The questions I asked were as follows: "Your opinion seems to be (Is it?) that all these problems are Jordan's sole responsibility, and that all other countries (including Britain) can wash their hands and simply ignore the whole problem. So is it your view that the refugees are supposed to stay where they are until they are all dead? Or go back to Syria to be killed there? If not, what do you think they ought to do?" It's now been established pretty clearly that you have no idea what your own views are on this topic. Fine.
If not all refugees are in Jordan then clearly its not Jordans problem alone. No i dont think Britain can wash its hands of the problem, we can and should do more. Should they stay where they are? In preference to in Britain, yes for the reasons i have indicated. Until they are all dead? clearly not, we should help more but not bring them to Britain. Or go back to Syria to be killed there? No point in answering that stupid question. If not, what do you think they ought to do? Help them in the places of refuge they find themselves. To the point they are not dying of hunger, thirst, disease or bullets. Answered already in the "Can we do more ? Probably. Should we do more? Probably." A response shared i would hope with every other country that is able to do so. The more countries that join in the less the financial burden on each of them such that Britain does not "house, feed, educate and administer health care ahead of needy britains ?" Perhaps not the answer you wanted me to give but answered already non the less.
The difficulty with this "plan" is that you can't just expect people to live a subsistance life in a camp for years on end with nothing to do. These people are people. Some of them are well educated. How long will the Syria situation go on for? It could be years and years. The Iraq War kicked off in 2003 - 12 years ago - and it's still not a stable place you can send anyone back to. The EU is capable of taking in the refugees, but they need to be split up around the different countries and not go en masse to Germany for example. Then, they need to be split up all around the country. If the UK took in 10'000 or more, you wouldn't notice them if they were all over the place. This would be their best chance of integrating and contributing something. Net UK immigration is supposed to run at about 250'000 a year, so it's almost an incidental number. What you don't want is for them all to arrive and live in the same area (which is what a lot of current immigration looks like). If you wait for the UK to turn into a paradise with no needy people, then you'll wait forever. It has always had needy people; it has never been a paradise with everyone's needs met. The EU needs to manage the process properly, with proper registration and transportation. We are still waiting.
We have to remember the Daesh are orchestrating much of this migration It isn't only the collateral fallout from war but the consequence of deliberate policy. Daesh are the biggest single criminal organisation operating and profiting from people trafficking into Europe and they are deliberately driving a mass exodus of "apostate" Muslim civilians as well as Christians and other groups who have been given the ultimatum of leave the "Caliphate" or die. Its essentially ethnic (or rather religious) cleansing. As they kill or displace unbelievers and "wrong" Muslims, at the same time they call "true" Muslims from across the world to join the Caliphate and thereby implant a population and establish a de facto state. Hence the bizarre spectacle of entire families, old folk and babes in arms burka'ed up to the eyeballs queueing to get on planes and go an live in a war zone. They're not necessarily going to strap on suicide vests, they think they're going to the promised land. Leaving aside the thousands of terrorists, chancers and opportunists who are not refugees but have hitched a ride on this tide of humanity out of choice not necessity, Europe has to understand the context of this migration, in particular that if we make these large population shifts permanent we will be assisting Daesh in their objective and bleeding the region white of the mass of the ordinary, the decent and the educated who are the antidote to political and religious extremism. Europe's response must keep this in mind. I find it particularly reprehensible when politicians talk smugly of creaming off the best and brightest and most educated for the benefit of our societies. There is no educated class being created to replace those who have fled and we have no right to exploit the situation for our own enrichment. It they are not to remain failed states war-torn countries will one day need their best people back again. Whatever emergency measures are put in place we must ensure that happens.
I'm actually going to vote for Gimlet when he runs for office. I know, I know, in many ways, he is so wrong-headed that he makes your eyes water but he's got a good head on his shoulders and he calls a shovel a big trowel. Plus, he is so cute. I wish the politicians were empowered to speak their minds and not get libelled by the Press. Who knows, we might even get a useful dialogue going over important issues of the day. (Sorry, I am tired and cranky and in pain.)
A few neutron bombs should do the trick. The neutron bomb, or Enhanced Radiation Weapon, produces minimal blast but maximum radiation, so it destroys people not property. I am not being entirely serious with this suggestion
protecting British interests, thats why we are gong there right? humanitarian or business? ones noble the other,well i will let you decide, and round and round we go. it's bollox.
