Why do refugees specifically have to come to the UK?

London accounts for 22% of GDP

very multicultural

That is the plan. White genocide

The gulf states have accepted ZERO refugees yet they fund many militant groups in Syria.How does that make you feel ?

what about other rich countries as UAE? they are Muslims countries too and much richer than we are.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3222405/How-six-wealthiest-Gulf-Nations-refused-single-Syrian-refugee.html

Yea and it didn't before we started mass importing people? Oh right it did lol


Posted from TSR Mobile

There is SO much more opportunity for refugees in Western countries, but they may be coming to the UK because:
1) We provide free healthcare/education.
2) They may be more informed about the immigration process (asylum seeking, visa applications) because information is more readily available.
3) There is more opportunity to claim benefits

But anyway, what are your views on the crisis and should we let more people in? Be honest

Why did you put "come to the UK" in your title and then admit in your first paragraph that their target is W. Europe? Trying to get an audience for the thread or do you choose to ignore that overwhelmingly they are trying to reach Germany? For pretty obvious reasons in that it offers the potential to earn a decent living and so far has made welcoming gestures unlike the UK, where the Tory shires and UKIP trolls rule the roost via their tame poodles in the lying and distorting mass media..

Every country should take an equal burden. UK has played a large role in overseas conflicts and plays a large role in military arms sales.

What's right is right. Dave wanted to arm the FSA and directly intervene in Syria at one point. We should welcome the refugees with open arms.

Is financially supporting the refugees in the locality of Syria not taking our share in a more effective way considerong the pounts I made and and others?

At least on this thread no emotional leftie has said something along the lines of 'we're all human'. So what.

Problem is you can't set up an effective long term community. Can you really build adequate hospitals, schools, infrastructure and meet the needs of the people in a camp?

True, no. But we could pay for the refugees to be integrated into the infrastructure of surrounding nations. This cash flow could actually do the nations a lot of good too!

Which surrounding nations do you suggest? France, Germany?

Having them in camps simply won't work.

That's not true if you look at the stats.

Yes, UK currently has taken in 200 or so Syrians (IIRC), though I've seen 2000 bandied about somewhere.

Cameron has introduced a plan to take refugees from refugees camps, and not those who have risked their lives and spent hundreds or thousands of pounds in an attempt to get to the UK which is admirable.

Yeah and this will be the same scene across Europe very soon if they dont start controlling the numbers coming in.
This might very well be the end of Europe as we know it. At the very least the "generous" welfare system is gonna collapse all across the continent and then the real chaos will ensue!

Why is it admirable?

The people in Calais are already in France. They are safe there. We should be taking people who are in direct danger from ISIS.

Wait for 10,000 people arriving in Germany every week they don't know what exactly they are putting themselves into, although I have nothing against the Syrian refugees I would help these people by getting to the root causes of the problem. I'm sure once the issues are sorted out in their own country then they have no reason to flee.