Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Anti-refugee people: Would you rather have a Syrian die than come to the UK? watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    False dichotomy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ladbants)
    A lot of people here are hating on refugees and saying that Britain shouldn't accept any. So would you rather have an innocent Syrian die in an air strike or a bomb than come here and live a safe life here?
    It's better if the refugees stay in Middle East
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shumaya)
    Is this what Jesus would say?
    Would Jesus tell the 3rd world if they risk their lives they can reach the land of milk and honey? Because this is what Merkel did, and 3,000 have already drowned crossing the med from North Africa and the ME as illegal immigration in Germany reached 2 million+ migrants in the space of 12 months.

    If anyone had a heart in this situation they would do what Australia did, stop the boats and tell them they will not be granted asylum by illegal immigration. Legitimate refugees with papers or ID proving they are what they say they are can apply from Refugee camps in Turkey or Lebanon.

    Migrants from Ghana or Nigeria for example throwing away their passport and landing in Greece or Italy should not even be accepted by the EU, they should be immediately deported.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This seems to be an appeal to emotion.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    But the average migrant? I still fail to see the case for justified death
    I dunno then, I think we would all prefer them not to come in the first place. Maybe it was hyperbole.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    I think reasons as to why there's so much anti refugee feelings going around is because a lot of them have walked into Europe unchecked- meaning ISIS would have a field day because they can easily send Jihadis posing as refugees, some act incredibly entitled for "refugees" (sex attacks, burning down the refugee buildings, forcing Christians from Syria to convert to Islam and how you have people from Pakistan posing as refugees just for benefits.

    There was some documentary called "Children of the Front Line" and the camera crew followed a mother and her two daughters to Germany. The girl was so happy because she said there were no bombs in Germany and she could dance on the street etc. I would gladly help families like that. But single men, who have left their families behind and have decided not to fight for their country? Nope never.



    I knew you'd say that hahaha
    I agree with all your points but why should men fight and die in pointless wars ?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kadak)
    I agree with all your points but why should men fight and die in pointless wars ?
    So many Syrians condemn ISIS for ruining their country. Why not just fight with the Kurds? I know its more complicated but I don't think its impossible considering a lot of them are young and fit.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    There wont be refugees if Britain didn't meddle in other countries affairs would there?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I'd rather have a Syrian use some common sense and stay in neighboring Islamic countries than come to the UK and "culturally enrich" ours.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Please can somebody answer this... I've been wondering for a while now...

    Why do these migrants come to countries like the UK instead of countries more similar culturally than their own? If I had to, I'd rather move to Australia than India, for example, even though both are warm countries. We share a language, most culture, largely similar religion/lack thereof...

    Are countries such as Saudi, Qatar, etc. viewed as brutish in Islamic countries as they are in other countries? Is this a contributing factor, or is the motivation to come here largely benefits, economic opportunities, etc.?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    To Themini, surely supporting the mess is what's been keeping it gone for so long?

    And there was an article where Dailymail journalists interviewed Yazidi girls who had been sold off by ISIS as sex slaves. It was really horrible to read and I think they interviewed quite a few girls about it. A shocking number of them said that Saudi Arabian sheiks had brought them and had paid ISIS extra if a girl was a virgin.

    If support from Saudi Arabia was cut completely, ISIS would dry up so fast they could be wiped out so much more easily.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ture-ISIS.html
    I made this distinction quite clearly. I don't like any of the 3 conservative extremist states (IMO) Israel, USA and Saudi Arabia who all happen to be great allies. If Saudis are the root cause of this problem then why is the UK actively backing them? They're supposedly our greatest ally. I despise Saudi Arabia, they're rotten to the core and spread Wahhabism and fundamental ideology. However I'm merely asking the question should we be blaming the person who started the forest fire? Or a bunch of teens who are chucking alcohol into the fire? Because that's what we're talking about here.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    So many Syrians condemn ISIS for ruining their country. Why not just fight with the Kurds? I know its more complicated but I don't think its impossible considering a lot of them are young and fit.
    Tbh,many of the groups fighting ISIS are anything but moderate from a Western point of view. Alot of them have ties or allegience to Al Qaeda.The Assad govt has killed far more civilians than ISIS,and many anti ISIS groups will probably go back to fighting Assad.
    Not to mention many Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia playing games,claiming to be on the anti ISIS coalition,yet many Saudis obviously supply ISIS with money and foreign fighters.
    Even if we defeat ISIS,the civil war will just continue.The fight against ISIS is just one part of it.Everything just looks so bleak and grim.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Having a whole country flooded with unskilled refugees would ruin it. The problem is that it's not just one, or ten, or even a hundred. It's an indeterminate horde that won't stop coming and may never leave.

