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.

 

A question to Liberals in the UK and USA over refugees?

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
A few questions!

First of all what is wrong with the concept of funding refugee camps with foreign aid so they can get the help they need in land where there culture is more accepted?

How many refugees should the USA and UK bring in?

Who pays for them?

How do you think vetting should be handled?

Should the native population accept a standard of living drop to accommodate these refugees?

Do you deny there is a crime increase in Germany and Sweden where refugees have been let in en mass?

Should not the politicians who caused the problem in the ME be the first to pay and house them before any innocent member of the public is forced to make sacrifices?




posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
A few questions!

First of all what is wrong with the concept of funding refugee camps with foreign aid so they can get the help they need in land where there culture is more accepted?


I don't see anything wrong with it.


How many refugees should the USA and UK bring in?


no more til things are worked out.


Who pays for them?


Average citizens as usual.


How do you think vetting should be handled?


Not sure but I that as well as checking to see if they are radicals we also need to address whether or not they are from war torn areas or just looking for a free meal ticket.


Should the native population accept a standard of living drop to accommodate these refugees?


Never.


Do you deny there is a crime increase in Germany and Sweden where refugees have been let in en mass?


Absolutely not.


Should not the politicians who caused the problem in the ME be the first to pay and house them before any innocent member of the public is forced to make sacrifices?



Now there's a great idea!!



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

It's all BS.

I want to know why we're turning away Cuban and Haitian refugees and giving all our attention to Syrian refugees.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   
What I wan't to know is how is there any refugees left over there.

Between Europe, and other middle eastern countries.

There can't be that many left.

The next question is why is Google,Microsoft, etc doing business with known terrorists states.

Is that how ISIS got so tech savy?

The next question is I want to know what the population of those refugees are per States that fought that EO.

And I agree with the poster above about it being BS.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Don't forget,for those who wanna bring in "Syrian" refugees, before you call us racist and white supremacist (I'm actually a non white American so don't bother) , let's see how so called "refugees" behave in Japan which is a "non-white" country.




edit on 2/12/2017 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
A few questions!

First of all what is wrong with the concept of funding refugee camps with foreign aid so they can get the help they need in land where there culture is more accepted?


Nothing is wrong with it...giving aid to refugees in the own land or countries similar to their own however, would be much more efficient in terms of travel and economics. Why aren't Muslim refugees going to Saudi Arabia, for example, which has more than enough rescources to handle them, and wouldn't need financial help to do it. Accepting possibly deeply traumatised refugees into a society and culture vastly different to their own will always cause problems.


How many refugees should the USA and UK bring in?


None till we know who they are, where they came from, why they're here and how healthy and educated they are. Unless they're obviously children of course, and I don't mean the 24 year olds that pass as minors, I mean under 14's.


Who pays for them?


We all do. Whether we like it or not.


How do you think vetting should be handled?


If the have no checkable ID, then they should be returned to where they claim they're from, or held until this can be established. They should not be handed benefits, housing, freedom and all the rights that go with them until we actually can confirm identity. There should be no distinction between "radical" and "moderate"...we have no way of telling who is either, or how they will behave once in our society.


Should the native population accept a standard of living drop to accommodate these refugees?


Absolutely not.


Do you deny there is a crime increase in Germany and Sweden where refugees have been let in en mass?


The crime issues in those countries are much worse than most people realise...no go zones for the police in any civilised country are unacceptable, but they are now a huge problem in Sweden for example


Should not the politicians who caused the problem in the ME be the first to pay and house them before any innocent member of the public is forced to make sacrifices?


In a perfectly fair world, yes, but they won't...not ever...in fact they would resist pretty much any attempt to house them anywhere near their location, I'm pretty sure.
edit on 12-2-2017 by caitlinfae because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
To be honest the UK has always been immensely generous to genuine asylum seekers, refugees and people who just want to live here. The make-up of our society is testament to that.

However, at the moment the demand is too great. There is too much mass movement of migrants just looking for opportunity and a “new life”. We need to take care of our own first. Why should the UK take in more child refugees when our when health, adoption and social services are overwhelmed with domestic demands. Why should some 16 year old Syrian have more attention in the adoption and help queue, than a 16 year old kid from Hull? Hard choice, but there is a choice.

Some paint these child migrants as defenceless and lost, and I am sure some are, but they have managed to travel single-handedly across half the world to get to the UK.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
What I wan't to know is how is there any refugees left over there.

Between Europe, and other middle eastern countries.

There can't be that many left.



Seriously?

That has to be one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read on ATS.

O.P - Ultimately WE the people end up paying either through the bombs that has displaced these people or having to offer them refuge.

