Goodbye to the UK as we know it

pendragon_arther

I wonder if anyone here knows the nationality of the immigrants wanting to come to the UK where the roads are paved with gold via Calaisand why they don't want to stay in France.

p00hsticks

pendragon_arther wrote: »

I wonder if anyone here knows the nationality of the immigrants wanting to come to the UK where the roads are paved with gold via Calaisand why they don't want to stay in France.

According to this, Eritrea, followed by Pakistan and Syria. And there are a number of reasons why they want to come to the UK rather than stay in France - partly because they can speak English, or they have relatives here, or because they perceive housing, education and benefits as better in the UK (although, as the report points out, those without children would actually get more money if they claimed asylum in France)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29074736

Pollycat

pendragon_arther wrote: »

I bet you wouldn't be so supportive of a huge influx of boatloads of refugees into you local area, but then you're pretty safe where you are ain't you you little Midlander.

For some bizarre reason known only to yourself, you've chosen to quote one of my posts asking another poster a simple question.
FWIW - unlike some other posters - I see the difference between economic migrants and refugees.

Pollycat wrote: »

Maybe a proportion of the people who are trying to get to the UK are not true refugees but more economic migrants.
And I have a very different attitude to those two very disparate groups.
However, it seems that some people tar both groups with the same brush.

So if those boatloads are true refugees, then yes, I would be supportive if they came into my local area.

pendragon_arther wrote: »

I bet you wouldn't be so supportive of a huge influx of boatloads of refugees into you local area, but then you're pretty safe where you are ain't you you little Midlander.

Absolutely priceless. :rotfl:

p00hsticks wrote: »

According to this, Eritrea, followed by Pakistan and Syria. And there are a number of reasons why they want to come to the UK rather than stay in France - partly because they can speak English, or they have relatives here, or because they perceive housing, education and benefits as better in the UK (although, as the report points out, those without children would actually get more money if they claimed asylum in France)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29074736

Careful p00hsticks, you're posting what some posters don't want to read.

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

Not some racist rant, but a fact.

Then it's a pity you didn't stick to the facts in your first post instead of tarring everybody with the same (sarcastic) brush::

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

Probably get deleted but what the hell. Just read we're spending £1 billion pound on economic migrants, sorry 'refugees', to bring them to the UK.

hollydays

pendragon_arther wrote: »

I bet you wouldn't be so supportive of a huge influx of boatloads of refugees into you local area, but then you're pretty safe where you are ain't you you little Midlander.

Op is a very little midlander , btw..

jaydeeuk1

Pollycat wrote: »

For some bizarre reason known only to yourself, you've chosen to quote one of my posts asking another poster a simple question.
FWIW - unlike some other posters - I see the difference between economic migrants and refugees.

So if those boatloads are true refugees, then yes, I would be supportive if they came into my local area.

Absolutely priceless. :rotfl:


Careful p00hsticks, you're posting what some posters don't want to read.


Then it's a pity you didn't stick to the facts in your first post instead of tarring everybody with the same (sarcastic) brush::

They stop being true refugees the minute they decide a refugee camp isn't good enough for them or they travel through several safe countries to get to the promised land of the UK where they'll be given housing, benefits and food. As soon as finance becomes the main reason for wanting to go somewhere in my eyes they become economic migrants.
By all means, help the genuine ones held in refugee camps - we've spent £900m on them already over the last 3 years, but the swarms of 20 and 30 year old men who are marching towards the UK, Germany etc while the Govt is considering sending our young men and women the other way to fight IS is ridiculous. And assuming you're not deliberately trolling and being obtuse and genuinely believe our young men should be fighting Islamic fighters in Syria instead of Syrians who instead will be tucked up safely in their new council houses then I pity you.

BlueEyedGirl

Under the Asylum Dispersal System, my town already houses over 1400 asylum seekers - this does not include their dependents. We have over 9000 in our geographic area; we certainly do not need anymore. Our social housing is at the point of collapse and people who need to move and who have been on waiting lists for years cannot get a look in because priority is given to asylum seekers. Our NHS services cannot cope with such an influx.

Our council has a duty to the settled residents especially those on housing waiting lists, those who cannot get their children into a first choice of school and those who struggle to get appointments with their GP.

I trust my town is not the only one like this in the UK.

If my not wanting 'so many new' refugees to bombard our country offends others then so be it. My opinion counts just as much as those who want to welcome refugees warmly.

hollydays

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

They stop being true refugees the minute they decide a refugee camp isn't good enough for them or they travel through several safe countries to get to the promised land of the UK where they'll be given housing, benefits and food. As soon as finance becomes the main reason for wanting to go somewhere in my eyes they become economic migrants.
By all means, help the genuine ones held in refugee camps - we've spent £900m on them already over the last 3 years, but the swarms of 20 and 30 year old men who are marching towards the UK, Germany etc while the Govt is considering sending our young men and women the other way to fight IS is ridiculous. And assuming you're not deliberately trolling and being obtuse and genuinely believe our young men should be fighting Islamic fighters in Syria instead of Syrians who instead will be tucked up safely in their new council houses then I pity you.

