the Migrant Crisis

[spireite]

Those who moan about the number of refugees coming here forget that Turkey already has 1.6 million and the Lebanon - with a population of 4.5 million has taken 1.2 million.

And do you know what happens when they reach these countries? They immediately run to Britain, Germany, Scandinavia. They same happened with Poland when they were under pressure to accept more

 

[Aber gas]

Aye, the likelihood of ISIS respecting any safe zone, particularly one protected by Western forces, is non-existent also.

Also on what scale are these safe zones going to constructed ? Because to be an effective " solution " the un or whichever body is responsible is going to have to build infrastructure , hospitals , mosques , schools , sanitation, a temporary civil service ect . This seems unlikely given the western world's attitude of ambivalence ( at best ) to these people .

 

[spireite]

What's the point of the UN if they can't get invollved in situations like the Syria crisis? They're about as much use as Anne Franks drumset

 

[HertsWolf]

And do you know what happens when they reach these countries? They immediately run to Britain, Germany, Scandinavia. They same happened with Poland when they were under pressure to accept more

That's absolutely absurd, and even the most basic understanding of either the statistics or the most absolute basic dynamics of the situation would tell you that.
Stop being a witless propagandist for the extreme right. There are STILL 1.6 million refugees in Turkey and STILL 1.2 million in The Lebanon.
How can anyone with a shred of common sense think that these people can "run" anywhere.

Have you ever lived in a refugee camp, or worked in one? Have you ever lived or even seen any person in poverty? Have you ever had any kind of interaction with impoverished communities? Phone up the UNHCR or Crisis or any agency working in this humanitarian disaster and give your obnoxious views to them.
Do you have the first fucking clue what it is like to be a refugee, alone, penniless, scared cold, tired and having lost family members, possibly children or parents?

For you this is just a game isn't it? Just numbers.

There are many differences of opinion and heated debates about how to resolve this but your Ladybird Book of Farage approach is, frankly, quite odious. You spout demonstrably wrong statistics, demonstrably wrong statements and then make witless generalisations.

 

[spireite]

That's absolutely absurd, and even the most basic understanding of either the statistics or the most absolute basic dynamics of the situation would tell you that.
Stop being a witless propagandist for the extreme right. There are STILL 1.6 million refugees in Turkey and STILL 1.2 million in The Lebanon.
How can anyone with a shred of common sense think that these people can "run" anywhere.

Have you ever lived in a refugee camp, or worked in one? Have you ever lived or even seen any person in poverty? Have you ever had any kind of interaction with impoverished communities? Phone up the UNHCR or Crisis or any agency working in this humanitarian disaster and give your obnoxious views to them.
Do you have the first fucking clue what it is like to be a refugee, alone, penniless, scared cold, tired and having lost family members, possibly children or parents?

For you this is just a game isn't it? Just numbers.

There are many differences of opinion and heated debates about how to resolve this but your Ladybird Book of Farage approach is, frankly, quite odious. You spout demonstrably wrong statistics, demonstrably wrong statements and then make witless generalisations.

This is exactly the problem with debate on this subject. And it's not absurd by the way, look it up.

 

[HertsWolf]

This is exactly the problem with debate on this subject. And it's not absurd by the way, look it up.

You're just lying. Look it up where? Provide a credible source for your fuckwit statements.

 

[HertsWolf]

This is exactly the problem with debate on this subject. And it's not absurd by the way, look it up.

No, the problem with this debate is people who have read something in a tabloid newspaper and think they are an expert. When asked for credible sources, they have none. Absolutely none.
Every single statistic you have used in this argument has already been shown to be bollocks.

 

[spireite]

It's frankly impossible to debate with someone who just launches abuse any given opportunity. It's a shame you have tn approach it like that, but if that's how you settle your arguments, good luck to you. Where's your credible source for however many in Tuekry and Lebanon, and they are actuallly LOOKING AFTER THEM? Any?

