The Brexit Thread

Dancingbear wrote: What we need is a load more people smugglers getting caught in the next couple of weeks.

so we know what's happenings to the 2 British ..what's happening to the Albanians . .....on the next plane back to bloody Albania ? More money for Language Line tho......while the Border Force guys tryi to sift through the lies .

seesaw50 wrote:

Bruntonpasty wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote: Not sure about polls but the odds at 2/9 for us to stay and 4/1 for us to leave.

Seesaw - so your problem appears to be that we aren't able to dominate it, if it was a case of whoever pays in most decides the direction it goes in it would become run by a small group of powerful countries and would serve the needs of the few.

Pasty- I don't think you can ignore the personalities. It only seems to be the Leave supporters who want the personalities ignored. Mainly in my view because those aligning themselves with the Leave campaign appear to be vile human beings.

I think you choose to ignore the point I'm making. Ultimately this referendum is about remaining in or leaving the EU. It is not about Dodgy Dave, Boris or Nigel, They will come or go at our decision at the ballot box every 4 or 5 years. Cameron will be gone shortly anyhow, one way or the other. I voted Tory last time, would I vote for Boris? I don't think so. Best thing the Tories could do to keep power would be install David Davies as leader. Where Labour go I'm not sure, Jeremy has been very quiet on the whole regarding the Referendum, I know he'is campaigning to leave but I suspect it's through gritted teeth.

Surely Jeremy's campaigning to stay iin ..through gritted teeth...typo?? Agree David Davies is a good shout for leader of the Torys and PM

Yes Seesaw, it was a a typo although........ he was very anti EU way back so?

Should Brexit win then Boris should be made Minister of Bananas and Hoovers as he is the self proclaimed expert on such matters. What an absolute idiot this man is, with his daily inaine utterances which generally contain no truth whatsoever.
God forbid that he should be PM although thats been his aim all along. Can you imagine him as PM being able to force through all the Tory far right laws that will reward the rich at the expence of the poor. Do you think he cares about anyone other than his rich Tory pals? If he and his Toff pals win they will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst the rest of us suffer. The UK will be marginalised by the rest of Europe and the UK will be seen as insular and anti European.

spanblue wrote: Should Brexit win then Boris should be made Minister of Bananas and Hoovers as he is the self proclaimed expert on such matters. What an absolute idiot this man is, with his daily inaine utterances which generally contain no truth whatsoever.
God forbid that he should be PM although thats been his aim all along. Can you imagine him as PM being able to force through all the Tory far right laws that will reward the rich at the expence of the poor. Do you think he cares about anyone other than his rich Tory pals? If he and his Toff pals win they will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst the rest of us suffer. The UK will be marginalised by the rest of Europe and the UK will be seen as insular and anti European.

The equally toff Cameron has talked just as much balls as Boris... they have both been a disgrace to be frank. But you can't try to make out that a vote for brexit is a vote for Tory toffs when there are just as many on the remain side.This is not a debate about parties and personalities for god's sake.... it is too important to make a decision on this because you don't like Boris' hair or something equally daft. There are equally toff politicians on both sides of the argument... both sides have lied their backside off and both brexit and remain leaders have made themselves look like total clowns so far. To claim that a vote to leave is somehow against the poor and in favour of the rich is frankly absurd... the vast majority of the rich don't want to leave... why would they want change when they have it so good? Cheap overseas labour has made many of them rich.... why would they want to stop that?

As far as the rest of Europe marginalising the UK... well that is pretty much what the leave side want.... they want to make their own decisions and trade with the rest of the world without being hamstrung by the EU.

Totally agree. Still, will really enjoy watching Cameron slink off with his tail between his legs.

Northumbrian wrote:

spanblue wrote: Should Brexit win then Boris should be made Minister of Bananas and Hoovers as he is the self proclaimed expert on such matters. What an absolute idiot this man is, with his daily inaine utterances which generally contain no truth whatsoever.
God forbid that he should be PM although thats been his aim all along. Can you imagine him as PM being able to force through all the Tory far right laws that will reward the rich at the expence of the poor. Do you think he cares about anyone other than his rich Tory pals? If he and his Toff pals win they will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst the rest of us suffer. The UK will be marginalised by the rest of Europe and the UK will be seen as insular and anti European.

