D
Deleted member 27897
Guest
As neighbouring states, only Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon have took them in.
Syria
- Thread starter Panhead
- Start date
- Status
As neighbouring states, only Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon have took them in.
Hulkster
Striker
We werent aware it was happening until towards the end of the war, it didn't even start until the war had already been ongoing for at least two years.
It's a popular myth invented after the event that we went to war to stop the Holocaust.
We went to war for the same reason we had done for centuries, so that no one European power became dominant, leaving us at their mercy.
Last edited:
We had a defence pact with Poland.
Panhead
Winger
Is that not what i said originally. We went to war when a peace pact was broken?
Hulkster
Striker
How would offering them safe sanctuary stop them from risking their lives to get here?
If anything, would it not encourage even more to risk their lives?
Panhead
Winger
Safe sanctuary would clearly involve laying transport on
D
Deleted member 30853
Guest
Less than zero. Slopey shoulders, etc.
Hulkster
Striker
Ok so we lay on transport.
How many people would take up an offer of free travel to the UK from Syria?
The number would probably be in the millions; do we have the capacity to transport millions of people, then house them and provide for them once they are here?
Assuming we do, or its only hundreds of thousands and not millions, how do we lay on this free transport?
We'd have to collect them from Syria would we not? How do we do that? As I've said on other threads, we could only do that by using military force to capture several Syrian ports, which we'd also have to defend from either ISIS or the Syrian government. So we now have boots on the ground and a war with Syria, who are supported by Russia.
Even if we overcome these problems, how do we ensure safe passage from all across Syria into our captured ports and onto our ships?
I am Boss
Winger
Would you take a family of refugees into your home?
Bob Fleming
Striker
It was a very different time. WWI still fresh in most peoples minds. Britain didn't want to go to war hence Chamberlains appeasement. By the time the extent of the persecution was truly known Hitler and Germany had been allowed to grow too strong. So yes we didn't take action to stop it but judge that on the time it happened not in hindsight. But I believe we took refugees though.
lord of light
Winger
but if i remember correctly we did know it was happening we did recognise the concentration camps existed the even discussed options - the only thing we could do was bomb them and that would have resulted in huge loss of life - easy with hindsight but a difficult situation for all at the time
Nobody gives a fuck about all that mate, let's just give them all free transport. If we think the numbers are out of control now then wtf would they do when it quadruples(at best).
It's not possible, as you've said in that post and the other posts you've made today. Has anyone even tried to answer it yet?
Panhead
Winger
So you think it's ok to leave these folks to be slaughtered? I have zero idea on how to do it, I just know something needs to be done
Have i mentioned them living with people?
Hulkster
Striker
Not that I've seen.
There just seems to be a lot of people who think that if you agree to let people come, the journey here will somehow become safe.
What is the point of crying 'something must be done' without having any practical solutions as to what we should actually do, then labelling people as callous and heartless for not doing it?
lord of light
Winger
but this country is doing the right thing we have given billions in direct aid and are actively fighting IS - i cant see many other EU countries doing the same - no we are doing our bit
PinzaC55
Striker
If you watch the BBC Auschwitz documentary on Netflix the last episode shows a UK government internal memorandum which says something to the effect of "We have enough Jews here already". There was also the example of a well off British family who lived in Guernsey and had an Austrian born Jewish nanny for their daughter. When the Germans invaded Guernsey the family were told to return to Britain but the nanny was refused because she was a "potential spy" (being Austrian). She was shipped to Auschwitz and gassed.
smoker
Striker
600k, 1.8m and 1.1m respectively.
You'd think the Saudis could take a few of these (not the ones their Jihadi mates are trying to exterminate obviously).
D
Deleted member 27897
Guest
This is the hypocrisy from the Saudis. The Saudi's will not take refugees in from Syria because the majority of Syrians fleeing the conflict are Shi'ia muslims escaping genocide from Sunni fundamentalists. Saudi Arabia has a strict sunni ideological regime, a massive influx of Shi'ia refugees would destablize their country, which is what has happened to Lebanon.
Saudi Arabia is in fact driving the main rebel groups and ISIS against the Assad regime. It's goal is to dump Assad (who harboured a secular regime) and to replace him with a Sunni regime subordinate to their regional leadership ambitions to the Middle East. (It gets one over on Iran).
It's politics, it plays with people's lives and that's what we're seeing here on so many levels.
The House of Saud will be next on the ISIS list, they know it too. It's gonna come back and bite them on the arse.
- Status