 

[jacobncfc]

What's the point of the UN if they can't get invollved in situations like the Syria crisis? They're about as much use as Anne Franks drumset

What exactly are they supposed to do, in terms of creating 'safe zones'? The UN don't have soldiers, they only have peacekeepers donated by other national armies, and no country wants to put a single boot on the ground in Syria because they fear anyone falling into the hands of ISIS. The last time the UN did this without thinking the potential consequences through, their peacekeepers got taken hostage and it resulted in Srebrenica.

 

[spireite]

That's absolutely absurd, and even the most basic understanding of either the statistics or the most absolute basic dynamics of the situation would tell you that.
Stop being a witless propagandist for the extreme right. There are STILL 1.6 million refugees in Turkey and STILL 1.2 million in The

Proof please.

Do you have the first fucking clue what it is like to be a refugee, alone, penniless, scared cold, tired and having lost family members, possibly children or parents?

Have you?

For you this is just a game isn't it? Just numbers.

How DARE you suggest that? You're the one trying to turn it into a pissing contest with other countries.

There are many differences of opinion and heated debates about how to resolve this but your Ladybird Book of Farage approach is, frankly, quite odious.

Again, ad-hominem for the sake of ad-hominem.

I sort of liked you before but you're impossible, and abusive, and a supreme know-it-all c*** who leaves zero room for argument. See we can both be nasty bitches, isn't it good and grown up?

 

[spireite]

What exactly are they supposed to do, in terms of creating 'safe zones'? The UN don't have soldiers, they only have peacekeepers donated by other national armies, and no country wants to put a single boot on the ground in Syria because they fear anyone falling into the hands of ISIS. The last time the UN did this without thinking the potential consequences through, their peacekeepers got taken hostage and it resulted in Srebrenica.

If we really fucking cared we'd all be in there giving ISIS a good hiding. But we won't because there's no benefit for us

 

[HertsWolf]

Here are some links to specific and verifiable information about the refugee situation. I apologise but none of these are the Daily Mail or from Katie Hopkins.

The State of the World's Refugees A UNHCR report providing an overview of the dynamics but also what has been done and what can be done in the future.
How UK and Germany compare on refugees Even Malta takes more than us. But then Malta's a huge place.
The truth about asylum Basic information.

Banner at a match in Hamburg.

 

[spireite]

Here are some links to specific and verifiable information about the refugee situation. I apologise but none of these are the Daily Mail or from Katie Hopkins.

The State of the World's Refugees A UNHCR report providing an overview of the dynamics but also what has been done and what can be done in the future.
How UK and Germany compare on refugees Even Malta takes more than us. But then Malta's a huge place.
The truth about asylum Basic information.

Banner at a match in Hamburg.

You 'nearly' did a post then without being a c***, but you just couldn't resist, could you?

'Britain is the second biggest bilateral donor of humanitarian aid. It has pledged £900m, the Home Office says.'
That's an interesting fact from one of those articles

 

[HertsWolf]

Proof please.

http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/country.php?id=224
http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php
Just two sources but do browse the data at your leisure. If these aren't good enough for you, please do feel free to find your own. It's all out there.

Have you?

Yes. I've worked with refugees, nomadic and poor communities in around 15 countries over the last 20 years, mainly in Africa and the Middle East but also in China, Vietnam and Cambodia. Furthermore, part of my family were in a Croatian refugee camp and the family was split up.

How DARE you suggest that? You're the one trying to turn it into a pissing contest with other countries.

Because of the following statements:
"They can claim free housing and a cash allowance alá job seekers" (Because they can't. Check with UK Refugee Council for information on why)
"Why don't these refugees/migrants stop in Poland? The Czech Republic?" (Because many do stop in eastern Europe and points in between. See UNHCR documents)
"this country can not support too many more people" (Based on what analysis is that? Just a generalisation without any consideration of the fact that smaller countries are taking far more whether you base it on population size, area, distance from the conflicts/poverty.)
"They were a viablle solution for the Sierra Leone crisis and others, why not here?" (Because the situations are so staggeringly different in context, scale, nature, geographical and climatological situations, political dynamics)
"And do you know what happens when they reach these countries? They immediately run to...." (Because this is demonstrably untrue [again check UNHCR data] and you are just spouting media nonsense.)