What makes me angry more than anything is people voting in a Government who decide to bomb a country into oblivion and then the very same people who voted in said Government, cannot see that they have any responsibility in dealing with the aftermath.

When you ask who should be responsible for paying for it, ultimately WE the people have to pay. First for the bombs and then for taking responsibility for the displaced people. It's called Taxation.

As DB has already said, it's B.S and I would add, absolutely beyond the pale.
edit on 12/2/17 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: DBCowboy

Don't forget,for those who wanna bring in "Syrian" refugees, before you call us racist and white supremacist (I'm actually a non white American so don't bother) , let's see how so called "refugees" behave in Japan which is a "non-white" country.





According to the muslims in the second video if you make fun of someone you deserve to die. Glad our President doesn't feel this way or there wouldn't be very many people left. Lets NOT defend these radicals for the sake of our misdirected left.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: caitlinfae
Why aren't Muslim refugees going to Saudi Arabia

Because if a refugee acted out once, even for a second, the Saudi's would lop their heads off ... and they know it.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: DBCowboy

Don't forget,for those who wanna bring in "Syrian" refugees, before you call us racist and white supremacist (I'm actually a non white American so don't bother) , let's see how so called "refugees" behave in Japan which is a "non-white" country.




Japan has been taking soo very few refugees also, so even with the trickle they have allowed, they now see the issue. I have been in a lot of debates with people on youtube about Japans decision to have hardly any and for this exact reason.
Japan is a perfect test bed..seriously, if you cant get along peacefully there, you aren't fit anywhere. cordial and comforting is their culture and if that offends you, you're nothing but trouble.

Middle eastern culture simply is not compatible with the western or eastern cultures.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   


-Chris



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
First of all what is wrong with the concept of funding refugee camps with foreign aid so they can get the help they need in land where there culture is more accepted?

Figured I would take a crack at these questions given I am still somewhat a liberal (no fan of the progressives though).

Yep, love that idea. seems the best use of foreign aid we spend anyhow...make a nice migrant city somewhere in north africa or the like..far away from the danger, but still in the ME



How many refugees should the USA and UK bring in?

I wouldn't mind some..but only women and children (under 13 I think). no single men, period..and perhaps only husbands and fathers once they have been properly vetted..but it would be better for those setups to be sent to the refugee camps instead.


Who pays for them?

Murica


How do you think vetting should be handled?

With snakes
gonna go with a slow process to see if there are any fanatical religious ties, crimes of note within 10 years, education and employable skills, etc.
Even women should be vetted..genitals does not automatically assign radical mindset capabilities.


Should the native population accept a standard of living drop to accommodate these refugees?

I would hope it would increase if anything or neutralize..mexicans bring great mexican foods, etc..sharing culture can be fantastic..so outside of the women/children, the employable men should be bringing with them their ideas to enrich the community, not leech off it.


Do you deny there is a crime increase in Germany and Sweden where refugees have been let in en mass?

How can you deny reality?
sort of points out why I say only women/children as a general rule.
Also, I would say dont make giant camps with all of them focused on one area..spread out all across the US to make them conform would be a good idea..make them feel safe and integrated (and able to drop islam..not a lot of mosques in nowheresville wyoming)


Should not the politicians who caused the problem in the ME be the first to pay and house them before any innocent member of the public is forced to make sacrifices?

Well, a lot of those politicians are US politicians..and those people got into power by the will of the people..so, falls back on us again anyhow.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone


-Chris

Just wanted to quote this for agreements sake.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
A few questions!

First of all what is wrong with the concept of funding refugee camps with foreign aid so they can get the help they need in land where there culture is more accepted?

Refugee camps suck & should only be temporary locations. So while I have no problem funding them temporarily w/foreign aid, refugee camps are only a bandage to the real problems which are what need to be fixed. Most refugee camps are filled with people fleeing from war and/or oppression (literally "people seeking refuge"). So if anything, we should focus on the causes of their fleeing so they can return to their homes. And for the record, which cultures are you talking about? Refugees can come from any culture on Earth.



How many refugees should the USA and UK bring in?

This depends greatly on which refugees we're talking about. I firmly believe we have a direct responsibility to help the citizens from countries we've destroyed in our invasions and occupations. We have a smaller but still tangible responsibility to help the citizens from oppressive countries w/oppressive govts that we support. And as part of our deals to arm rebels, oppressed minority groups & proxy groups in other countries, we typically pretend that we care about their plights (hence why we're arming them & intervening in the first place). So it makes sense that we prove our concern by protect their families (aka "refugees").

