Battlefield Calais: 'the swarm'

[Sweet Square]

I called Cameron a cnut earlier in the thread, if this is true then cnut doesn't even come close to covering it.

They are the worst.

Anyway always worth quoting The Thick Of It

I've spent ten years detoxifying this party. It's been a bit like renovating an old, old house, yeah? You can take out a sexist beam here, a callous window there, replace the odd homophobic roof tile. But after a while you realise that this renovation is doomed. Because the foundations are built on what I can only describe as a solid bed of cnuts.

Sums up that party quite nicely.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Seems an odd idea, though the refugees are only being offered an initial 5 year residency.

 

[Eyepopper]

Good, pleased to see that someone has. What a pity that so many others aren't able to see the issues as clearly. If you don't balance the head with the heart in a crisis situation you just end up retorting to reasonable logic with sarcasm, which never helps in any situation.

I didn't respond with sarcasm, if you read it properly you'll see why, if you want to of course.


(thats sarcasm)

 

[NinjaFletch]

Seems an odd idea, though the refugees are only being offered an initial 5 year residency.

I don't think its odd at all really.

It's exactly what Cameron wants, the illusion of doing something worthwhile without actually burdening us at all.

Not that a small number of Western educated Syrian refugees would be a burden, in fact you'd be hard pushed to find a economist who thought that migration of any sort would cause anything other than an economic boom to the host country, but who cares for the facts in the face of some good old fashioned chest bumping and rhetoric?

 

[Classical Mechanic]

I don't think its odd at all really.

It's exactly what Cameron wants, the illusion of doing something worthwhile without actually burdening us at all.

Not that a small number of Western educated Syrian refugees would be a burden, in fact you'd be hard pushed to find a economist who thought that migration of any sort would cause anything other than an economic boom to the host country, but who cares for the facts in the face of some good old fashioned chest bumping and rhetoric?

Deported to where though is the question, surely the aim with refugees is eventually repatriate them if the conditions are permissible? I doubt that they will be deported if Syria is still a dangerous place to live.

It is interesting that you equate refugees to being a burden but then say later that they can only be a economic benefit, though as a lefty I am surprised that you feel that a debate can be settled by economic value. Surely a content society functions in a more complex way?

Not that I agree with the policy if how Ashdown frames it is correct. Depending on the age of the children they could effectively only have ever known life in Britain.

I don't find myself agreeing with the specifics of how Cameron is dealing with this but I think generally he has handled the crisis much better than the panic stations Merkel and the 'LET THEM ALL IN' which was echoed by Labour in parliament today.

 

[NinjaFletch]

Deported to where though is the question, surely the aim with refugees is eventually repatriate them if the conditions are permissible? I doubt that they will be deported if Syria is still a dangerous place to live.

It is interesting that you equate refugees to being a burden but then say later that they can only be a economic benefit, though as a lefty I am surprised that you feel that a debate can be settled by economic value. Surely a content society functions in a more complex way?

Not that I agree with the policy if how Ashdown frames it is correct. Depending on the age of the children they could effectively only have ever known life in Britain.

I don't find myself agreeing with the specifics of how Cameron is dealing with this but I think generally he has handled the crisis much better than the panic stations Merkel and the 'LET THEM ALL IN' which was echoed by Labour in parliament today.

Well I don't, really, on either point.

I don't think migration burdens the host country - I'm yet to see a convincing argument that migration has anything but a net economic benefit to a country- and I don't think that the debate is as simple as economics either. In fact, my opinion is that this is a fundamentally humanitarian problem that we should be doing everything to solve, regardless of the cost to the economy.

The point you're replying to is more aimed at the UKIP supporting twits - of which a fair few are polluting this thread - that think the reason we shouldn't do anything to help is because of economics (although Germany's benevolence is almost certainly based on their long term fears about their economy, as much as it is genuine compassion).