It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK to accept 'thousands' more refugees

page: 6
17
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

In Syria, is it now the time for the international community to declare a "safe haven" and start to intervene to remove belligerents? One thing ISIS, or Assad would not want is to face NATO. The other alternative is we just leave the place to rot.


"It is now the time" for outside influences to stop supplying and funding and training terrorists to attack and murder innocents in Syria. The Syrian regime which is one of the last secular regimes in the Middle East must be helped to fight off the terrorists it is fighting for its life again. I'll say it again, we in the west are backing the wrong side in Syria.




posted on Sep, 5 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
a reply to: MrCrow

Any country that has partaken, or is partaking in the bombing of these refugees homelands should be FORCED to accept these refugees.


Make that "Any politician that has partaken, or is partaking in the bombing of these refugees homelands should be FORCED to house these refugees."

Many people were against these wars "Not In My Name" campaigns. Money spent on housing these unfortunate people is going to deprive those protestors of council housing, school places, and other services which they have paid taxes for.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Indeed - I have no issue with helping genuine refugees, but we shouldn't be forced by the EU to accept any who have arrived by illegal channels or who aren't even refugees (such as those from Africa, or India, or Pakistan or Bangladesh or Sri Lanka). I think the PM's offer for those in genuine need is the correct and only course of action.

As for the asinine comments about the NHS - not sure of the relevance - but NHS funding has increased year on year for many years currently totalling close to £140 Billion per annum. In fact, it accounts for 20% of total Government spending.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
Have the Germans been bombing those countries?


If we're talking Syria, then no, but neither has the UK. But then, that is part if the problem. If the West could get it's act together, we could have stopped the civil war in it's tracks, but far too many are now shy of any military action to the point we now simply stand and watch.


originally posted by: tothetenthpower
If so, then yes they share responsibility, if not well..maybe the UK should not get involved in military campaigns if it can't afford the consequences.

~Tenth


Others bear responsibility here as well, you know and the UK has not bombed Syria. Why doesn't the US or Canada (Operation IMPACT) or any of the Gulf states that actually are bombing Syria step up?

Or perhaps Russia who have been propping up Assad making the Civil War last far longer than it should?

I know it's fashionable to blame the West for everything and let's face it, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. We sat by while Rwanda happened and we're slated for it, we get involved in the Balkans and we're slated for it, we don't support Iraqi rebels after the First Gulf War, we're slated for it, we actually do get rid of Saddam and we're slated for it.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 03:33 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

Comments about the NHS are not "asinine", if you worked within it you know that. The staff are pushed to their limits already. Try working on a large ward with only 2 of you on and see how much increased funding has helped this problem. Unless you work within the NHS I suggest you keep your funding argument to yourself because you have swallowed Cameron's propaganda.

You cannot simply keep bringing people in with health problems - you think all these people arriving as the government tell you don't use the NHS, f you do then you are naive. Only two days ago a Doctor working at one of the departure points refugees use said their health is dire and the journey across the Med is far too dangerous as they are so weak and many so ill. No insulin tablets and medication for long enough to badly affect them.

Furthermore there is a moral issue here that doesn't involve the refugees directly. Cameron is telling the indigenous public, we have to face dire cuts to all our services. Our social housing is facing a 1% reduction in its budget for the next 4 years so jobs, new builds, apprenticeships etc cannot be maintained, let alone expanded to cover our natural growth within our population . Yet now suddenly what is he going to do as his own government's budget wasn't done to cater for x thousands coming here and bringing nothing with them. Is he going to get us further into debt or was he lying to us in the beginning?

Believe me I want to help, but I see the repercussions of all of this and people will forget that dead little boy very quickly when they get side-lined for getting services they have already paid for, in order to accommodate yet more immigrants. The UK is a tiny island in comparison to many of the other EU countries and many of these need to step up although the solution is to deal with ISIS immediately - which strangely doesn't seem to happen does it? Shame those who fund it aren't taking refugees!



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 03:33 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

Comments about the NHS are not "asinine", if you worked within it you know that. The staff are pushed to their limits already. Try working on a large ward with only 2 of you on and see how much increased funding has helped this problem. Unless you work within the NHS I suggest you keep your funding argument to yourself because you have swallowed Cameron's propaganda.

You cannot simply keep bringing people in with health problems - you think all these people arriving as the government tell you don't use the NHS, f you do then you are naive. Only two days ago a Doctor working at one of the departure points refugees use said their health is dire and the journey across the Med is far too dangerous as they are so weak and many so ill. No insulin tablets and medication for long enough to badly affect them.