I think people forget that "refugees" are specific types of immigrants that have to prove they're fleeing from harm.



Who pays for them?

Depends on the situation. "You broke it, you bought it" comes to mind in some cases. However, "refugee" doesn't mean "poverty stricken". Asylum seekers can be rich, poor, or somewhere in between, so you'll have to clarify what costs you're talking about.

I feel like I should add something. Some countries have rules where refugees can't get legal jobs for x-amount of months or until they're refugee status is confirmed. So this means they either have to bring enough funds to take care of themselves during that time period, they'll have to work illegally, or someone will have to pay to accommodate them. So maybe those kinds of rules should be amended so that the refugees can also earn legal wages and pay for their own accommodations? Of course, this crosses over into work visas and "immigrants taking our jobs!!!" territory, so there would need to be a balance.



How do you think vetting should be handled?

What's the process right now? It's hard to answer this vague question when no one wants to bring up the details of the current process. So how would we know if any of our suggestions aren't already in place?



Should the native population accept a standard of living drop to accommodate these refugees?

What standard of living drop? Give some details & viable links (no fake news, bro).



Do you deny there is a crime increase in Germany and Sweden where refugees have been let in en mass?

LOL Do you care about ending crime in those countries or about stopping refugee-related crimes? Because I'm pretty sure the vast majority of crimes in those countries are being committed by citizens, just like in the US & the UK.



Should not the politicians who caused the problem in the ME be the first to pay and house them before any innocent member of the public is forced to make sacrifices?

Let's follow that logic for a second. If you're going to blame the "politicians who caused problems in the MidEast", then surely that blame should also extend to the citizens who supported those politicians and their actions in the MidEast. So if a politician who voted for our actions should be held responsible, then why not also the citizens who actually carried out those actions as soldiers? Or the citizens who have defense related jobs & profit from the MIC's actions in those countries?

Why are only the politicians responsible, especially since their commands mean nothing if other citizens don't actually follow through on them? Is this a case of "I was just following orders"?



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Two things to do that would actually make some difference

1. Separate genuine refugees from economic migrants claiming to be refugees.

2. Cut the numbers of people attempting to enter the UK by ending the automatic right of illegal immigrants to claim asylum, and jump ahead of those going through the correct processing required to migrate into the UK legally.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

"First of all what is wrong with the concept of funding refugee camps with foreign aid so they can get the help they need in land where there culture is more accepted?"

The logistics of providing the help and support required so far away and geopolitical layout of the places in question could present a problem.

"How many refugees should the USA and UK bring in?"

As to the U.K no more until we can address our own socioeconomic issues and accommodate in an appropriate manner the people we already have. That being said, if we bomb them they will come.

"Who pays for them?"

Our respective governments i imagine.

"How do you think vetting should be handled?"

Carefully but fair, we need to treat people like human beings, anything else is simply wrong.

"Should the native population accept a standard of living drop to accommodate these refugees?"

Certainly our working classes should not, as to the rest, well they could be doing with distributing there accumulated wealth amungst our respective populations rather more evenly.

"Do you deny there is a crime increase in Germany and Sweden where refugees have been let in en mass?"

No but where poverty and numbers in an area increase the crime rate will surely follow. We also need to take into account some of these refugees most lightly have undiagnosed mental health issues that go hand in hand with what they have experienced which also may contribute to any increase in crime statistics.

"Should not the politicians who caused the problem in the ME be the first to pay and house them before any innocent member of the public is forced to make sacrifices?"

Yes, double yes, and yes again!

edit on 12-2-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone


-Chris






posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I tend towards empathy when I think of my dearest friend from childhood.

He was a zarathustran of Persia...his family was forced to flee their beloved homeland after the shah abdicated...

His family's assets were seized and for not his fathers education and livelihood(OBGYN) his family would have known only subjugation..

Subjugation by your ethos...one bereft of humanity...bent on the anihilation of all those who would oppose the ludicrous tenants of your Stone Age superstitions...

Though Zoroastrians are driven to near extinction by your ilk I welcome all who worship Ahura Mazda to texas so they may flee the morally bereft lands of the prophet...

-Chris



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 03:54 PM
link   
US and UK understandings of the word liberal are different from what I see.

But i do regard myself as a liberal, yes a dirty stinking ignorant liberal.

So what do i think we should do with refugees.

Let as many as is sensible but those who enter are subject to the strictest vetting possible and then a simple rule. If you commit any serious crimes (ie rape, murder, serious assault, terrorism, ect) then rather than waste tax payers money on putting you through our courts system. We quite simply send you back home and hand you over to the people you were running from as a deterrent.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join