You're not by any chance a member of the edl are you ? I wondered how long before you brought " our boys" into the equation.
Council houses you say, I don't think that's actually correct is it ?
Let's face it, again I reiterate you have virtually NO immigrants in your town.
Yet still you are looking for someone to blame your general dissatisfaction at life on.

hollydays

BlueEyedGirl wrote: »

Under the Asylum Dispersal System, my town already houses over 1400 asylum seekers - this does not include their dependents. We have over 9000 in our geographic area; we certainly do not need anymore. Our social housing is at the point of collapse and people who need to move and who have been on waiting lists for years cannot get a look in because priority is given to asylum seekers. Our NHS services cannot cope with such an influx.

Our council has a duty to the settled residents especially those on housing waiting lists, those who cannot get their children into a first choice of school and those who struggle to get appointments with their GP.

I trust my town is not the only one like this in the UK.

If my not wanting 'so many new' refugees to bombard our country offends others then so be it. My opinion counts just as much as those who want to welcome refugees warmly.

Do you have a link to the proof that asylum seekers are given priority over everyone else in your area?

jaydeeuk1

hollydays wrote: »

You're not by any chance a member of the edl are you ? I wondered how long before you brought " our boys" into the equation.
Council houses you say, I don't think that's actually correct is it ?
Let's face it, again I reiterate you have virtually NO immigrants in your town.
Yet still you are looking for someone to blame your general dissatisfaction at life on.

I'm not part of the "I'm alright, Jack" brigade like you so even though the small town of Belper has low immigration (I lived in Derby for longer), I'm standing up for areas that do have problems and are scared at being labelled 'racist' by irresponsible lefty types like yourself, who would rather see a country lose its identity and security. I just hope you don't have to rely on the NHS in later life and wondering why you're left in a corridor while a group of benefit tourists wonder by. Still, you'll die happy knowing that was what you wanted.

"Our boys" risk their lives to defend this country and its population, including people like you, from threats abroad, help restore peace and stability abroad, although I'm sure if they read your drivel they'd be wondering why they bother.

Its almost like you're racist against the British.

Tropez

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

By all means, help the genuine ones held in refugee camps - we've spent £900m on them already over the last 3 years, but the swarms of 20 and 30 year old men who are marching towards the UK, Germany etc while the Govt is considering sending our young men and women the other way to fight IS is ridiculous. And assuming you're not deliberately trolling and being obtuse and genuinely believe our young men should be fighting Islamic fighters in Syria instead of Syrians who instead will be tucked up safely in their new council houses then I pity you.

Well we're considering airstrikes against Syria. It isn't quite the same as a deployment of the ground forces.

I always find it interesting though when people suggest that the refugees should all take up arms and fight, as if it were so simple. Firstly, a lot of the refugees that are trying to make it into Europe are the educated people. They're the ones with the extra money to spend to get here. These people could be doctors, nurses, teachers, chemists, engineers etc. Skilled workers, generally.

Even in places like Syria, your average college course does not involve training with an AK-47 or AR-15 assault rifle. You're generally not schooled in firing a mortar or an anti-tank gun and my understanding is that there is very little in the way of military tactical training.

Forming a military unit is a little more tricky than you might think. Most non-Kurdish Syrians cannot simply join the YPG or other Kurdish forces that are operating in Northern Syria because while the Kurds may be quite happy for a handful of Western participants to join with them, they're distrustful of others.

The strongholds of the Free Syrian Army are located on the Western side of Syria, which might force someone to cross territory held by ISIS, Al-Nusra and the Syrian government in order to join the FSA and that's assuming someone would want to join a group that is alleged to have committed numerous war crimes itself including torture, summary execution, beheading, rape etc.

So, you can't get to the FSA to join with them, or you would just rather not be associated with a military group that behaves in such a barbaric manner... What's next? You start your own group. Well you'll need weapons, including heavy weapons - RPGs, mortars, anti-tank guns (since ISIS did manage to acquire themselves some tanks) along with basic assault rifles. You'll probably want to spend a good three to six months trying to learn how to use this stuff, otherwise you're likely to blow your own legs off the first time you're deployed to a battlefield.

You'll also need communications equipment. It helps to have some sort of private radio communication in order to coordinate troop movements and so that your spotters can direct your mortar or other artillery fire without having to risk continually exposing themselves as they run back and forth.

You'll need a military chain of command as well. The people at the top need to have basic military tactical and strategic knowledge, preferably not from merely playing Command & Conquer. One advantage ISIS has is the number of former Iraqi soldiers in its ranks, and the FSA has a number of Syrian Army defectors. The Kurds have their own military wings, so they're alright. As a civilian, there might be someone amongst your number who has military experience, but given that less than 5% of Syrians have served in their nation's armed forces it isn't a given - besides which a former Syrian air-force member might not be the best person to lead an infantry charge.

You will also need a lot of confidence. ISIS and co go around committing all these war crimes to demoralise their enemies. Beheading Syrian army soldiers is all part of a psychological game and it won't escape most people's attention that both the Syrian and Iraqi professional armies have, on occasion, utterly capitulated to ISIS forces.

Now I know that our brave men from WWII stood up and fought for us, but they did have a minor advantage of A) Being forced into it and Becoming part of an already standing professional military force with centuries worth of experience in fighting all sorts of wars in all sorts of territories that had a legitimate military command structure and a wartime economy that had seen most industries overhauled into supplying the military. It is a small advantage.

Unfortunately, war has become a lot more complicated since the days a perturbed group of farmers could oust the British from their colonies. Without the right training, equipment, command structure, supply lines etc. you're basically a lamb to the slaughter and since humans have a natural survival instinct, if you don't have what you need to fight then you will usually take flight instead.