The equally toff Cameron has talked just as much balls as Boris... they have both been a disgrace to be frank. But you can't try to make out that a vote for brexit is a vote for Tory toffs when there are just as many on the remain side.This is not a debate about parties and personalities for god's sake.... it is too important to make a decision on this because you don't like Boris' hair or something equally daft. There are equally toff politicians on both sides of the argument... both sides have lied their backside off and both brexit and remain leaders have made themselves look like total clowns so far. To claim that a vote to leave is somehow against the poor and in favour of the rich is frankly absurd... the vast majority of the rich don't want to leave... why would they want change when they have it so good? Cheap overseas labour has made many of them rich.... why would they want to stop that?

As far as the rest of Europe marginalising the UK... well that is pretty much what the leave side want.... they want to make their own decisions and trade with the rest of the world without being hamstrung by the EU.

See this is just the sort of crap being peddled by the remain side

If we leave and i want to by 200 Volkswagon cars do you really think they.ll say " Sorry Mrs Merkel says your nasty Englishmen who left the EU so we cant sell them to you "

Will they fu*ck its more likely to be we.ll deliver them by Friday and Good old British Pounds would suit us best please.

' Do you think he cares about anyone other than his rich Tory pals? If he and his Toff pals win they will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst the rest of us suffer.'

to be fair, you could put just about any of that lots name at the start of that sentence and it would still ring true.

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Northumbrian wrote:

spanblue wrote: Should Brexit win then Boris should be made Minister of Bananas and Hoovers as he is the self proclaimed expert on such matters. What an absolute idiot this man is, with his daily inaine utterances which generally contain no truth whatsoever.
God forbid that he should be PM although thats been his aim all along. Can you imagine him as PM being able to force through all the Tory far right laws that will reward the rich at the expence of the poor. Do you think he cares about anyone other than his rich Tory pals? If he and his Toff pals win they will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst the rest of us suffer. The UK will be marginalised by the rest of Europe and the UK will be seen as insular and anti European.

The equally toff Cameron has talked just as much balls as Boris... they have both been a disgrace to be frank. But you can't try to make out that a vote for brexit is a vote for Tory toffs when there are just as many on the remain side.This is not a debate about parties and personalities for god's sake.... it is too important to make a decision on this because you don't like Boris' hair or something equally daft. There are equally toff politicians on both sides of the argument... both sides have lied their backside off and both brexit and remain leaders have made themselves look like total clowns so far. To claim that a vote to leave is somehow against the poor and in favour of the rich is frankly absurd... the vast majority of the rich don't want to leave... why would they want change when they have it so good? Cheap overseas labour has made many of them rich.... why would they want to stop that?

As far as the rest of Europe marginalising the UK... well that is pretty much what the leave side want.... they want to make their own decisions and trade with the rest of the world without being hamstrung by the EU.

See this is just the sort of crap being peddled by the remain side

If we leave and i want to by 200 Volkswagon cars do you really think they.ll say " Sorry Mrs Merkel says your nasty Englishmen who left the EU so we cant sell them to you "

Will they fu*ck its more likely to be we.ll deliver them by Friday and Good old British Pounds would suit us best please.

too right the good old English quid will do. best decision by a politician in the last 50 was not to join the euro.

mojo wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Northumbrian wrote:

spanblue wrote: Should Brexit win then Boris should be made Minister of Bananas and Hoovers as he is the self proclaimed expert on such matters. What an absolute idiot this man is, with his daily inaine utterances which generally contain no truth whatsoever.
God forbid that he should be PM although thats been his aim all along. Can you imagine him as PM being able to force through all the Tory far right laws that will reward the rich at the expence of the poor. Do you think he cares about anyone other than his rich Tory pals? If he and his Toff pals win they will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst the rest of us suffer. The UK will be marginalised by the rest of Europe and the UK will be seen as insular and anti European.