You are either trivialising or generalising the situation. Many other countries are doing far more, but it's hardly a pissing contest. That is trivialising the situation. Your easy use of lazy soundbites is why I say it's a numbers game for you. The evidence points to a very different situation than the one you proclaim.

I sort of liked you before but you're impossible, and abusive, and a supreme know-it-all c*** who leaves zero room for argument. See we can both be nasty bitches, isn't it good and grown up?

I'll live with your contempt, thanks. I'm certainly not abusive just fed up with twisted and contorted stories from the media being echoed in forums and pubs as fact. Time and time again, the truth is demonstrated - with official reports and data - to be very different.
There is a huge amount of debate going on, but spouting demonstrably incorrect data and amplifying vicious and uncompassionate myths is simply absurd. I'm far from being know-it-all....not even know-much....but I am able and prepared to react strongly to simplistic hubris packaged up as 'fact'.
My obvious irritation is based upon the fact that the media (and you by extension) show no willingness to use the huge range of material and resources that can help shape solutions to very difficult situations. Migrants are being demonised and presented (not by you, but in the same vein) as "illegals" and "cockroaches" when they are just terrified and usually escaping almost certain death.

 

[spireite]

http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/country.php?id=224
http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php
Just two sources but do browse the data at your leisure. If these aren't good enough for you, please do feel free to find your own. It's all out there.

Do we know that they are still in the countries they were granted asylum in? How do we differeniate between genuine people seeking asylum from the Syria conflict and those getting into, say, Greece illegallly and moving from there?

Yes. I've worked with refugees, nomadic and poor communities in around 15 countries over the last 20 years, mainly in Africa and the Middle East but also in China, Vietnam and Cambodia. Furthermore, part of my family were in a Croatian refugee camp and the family was split up.

Ok, fair enough, I can see why this would give you a better insight than I, but I take umbridge and the way you were talking to me. There's no need.

Because of the following statements:
"They can claim free housing and a cash allowance alá job seekers" (Because they can't. Check with UK Refugee Council for information on why)
"Why don't these refugees/migrants stop in Poland? The Czech Republic?" (Because many do stop in eastern Europe and points in between. See UNHCR documents)
"this country can not support too many more people" (Based on what analysis is that? Just a generalisation without any consideration of the fact that smaller countries are taking far more whether you base it on population size, area, distance from the conflicts/poverty.)
"They were a viablle solution for the Sierra Leone crisis and others, why not here?" (Because the situations are so staggeringly different in context, scale, nature, geographical and climatological situations, political dynamics)
"And do you know what happens when they reach these countries? They immediately run to...." (Because this is demonstrably untrue [again check UNHCR data] and you are just spouting media nonsense.)

None of theose give you the right to make assumptions on my character, or the things I do and read. I do not read the Daily bloody Mail and I think Katie Hopkins is a disease. I take a lot of those statements from people living in Germany, Poland etc on other message boards and they can see the situations for themselves.

Read here by the way from the .gov website regarding asylum benefits - https://www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get[/QUOTE]

You are either trivialising or generalising the situation. Many other countries are doing far more, but it's hardly a pissing contest. That is trivialising the situation. Your easy use of lazy soundbites is why I say it's a numbers game for you. The evidence points to a very different situation than the one you proclaim.

Then why make comparisons with other countries? This is not a game where you get points for every migrant you take. I'm sure other countries have their agendas for letting people in, such as on of your linked articles Germany is perhaps doing it because the native 'German' population is decreasing and aging, and they need an influx of young workers.