Furthermore there is a moral issue here that doesn't involve the refugees directly. Cameron is telling the indigenous public, we have to face dire cuts to all our services. Our social housing is facing a 1% reduction in its budget for the next 4 years so jobs, new builds, apprenticeships etc cannot be maintained, let alone expanded to cover our natural growth within our population . Yet now suddenly what is he going to do as his own government's budget wasn't done to cater for x thousands coming here and bringing nothing with them. Is he going to get us further into debt or was he lying to us in the beginning?

Believe me I want to help, but I see the repercussions of all of this and people will forget that dead little boy very quickly when they get side-lined for getting services they have already paid for, in order to accommodate yet more immigrants. The UK is a tiny island in comparison to many of the other EU countries and many of these need to step up although the solution is to deal with ISIS immediately - which strangely doesn't seem to happen does it? Shame those who fund it aren't taking refugees!



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 03:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: stumason

Comments about the NHS are not "asinine", if you worked within it you know that. The staff are pushed to their limits already. Try working on a large ward with only 2 of you on and see how much increased funding has helped this problem. Unless you work within the NHS I suggest you keep your funding argument to yourself because you have swallowed Cameron's propaganda.


They are, when they start with "so, he can fond £100 million for refugees but not the NHS" when the NHS get's it's funding increased year on year and costs 1500 times what he has pledged for them.


originally posted by: Shiloh7
You cannot simply keep bringing people in with health problems - you think all these people arriving as the government tell you don't use the NHS, f you do then you are naive. Only two days ago a Doctor working at one of the departure points refugees use said their health is dire and the journey across the Med is far too dangerous as they are so weak and many so ill. No insulin tablets and medication for long enough to badly affect them.


I agree with you, actually, so no I'm not naive. Keep your assumptions to yourself.


originally posted by: Shiloh7
Furthermore there is a moral issue here that doesn't involve the refugees directly. Cameron is telling the indigenous public, we have to face dire cuts to all our services. Our social housing is facing a 1% reduction in its budget for the next 4 years so jobs, new builds, apprenticeships etc cannot be maintained, let alone expanded to cover our natural growth within our population . Yet now suddenly what is he going to do as his own government's budget wasn't done to cater for x thousands coming here and bringing nothing with them. Is he going to get us further into debt or was he lying to us in the beginning?


A damned if we do and damned if we don't problem there. He has been under massive pressure for the bleeding hearts and other EU leaders to do something (even though we have given the most aid for the refugees anyway). Now, you could pull up the drawbridges and dig your head in the sand, keep our money at home etc, but then how will that blowback to affect the nation in the future, say in any EU negotiations?


originally posted by: Shiloh7
Believe me I want to help, but I see the repercussions of all of this and people will forget that dead little boy very quickly when they get side-lined for getting services they have already paid for, in order to accommodate yet more immigrants. The UK is a tiny island in comparison to many of the other EU countries and many of these need to step up although the solution is to deal with ISIS immediately - which strangely doesn't seem to happen does it? Shame those who fund it aren't taking refugees!


Again, I agree with you here as well. It seems that aside from the (off topic) NHS point, we are actually in complete agreement, so maybe wind your neck in?



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 03:58 AM
link   
a reply to: MrCrow

Will catch up with this article..



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 04:08 AM
link   
I think the op as got his millions and billions mixed up. Easily done in this day and age. I think that has caused some confusion in this thread.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 05:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
I think the op as got his millions and billions mixed up. Easily done in this day and age. I think that has caused some confusion in this thread.


My millions were per the quote from Cameron.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: MrCrow
Ok



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7

Thats not a a NHS funding problem.

The NHS is getting more than enough! Hell its swallowing most the UK budget!

Its a NHS problem in general.

The foundations of the NHS has become rotten. You can throw a trillion at it and it wont sort the issues out.

UK provides one of the worst health services in Western Europe and costs far far more.

Sure we are way above the US but thats not hard! I dont want to settle with being better than the USA, i want THE best service and tgats means looking at countrys like france.


edit on 6-9-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Quite and while this is OT, it has to be said the NHS as an organisation is structurally broken and needs major reform. Sadly, ideology rather than pragmatic thinking tends to get in the way of this - case in point, the opposition to private health providers being involved in health care in the UK. It works bloody well in France and Germany.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Your right!!

They needed the right excuse to put Boots on the ground in Syria. The Migrant Crisis has given them that excuse. Basically the Migrant Crisis has been created by Western bombing and Western backed Terrorism and is used to justify Western Bombing of Syria. Their Goal has and always been from the start - Remove Assad at any cost. Boots on the ground has been their goal for a long time. They never got the Justification until now to do it!