The equally toff Cameron has talked just as much balls as Boris... they have both been a disgrace to be frank. But you can't try to make out that a vote for brexit is a vote for Tory toffs when there are just as many on the remain side.This is not a debate about parties and personalities for god's sake.... it is too important to make a decision on this because you don't like Boris' hair or something equally daft. There are equally toff politicians on both sides of the argument... both sides have lied their backside off and both brexit and remain leaders have made themselves look like total clowns so far. To claim that a vote to leave is somehow against the poor and in favour of the rich is frankly absurd... the vast majority of the rich don't want to leave... why would they want change when they have it so good? Cheap overseas labour has made many of them rich.... why would they want to stop that?

As far as the rest of Europe marginalising the UK... well that is pretty much what the leave side want.... they want to make their own decisions and trade with the rest of the world without being hamstrung by the EU.

See this is just the sort of crap being peddled by the remain side

If we leave and i want to by 200 Volkswagon cars do you really think they.ll say " Sorry Mrs Merkel says your nasty Englishmen who left the EU so we cant sell them to you "

Will they fu*ck its more likely to be we.ll deliver them by Friday and Good old British Pounds would suit us best please.

too right the good old English quid will do. best decision by a politician in the last 50 was not to join the euro.

It was indeed a great decision not to join the Euro, despite all the so called expert institutions saying we should join. The same or some of the same institutions who are telling us which way we should be voting now.

how do you or can you organise a way to vote if your otherwise unavailable on said day?

mojo wrote: how do you or can you organise a way to vote if your otherwise unavailable on said day?

Must be a postal vote or proxy method.

I suppose I could ask someone, who doesn't live in the same ward as me, to pop in with my card with direct instructions on how I want to vote.
aye, that'll do, can't fail.

Just dug out my card & it say's on it that you don't need to take it to the polling station, how the heck do they know who is who as there is no mention of having to produce any ID.....all replies to veryconfused.com please

You don't have to take the card for any election.. But they ask your name and tick you off the ward list FYI

so in theory, if you know folk aren't bothering to vote, you could pop in first thing as it opens as them and vote, them return later when the staff change and go as someone else and vote again?

Yes but you always have been able to. You could also do it in multiple constituencies if you could be arsed.

Bloody hell, back in the dim & distant past it was like getting interviewed by the "Spanish Inquisition" before you could put a cross anywhere near a piece of paper. Surely this is open to all kinds of abuse & I'm surprised when there is marginal results the loser doesn't cry foul from the rooftops. It would probably make no difference at the time, but would surely highlight the, as pointed out by CCU, lax nature of the system.

mojo wrote: so in theory, if you know folk aren't bothering to vote, you could pop in first thing as it opens as them and vote, them return later when the staff change and go as someone else and vote again?

The staff in the Polling station don't change ...done it.....you're on from when the polls open till they close at 10pm!

seesaw50 wrote:

mojo wrote: so in theory, if you know folk aren't bothering to vote, you could pop in first thing as it opens as them and vote, them return later when the staff change and go as someone else and vote again?

The staff in the Polling station don't change ...done it.....you're on from when the polls open till they close at 10pm!

Slave labour Seesaw

Dancingbear wrote: Yes but you always have been able to. You could also do it in multiple constituencies if you could be arsed.

Only if you were registered to vote in multiple constituencies db which entails having an address in multiple constituencies to be registered at. Not saying impossible but difficult

WOSBlue wrote:

seesaw50 wrote:

mojo wrote: so in theory, if you know folk aren't bothering to vote, you could pop in first thing as it opens as them and vote, them return later when the staff change and go as someone else and vote again?

The staff in the Polling station don't change ...done it.....you're on from when the polls open till they close at 10pm!

Slave labour Seesaw

err decent return for hours worked I'd say!

seesaw50 wrote:

WOSBlue wrote:

seesaw50 wrote:

mojo wrote: so in theory, if you know folk aren't bothering to vote, you could pop in first thing as it opens as them and vote, them return later when the staff change and go as someone else and vote again?