I'm certainly not abusive just fed up with twisted and contorted stories from the media being echoed in forums and pubs as verbatim. Time and time again, the truth is demonstrated - with official reports and data - to be very different.
There is a huge amount of debate going on, but spouting demonstrably incorrect data and amplifying vicious and uncompassionate myths is simply absurd. I'm far from being know-it-all....not even know-much....but I am able and prepared to react strongly to simplistic hubris packaged up as 'fact'.
My obvious irritation is based upon the fact that the media (and you by extension) show no willingness to use the huge range of material and resources that can help shape solutions to very difficult projects. Migrants are being demonised and presented (not by you, but in the same vein) as "illegals" and "cockroaches" when they are just terrified and usually escaping almost certain death.

Well you are being abusive, that's what name-calling and talking down to someone is. If anyone gives an opinion that is different to your 'let every migrant all in indiscriminately and bugger to the consequences, I'm sure we'll live' gets labelled a raicst, Daily Mail reading bigot, and it's wrong.

 

[HertsWolf]

'Britain is the second biggest bilateral donor of humanitarian aid. It has pledged £900m, the Home Office says.'
That's an interesting fact from one of those articles

Indeed, it is an interesting fact and never in doubt. There's more, specific to Syria here. But in the present context, it's misleading and outdated now. Despite the four-year framework, Britain's policies are fast changing now there is no longer a coalition government. Britain has done a lot of good work in both the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa, but even the relatively high spend is a drop in the ocean compared to the long-term drain on national economies of the last 50 years. As with Iraq and Afghanistan before them, the political decisions on Syria completely underestimated the wider fallout.

I also think you have missed the point: I don't think any country has done a good job in the developing world..UK, Germany, France, US, Russia, China. They all use poorer countries for cheap resources leaving nothing behind except shit governments. The people of these countries (whether economic migrants or refugees) are just "following the money".

Out of interest, how would you (or anyone else) think of a new policy that said that anyone not living in London 10 years ago must return to their place of origin in the UK or wherever else? If you don't go "voluntarily", we'll take you by force?

 

[HertsWolf]

Well you are being abusive, that's what name-calling and talking down to someone is. If anyone gives an opinion that is different to your 'let every migrant all in indiscriminately and bugger to the consequences, I'm sure we'll live' gets labelled a raicst, Daily Mail reading bigot, and it's wrong.

Says the man who called me a c*** several times in the last hour.

 

[spireite]

I also think you have missed the point: I don't think any country has done a good job in the developing world..UK, Germany, France, US, Russia, China. They all use poorer countries for cheap resources leaving nothing behind except shit governments. The people of these countries (whether economic migrants or refugees) are just "following the money".

Wasn't Syria Russia's fault in the main? Didn't they, and still do, support Assads regime even when he was using chemical weapons on his own people? They should have the greatest burden in terms of asylum seekers if we're going to proportion blame around for the worlds problems.

Out of interest, how would you (or anyone else) think of a new policy that said that anyone not living in London 10 years ago must return to their place of origin in the UK or wherever else? If you don't go "voluntarily", we'll take you by force?

Abhorrent. Mate, I'm not the person you obviously think I am...

 

[spireite]

Says the man who called me a c*** several times in the last hour.

Well, I was obviously retaliating.... I didn't start the pointless, childish name-calling

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

It's interesting to take a step back an observe this crisis phenomenon for what it is. Essentially we're being spurred into action because dead people washing up on Italian beaches is much less palatable than people being blown to shit in Syria where we can't see them. Somehow it's the hundreds dying in illegal border crossings that trump the tens of thousands dying while fighting or enduring a civil war that will determine the fate of their nation. What did people think was happening in the world? How on Earth is this a 'migrant' crisis? The people with the means and inclination to escape the fight are the Syrians we should care least about. I would commit troops to Syria long before I would open the borders. If you're someone who's mind has been changed just because you saw a picture of a dead kid on a beach then you're a fucking moron. This symptom is almost trivial compared to the cause.

 

[HertsWolf]

Do we know that they are still in the countries they were granted asylum in? How do we differeniate between genuine people seeking asylum from the Syria conflict and those getting into, say, Greece illegallly and moving from there?

It is very difficult for refuges to move around. The UNHCR and government data is considered fairly accurate and used and trusted by most agencies.