    The whole concept of asylum and the treaties governing it were written in a different time. The concept is now being abused to flood European countries with countless people from a culture that's very hostile to their way of life. Only now they can't revise it without angering important sections of the population.

    I think Europe has unfortunately bound itself to some very self-destructive ideas and traditions, and that there's no way they will save themselves because being compassionate is more important than anything else now.

    I should clarify that I have no issue with controlled immigration of wealthy or educated people from countries like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. But unchecked migration of refugees from the very heart of anti-Western terrorism, based on total trust and compassion? Absurd.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    If we used this question to justify allowing anyone at risk of death, displacement and discrimination across the world in Britain we'd be a) billions of people over capacity and b) not British anymore.

    Get a grip, OP.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by G8D)
    If we used this question to justify allowing anyone at risk of death, displacement and discrimination across the world in Britain we'd be a) billions of people over capacity and b) not British anymore.

    Get a grip, OP.
    Answer the question. If you had the power to choose whether a Syrian comes to this country or dies in their homeland you'd have to be wrong in the head to choose the latter.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    Answer the question. If you had the power to choose whether a Syrian comes to this country or dies in their homeland you'd have to be wrong in the head to choose the latter.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'd agree with you. But the question does not represent the issues we are currently facing.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jeremy1988)
    Having a whole country flooded with unskilled refugees would ruin it. The problem is that it's not just one, or ten, or even a hundred. It's an indeterminate horde that won't stop coming and may never leave.

    The whole concept of asylum and the treaties governing it were written in a different time. The concept is now being abused to flood European countries with countless people from a culture that's very hostile to their way of life. Only now they can't revise it without angering important sections of the population.

    I think Europe has unfortunately bound itself to some very self-destructive ideas and traditions, and that there's no way they will save themselves because being compassionate is more important than anything else now.

    I should clarify that I have no issue with controlled immigration of wealthy or educated people from countries like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. But unchecked migration of refugees from the very heart of anti-Western terrorism, based on total trust and compassion? Absurd.
    Unfortunately the obsession amongst the leftists and political classes in this country / EU will be the death of us all, they are a generation apart from reality, and by the time they realise it will be practically too late.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    Answer the question. If you had the power to choose whether a Syrian comes to this country or dies in their homeland you'd have to be wrong in the head to choose the latter.

    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Would you rather a small child die in the UK as the NHS cannot afford the treatment required to try and save him / her or to bring in a random migrant?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    Would you rather a small child die in the UK as the NHS cannot afford the treatment required to try and save him / her or to bring in a random migrant?
    Taking this entirely hypothetically, there'd be no reason to take one over the option if each ends in a child dying.

    But placing this in the real world, can you actually establish reasonable grounds for the possibility of a causal link between a migrant coming here and a native child dying from lack of required treatment?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    Taking this entirely hypothetically, there'd be no reason to take one over the option if each ends in a child dying.

    But placing this in the real world, can you actually establish reasonable grounds for the possibility of a causal link between a migrant coming here and a native child dying from lack of required treatment?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yes, as money does not grow on trees, every £ being spent on a migrant is a £ taken away somewhere, could be from the NHS, could be from mental health services (perhaps someone will commit suicide), could come a variety of areas. There is no good reason at all for any migrant to come here, which is why I have my personal policy of the UK should take zero migrants.
 
 
 
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.