The staff in the Polling station don't change ...done it.....you're on from when the polls open till they close at 10pm!

Slave labour Seesaw

err decent return for hours worked I'd say!

I don't know, not a council worker at the time were you

WOSBlue wrote:

seesaw50 wrote:

WOSBlue wrote:

seesaw50 wrote:

mojo wrote: so in theory, if you know folk aren't bothering to vote, you could pop in first thing as it opens as them and vote, them return later when the staff change and go as someone else and vote again?

The staff in the Polling station don't change ...done it.....you're on from when the polls open till they close at 10pm!

Slave labour Seesaw

err decent return for hours worked I'd say!

I don't know, not a council worker at the time were you

Couldn't possibly say due to confidentiality agreement

seesaw50 wrote:

Dancingbear wrote: Yes but you always have been able to. You could also do it in multiple constituencies if you could be arsed.

Only if you were registered to vote in multiple constituencies db which entails having an address in multiple constituencies to be registered at. Not saying impossible but difficult

You've totally missed the point seesaw. The lad was on about voting for people who you knew weren't gonna vote. If you knew 10 people who weren't gonna vote all from different wards hypothetically you could vote for them if you could be bothered. Only real problem would be if you tried to vote as someone and the guy at the desk knew him.

correct db.

Say we do come Vote to Leave. Any immigration policy will be down to the government of the day to decide.

What happens if said government then decides to just continue with what we have now rather than putting on any limits ? Or cancels any limits that a previous government have enforced ?

DeckchairBlue wrote: Say we do come Vote to Leave. Any immigration policy will be down to the government of the day to decide.

What happens if said government then decides to just continue with what we have now rather than putting on any limits ? Or cancels any limits that a previous government have enforced ?

Somthing i saw discussed earlier in the week and the very reason a grouping of right of centre independent Labour MP.s in Parliament wouldnt be a bad thing.

DeckchairBlue wrote: Say we do come Vote to Leave. Any immigration policy will be down to the government of the day to decide.

What happens if said government then decides to just continue with what we have now rather than putting on any limits ? Or cancels any limits that a previous government have enforced ?

Then as an electorate if we didn't like the policy we could vote the government out at the first opportunity.... something which we can't do with the EU. The point really is that a national government should be able to decide it's own immigration policy based on the market conditions at the time for that country.... there may be times when we do need a lot of skilled immigrants to come to the country...but at least a points based system would be able to ensure that the immigrants matched the required skills. At the moment you don't have control over numbers or quality coming here from the EU.

His last comment was about staying in for our children and there grand children.But surely Mr Cameron and a lot of us on this board had relatives who fought in the last war so they could debate this freely in a free world. Its our fault we have sold them brave men down the river they would be turning in there graves if they could see what was happening now. We are giving our country to the people we fought against only yesterday Merkel was telling us what to do but all this rubbish they are spouting is changing my mind now im voting out i say get rid we are better off whithout them.

The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

CumbrianView wrote: His last comment was about staying in for our children and there grand children.But surely Mr Cameron and a lot of us on this board had relatives who fought in the last war so they could debate this freely in a free world. Its our fault we have sold them brave men down the river they would be turning in there graves if they could see what was happening now. We are giving our country to the people we fought against only yesterday Merkel was telling us what to do but all this rubbish they are spouting is changing my mind now im voting out i say get rid we are better off whithout them.

You release that the war you are referring to was 60+ years ago and was fought against the Nazis (ideology) not the Germans (people) don't you ?

You'd have thought that in that time we would have used the freedom won by those guys to gain more intelligence than beleiving that "we beat you in a war so you can't tell us what to do" is a valid point to use in a debate.

Merkel was never at any point telling us what to do. As the leader of a EU country she was voicing her opinion on what was happening in another EU country, the same as other leaders have including the Americans, and the same as we would probably be doing if it was Germany voting to leave.