None of theose give you the right to make assumptions on my character, or the things I do and read. I do not read the Daily bloody Mail and I think Katie Hopkins is a disease

With all due respect, it does. You have used sweeping generalisations as a very firm basis for your arguments, some of which have been pretty heartless and lacking in compassion. Many of your statements are very closely aligned with reports and attitudes in those newspapers.

I take a lot of those statements from people living in Germany, Poland etc on other message boards and they can see the situations for themselves.

Individual experiences, including (or especially) mine, are rarely recounted accurately.

Then why make comparisons with other countries? This is not a game where you get points for every migrant you take. I'm sure other countries have their agendas for letting people in, such as on of your linked articles Germany is perhaps doing it because the native 'German' population is decreasing and aging, and they need an influx of young workers.

I make the comparisons because most EU countries are doing more about this present refugee crisis. Most richer countries share some of the blame for the causes and effects of how we have dealt with poorer countries; currently we are doing less.

If anyone gives an opinion that is different to your 'let every migrant all in indiscriminately and bugger to the consequences, I'm sure we'll live' gets labelled a raicst, Daily Mail reading bigot, and it's wrong.

Show me the line where I have called anyone racist. Quote it for me, please. Again, it really might be worth sticking to the facts rather than just making stuff up. Are you surprised that I get pissed?
Show me the bit where I say 'let every migrant all in indiscriminately and bugger to the consequences, I'm sure we'll live'. Please read very carefully what I have said. I believe we are going to face an ever-increasing challenge to resolve the expectations of large numbers of migrants. I blame the crisis on ourselves and our governments and believe we have to resolve the situation here and now. I certainly don't advocate letting all migrants in to the UK. I would certainly be happy to let more refugees and migrants in.

 

[Womble98]

There is a myth about all the refugees wanting to come to Britain, it is totally false. The only reason it may appear we are completely swamped is because all refugees congregate in Calais, as it is the only real crossing point to England. Other countries have borders hundreds of miles long.

 

[spireite]

It is very difficult for refuges to move around. The UNHCR and government data is considered fairly accurate and used and trusted by most agencies.

With all due respect, it does. You have used sweeping generalisations as a very firm basis for your arguments, some of which have been pretty heartless and lacking in compassion. Many of your statements are very closely aligned with reports and attitudes in those newspapers.

No, it doesn't. Unless you've met me in person and known me for several yers, you don't have a clue what kind of person I am and I'd thank you to stop making assumptions about me. You've made your mind up about what I apparently 'think' and won't budge. I even proved you wrong on the asylum benefits in the UK and you ignored me. You only see what you want to see.

I make the comparisons because most EU countries are doing more about this present refugee crisis. Most richer countries share some of the blame for the causes and effects of how we have dealt with poorer countries; currently we are doing less.

But like I say, do they have a reason WHY? I find it hard to believe they are doing it out of the goodness of the heart or as a way of 'make amends' for apparently fucking their country up.

Show me the line where I have called anyone racist. Quote it for me, please. Again, it really might be worth sticking to the facts rather than just making stuff up. Are you surprised that I get pissed?
Show me the bit where I say 'let every migrant all in indiscriminately and bugger to the consequences, I'm sure we'll live'. Please read very carefully what I have said. I believe we are going to face an ever-increasing challenge to resolve the expectations of large numbers of migrants. I blame the crisis on ourselves and our governments and believe we have to resolve the situation here and now. I certainly don't advocate letting all migrants in to the UK. I would certainly be happy to let more refugees and migrants in.

Not in so many words, but you certainly made it clear that's what you think. Suggesting I read a flagrantly racist rag like the Daily Mail and share opinions with Katie fucking Hopkins...

I just suggested the best way to fix this issue might not be to just open borders to anyone, but to actually to sort the problem out. Out of curiosity, what would you say is the 'cap' of the amount of people the UK can support? And what would you do about our rising population?

