|
|
Post by lostinspace on Apr 16, 2022 11:47:54 GMT
So ..Let's look at France as you have mentioned them..23,000 odd !! ..the UK fits into France several times over,so in consideration of that the numbers are pretty good,but not good enough for you ... obviously . You may be PM one day alongside Kier.in coalition...in your dreams ☁️ My goodness 😂😂😂😂 thought that would tickle your fancy !!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Apr 16, 2022 13:56:01 GMT
Terrible argument Oldie. Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan & Iraq are all relatively close to Syria. Not sure about your number for Germany either. How so? barring Turkey and Germany, most of those countries are very ill equipped economically to take them in. But take them in they did. As you are fixated on geographic proximity, Sweden: 115,000 Austria: 58,000 Greece: 38,000 Netherlands: 38,000 France: 23,500 Switzerland: 20,000 Bulgaria, yes, Bulgaria!!:19,000 UK: 11,400. We are being swamped I tell you, swamped. 🤭🤭🤭 Of course to some they feel that's true. 😂😂 'fixated on geographic proximity'? Are you serious or did you have a common sense by-pass operation at some point? |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Apr 16, 2022 20:34:57 GMT
Oldie, what would be your view if Russian's started to arrive on the boats from France, with no paperwork and no way of identifying them? They could very well be murderers and rapists. I ask the same question. |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by oldie on Apr 17, 2022 6:15:45 GMT
Oldie, what would be your view if Russian's started to arrive on the boats from France, with no paperwork and no way of identifying them? They could very well be murderers and rapists. I ask the same question. It is a very stupid question. Unless you start from the premise that the majority of refugees arriving here are criminals. But let's turn it on its head. What would happen if there was an uprising in Moscow against Putin and his military started shooting people and conducting mass arrests. If Russians ran from that conflict and beached up here would you advocate turning them away, on the grounds that they were rapists and murderers? Well? |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Apr 17, 2022 8:58:08 GMT
It is a very stupid question. Unless you start from the premise that the majority of refugees arriving here are criminals. But let's turn it on its head. What would happen if there was an uprising in Moscow against Putin and his military started shooting people and conducting mass arrests. If Russians ran from that conflict and beached up here would you advocate turning them away, on the grounds that they were rapists and murderers? Well? Ha,ha, you call my question stupid and then you come up with the ridiculous. So, you can't answer my valid question. Nobody is saying the majority of immigrants are criminals, once again it's only you. It is the responsibility of government to ensure the safety of it's people. This involves identifying just who is coming into the country. Instead of allowing potentially serious criminals to walk the streets it makes total sense to put them in an 'holding area' until their identity can be established and checked. |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by oldie on Apr 17, 2022 9:51:31 GMT
It is a very stupid question. Unless you start from the premise that the majority of refugees arriving here are criminals. But let's turn it on its head. What would happen if there was an uprising in Moscow against Putin and his military started shooting people and conducting mass arrests. If Russians ran from that conflict and beached up here would you advocate turning them away, on the grounds that they were rapists and murderers? Well? Ha,ha, you call my question stupid and then you come up with the ridiculous. So, you can't answer my valid question. Nobody is saying the majority of immigrants are criminals, once again it's only you. It is the responsibility of government to ensure the safety of it's people. This involves identifying just who is coming into the country. Instead of allowing potentially serious criminals to walk the streets it makes total sense to put them in an 'holding area' until their identity can be established and checked. No question that the backgrounds of refugee applicants seeking asylum should be checked. Of course. Under the proposals put forward by our esteemed Government, are the backgrounds of the people landing on the beaches in the UK being checked before we ship them out on a one way ticket to Rwanda? Regardless of their ethnicity? Btw, I am led to believe we granted asylum to 76 Rwandans in recent times. Just for context. |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Apr 17, 2022 9:54:09 GMT
Ha,ha, you call my question stupid and then you come up with the ridiculous. So, you can't answer my valid question. Nobody is saying the majority of immigrants are criminals, once again it's only you. It is the responsibility of government to ensure the safety of it's people. This involves identifying just who is coming into the country. Instead of allowing potentially serious criminals to walk the streets it makes total sense to put them in an 'holding area' until their identity can be established and checked. No question that the backgrounds of refugee applicants seeking asylum should be checked. Of course. Under the proposals put forward by our esteemed Government, are the backgrounds of the people landing on the beaches in the UK being checked before we ship them out on a one way ticket to Rwanda? Regardless of their ethnicity? Btw, I am led to believe we granted asylum to 76 Rwandans in recent times. Just for context. I do not know the details, but common sense says that if someone turns up with passport/paperwork it is far easier to process them.......but you are just talking about refugees? |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by oldie on Apr 17, 2022 12:32:36 GMT
No question that the backgrounds of refugee applicants seeking asylum should be checked. Of course. Under the proposals put forward by our esteemed Government, are the backgrounds of the people landing on the beaches in the UK being checked before we ship them out on a one way ticket to Rwanda? Regardless of their ethnicity? Btw, I am led to believe we granted asylum to 76 Rwandans in recent times. Just for context. I do not know the details, but common sense says that if someone turns up with passport/paperwork it is far easier to process them.......but you are just talking about refugees? You got there. How do we differentiate between refugees and those economic migrants not fleeing a despotic regime, famine or ecological destruction, violence and warfare, without processing them? Should we process them before we ship them off to Rwanda on a one way ticket? Is that even legal? (Shipping them there) As a point of context, I understand circa 70% of those who rack up and claim asylum currently are subsequently approved. Under the Rwanda scheme they wouldn't have a chance. Is that the sort of society we wish to become? |
|