The Migrant crisis is their ticket for the all important last invasion.

I just hope Russia gets in there and stops them!



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Nova937
I'm not entirely sure what the plan is, once again we don't know what the goal is and what the end game is. We take out Assad? Then what? We leave a power vacuum, Syria becomes the centre of war with Islam, fulfilling the nutter jihadis prophecy? Is that playing into their hands? Russia's now in the mix too. Sounds like the mother of all #storms



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nova937
Their Goal has and always been from the start - Remove Assad at any cost. Boots on the ground has been their goal for a long time. They never got the Justification until now to do it!

The Migrant crisis is their ticket for the all important last invasion.

I just hope Russia gets in there and stops them!


Yeah certain countries, UK included are obsessed by toppling Assad. As you say we've just got to hope the Russians get in there first. They can at least help Assad keep a portion of Syria, this will allow Christians to live in that region. If the US and UK get in there, whatever the short term results they claim to achieve, the long term result will be a near total elimination of the ancient Christian community in Syria, plus the end of a secular Syria and the emergence of another Islamic state.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Personally, they should do what we (eventually) did in the Balkans (same sort of inter-community/religious violence). Send in troops to end the fighting and keep the peace. Take out the extreme elements and make everyone else sit around a table to sort their crap out. It took a while in the Balkans, but they're in a much better place for it now.

Sadly, Blair's military adventurism into Iraq and Afghanistan to cuddle up to the Yanks has everyone with a bad taste in their mouth about any military intervention, even when it might actually do some good.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: crazyewok

Quite and while this is OT, it has to be said the NHS as an organisation is structurally broken and needs major reform. Sadly, ideology rather than pragmatic thinking tends to get in the way of this - case in point, the opposition to private health providers being involved in health care in the UK. It works bloody well in France and Germany.


I know right?

Soon as you metion reforming the NHS the torys go white as a sheet and try and run away from tbe problem and labour eyes start swivelling and they go red in the face and start ranting nonsense of returning to US system (if you can call the USA health care a system).

No one has the brain cells or courage to adress the fact the UK has one of the less efficient and cumbersome health systems in the EU !



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

What gets me about this whole matter is that at no time have I seen on any foreign tv stations any Syrians demanding Assad go. Nothing until our government and the USA decided he was going. It was the same with Libya it was only once we and the USA decided Gaddafi had to go and of course we immediately armed his opponents, that civil war broke out there.

Now I suspect that Cameron had no idea the result of his clandestine activities would mean that the people he has hurt the most and whose lives have been ruined in their own countries, would have the audacity to turn up on the door step demanding entry here. I bet he is wetting himself. Obama must be grinning because he is too far away to be held accountable and have unwanted people turn up due to his decisions and actions. Bear in mind some of them will be perfectly aware of exactly who is responsible for the destruction of their lives and may even be planning revenge on these men, especially if they have lost loved ones.

I suspect we will soon be hearing people demand another general election over this and a show of no faith in cameron. Must be a first in history having to face what you have caused - but it doesn't help people living here already facing drastic cut to their services and the weight of the huge immigrant influx here already. We also don't have to grant permanent right to settle, just temporary and perhaps the Russians might sort out Syria as clearly we are too impomipetent freudian againism - I don't agree with you concerning the NHS but neck in because its OK to disagree.



We don't have to grant permanent residence just a temporary residence until the ME problems are sorted out.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Look at the immigration numbers we own up to and then add the rest that are here illegally. I suspect the funding is still well below the actual number of people needing treatment. We have no screening to stop people arriving weigh HIV and other health issues. Try getting into Canada with ill health and a lot of other countries who don't need to fund their health systems so highly. Also a GP from the doctors without Borders has already said that the health of most of these incoming refugees she had examined was deplorable. Most had been without their medication for some time and these people have been under nourished, ill treated and exhausted - all rife circumstances for bad health - so Camerons assertion that immigrants don't use the NHS is rubbish. Ask someone who works in it, they will put you right. But we do disagree on this I am really talking about what it ail cost us on this one side of finance only.

I would also raise the point of exactly what right do people think they have to crash into a country they have no ties with, have never paid into their tax system and expect that country to take them, their family and be given everything they need. There are plenty living here in poverty that need help and also deserve it.

However, the biggest question is why haven't many of these people gone to another Muslim country where they share a lifestyle that doesn't exist for them in Europe? Why haven't they gone to closer countries such as Saudi, Iran etc, that's something I think we in the West have a right to ask and find out about. They are in actual fact financial migrants whether people like that or not.




top topics



 
17
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join