 

[HertsWolf]

Well, I was obviously retaliating.... I didn't start the pointless, childish name-calling

Again, with all due respect, you did. You called me a c***.
I called you a "witless propagandist for the extreme right" because most of what you have written is actually just that and has been shown to be just that in several posts. Witless because you have just echoed statements used by the extreme right about migrants. Propagandist because you can't provide sources for your generalisations and you are hoping people will believe your wild and unfounded statements.
You still haven't even provided any sources for where you said "It's true, look it up".... Just, effectively, that some bloke in Poland said it on an internet forum.

I even proved you wrong on the asylum benefits in the UK and you ignored me. You only see what you want to see.

I didn't want to respond to the asylum benefits document because it's laughable. You are aware of the difference between the word "may" and "will", don't you? Now read the first paragraph of your document again. See where it says "may get"? It doesn't mean "will get". There's a reason for using the word "may" instead of "will". Because many of them don't.
Even for those that do actually get benefits, it's a paltry amount. I suggested earlier that you might want to check the Refugee Council for information.

So you didn't prove me wrong. As with every other myth and bullshit you've presented today, your point has been proved wrong.

 

[spireite]

"They can claim free housing and a cash allowance alá job seekers" (Because they can't.

You said they can not claim benefit, yet they can. Whether 1% get accepted or 100% they can still claim, and recieve, benefits. So you were wrong. Just accept it, and drop the fucking attitude for Gods sake...

And I called you a c*** because your attitude and they way you come across is that of a c***. I only resorted to that because you name-called first. Are we really doing this? Christ

 

[HertsWolf]

You said they can not claim benefit, yet they can. Whether 1% get accepted or 100% they can still claim, and recieve, benefits. So you were wrong. Just accept it, and drop the fucking attitude for Gods sake...

No they can't. Some may be eligible. Many are not. Your statement was, effectively, that they (i.e. all) can claim. I responded that not they (i.e. all) can't. What part of the word "may" are you struggling over?

On the "c***" bit, you were the one who made the point about pointless name-calling yet...oh wait...you were the one who called me a c***. So you appear to be the one that started "really doing this".

It's quite amusing to see you bring Christ and God into the discussion. Surprising too, as both are fairly well-known for their compassion whereas most of your arguments have been based around a lack of compassion and humanity..... it's all been "them", sweeping generalisations and then bleating about me not knowing when you when I call you out on your behaviour.
It's clear that you favour being a bit helpful as long as they all fuck off where they belong and don't spoil the green belt. It's precisely what Jesus said about the Good Samaritan: none of this namby-pamby liberal assistance shit, just that all these people should go back where they belong!

 

[spireite]

Semantics. Are you capable of talking to someone without getting off the fucking horse you rode in on? Do you speak to your wife/girlfriend like this? Do you have many friends, or have you talked them all out of your life with this same horrible patronizing tone? Do you actually expect people to respond positively when you talk to them like this? Whatever, we're not getting anywhere here. I wish you joy of the day, sir. Good luck this weekend with Bolton.

 

[Pagnell]

 

[HertsWolf]

Semantics. Are you capable of talking to someone without getting off the fucking horse you rode in on? Do you speak to your wife/girlfriend like this? Do you have many friends, or have you talked them all out of your life with this same horrible patronizing tone? Do you actually expect people to respond positively when you talk to them like this? Whatever, we're not getting anywhere here. I wish you joy of the day, sir. Good luck this weekend with Bolton.

Actually, it's not semantics. You have been shown to be wrong as you have all day on this topic. Your right-wing agenda has been debunked. You haven't been able to back up ANY of your quite nasty statements about the situation.

I normally join in the banter cheerfully but you have repeatedly presented a vicious, right-wing agenda and parroted unpleasant myths. It's odious, it lacks compassion and it treats migrants as numbers and "them". There's plenty of debate around this subject and much with which I disagree, but also much that I have learnt. Only not from you.

The comments about my family and friends: ignored. Feels off-limits to bring them in on any discussion, but then you haven't had much of significance to add anyway.

 

[Stringy]

Hey, I wonder what our response would be if these people fleeing war and destruction were white Christians.