - Jordan or Turkey; 

 

Let's deal with "neighbouring countries" first: of course they will take the bulk, if not all refugees in line with international law.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you've neglected an estimated million illegals already living in the UK under the radar; estimated precisely because they are under the radar.  The majority of these migrants are fleeing poverty, not war.  If we hadn't faffed about with the naïve idea that we could, by supporting insurrections against the existing secular dictators, create liberal democracies in cultures riven with medieval religious intolerance, to the point of a Sunni v Shia civil war throughout the M/East; we wouldn't even be contemplating bringing it to the UK. btw. no one is "forcing" migrants to migrate; to pay relatively huge sums to traffickers and risk death in unseaworthy boats; they do it "for a better life". Thankfully, the EU leaders haven't completely capitulated to the situation, but with one eye on their electorates, have made vague comitments to a repatriation programme and a war on the traffickers - but don't hold your breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are under the radar you are guessing on numbers.  If they are here already they are not what we are discussing are they?  If you think war is having no effect on the amount of people fleeing there own countries you are myopic or blinkered or shutting your eyes to the truth.  Of course poverty too will be driving some people to escape but how does somebody escaping poverty pay huge sums to escape?  

 

The question is what to do when we come across a boat filled with desperate people in danger of sinking in the Mediterranean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr/Ms PJ,

 

Just exactly how much flotsam and jetsom are you prepared to accept into the UK before you think that is enough ?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Errm no; if they're already here, they are already "on our boat", hence the overcrowding problem; we have to add to this your celebrated "free movement of labour" from the EU; all constituting an increase in population and an increased demand, in an era of austerity, for housing and public services. "Guessing at numbers" - precisely; thus exposing the shambolic nature of the system, and the failiure of successive Governments to get a grip. I don't omit wars from the calculation, but as international law requires refugees to seek asylum in the "next nearest safe country"; I don't think it there's any right to invite them over here.  Let's look at just what's happening in some groups that have made it to this land of milk and honey; they still carry their outdated belief systems with them, to the extent that some strive to get back to the ISIS Caliphate; to wage war and behead folk; and if they can't get there, they attempt to commit such abhorent acts in this country - thats what you myopic do gooders are setting us up for. As for paying huge sums, I actually used the term "relative"; these migrants are paying traffickers £thousands per trip; another example of just how desperate they are to realise their dream.  The question is, you say; well I'm answering it with some rational argument, your not. Your only answer is to bend over at Dover and let them pile in, which is absolutely stupid. It's not rocket science to suggest that unseaworthy migrant boats are taken back to the port of embarkation - sorted. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change the record Observer, the free movement of labour within the EU has nothing to do with this awful humanitarian crisis.  You are completely conflating many issues into some anti almost everyone rant.  So you are with Katie Hopkins and Portillo then, set the gunboats on them or drag them back whence they came and dump them on the beach.  Not sorted .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...