If you cant see that Merkel was telling us what to do i am baffled.She was saying if we left, the trade deals that would need to be sorted would not be made easy for us.She is not saying they would be made easier if we left .So telling us to stay there economy rely's on us more we do of them .Get out while we can before it all comes tumbling down
96% of companys in the uk dont deal with europe anyway i am sure we can stand on our own with out unelected people telling us what to do.

the Spanish president / prime minister, I don't know which it is, stated that if we left it would mean that it would be harder for us to go and work in spain. I think what he really means is that if we leave and close the borders, the almost bankrupt spain and Spanish government will have to look after their own citizens instead of them having free passage to come and take jobs in Britain.

they're all starting to panic now, so lets see who will come out with the most outlandish claims.

I've said all along, they do not want us to leave. Not because they like us, more that as part of the club were less of a threat, more under control. Oh and of course, the money we put in as net contributors. Obama doesn't want us to leave because we're their little toe hold into Europe, He can fook right off! Cameron went to get us "a deal" and got nothing, as it gets closer i think there will start to be offers/concessions put forward to try and keep us in. Some say we should stay in to effect change, Not a snowball in hell's chance of that happening on anything we see as critical to us. we do have 10% of the MEP's but if the other 90% are against our proposals? We're not gonna gain anything we really want if it affects the others adversely, Never! There are those who say the future will be uncertain if we leave? I would say that staying in means one thing and one thing only, Greater integration into the European political experiment and therefore less autonomy. Personally I don't want ANY further integration and I'm quite happy to risk the uncertainty.

Vote LEAVE on 23rd June 2016.

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

Then the points system needs beefing up, simple.

As a land mass and population per square mile, I suspect that Canada has room for a few more people than this overpopulated little island of ours. I'm not saying stop immigration entirely but on the scale we have now, it is only going to cause more problems for us all in the longer term. you'll no doubt be as vociferous in your attacks on govt for cutting back in the NHS, education and general infrastructure, I'd ask where is the money coming from to pay for the ideals you wish to support? You can tax the rich so far but ultimately we will ALL have to pay one way or another.


We weren't alone in the destabilising activities, I do believe gOod 'ol uncle sam was the leader of the pack,how many refugees are they taking? and if the Donald gets in in November? how many then? and perhaps even how much more destabilisation?


Edited to add. Dodgy Dave reckoned on telly that Turkey will never be part of the EU. Really? don't believe that for a second! they made a deal recently with the Eu to take in refugees etc, this won't be out of the goodness of their hearts, there will be strings and anyone who believes otherwise is kidding themselves. Turkey would be a disaster for the EU.

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

Exactly so lets have a points system that does work then.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

And whats the density of population of Canada compared with the UK ? Basically were full and theyre a long way off it and the same argument applies to just about every country thats accepting large numbers inc Germany.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

To the best of my knowledge weve never bombed Syria and if these people who are now infecting Europe had had the balls to stay at home and fight they could have defeated both ISIS and Asad a long time ago but give it 6 months and ISIS will have been wiped out and they can all go home. Wonder what their excuse will be then ?

.

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

Exactly so lets have a points system that does work then.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

And whats the density of population of Canada compared with the UK ? Basically were full and theyre a long way off it and the same argument applies to just about every country thats accepting large numbers inc Germany.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

To the best of my knowledge weve never bombed Syria and if these people who are now infecting Europe had had the balls to stay at home and fight they could have defeated both ISIS and Asad a long time ago but give it 6 months and ISIS will have been wiped out and they can all go home. Wonder what their excuse will be then ?

.

That would probably work yes.

No basically we are not full. Only 7%of the UK is designated as being urban, this includes roads and urban developmental, so we are very far from being full.

Well your knowledge is wrong then isn't it, because have been. These people aren't 'infecting' anywhere, they have had their homes and lives destroyed because we (the west) decided that we wanted to interfere in a region to suit our own needs.

Do you really think that every bomb dropped in Syria hits its target (ISIS), what happens when they are in the towns and cities they have occupied ?

You really think it's as simple as they should just stay and fight ? I'll give you a scenario. Syrian man with a wife and 2 kids decides to stay and fight, is killed, his wife can't work (Muslim country), so her and his kids now have no provider and are destitute. ISIS roll into their town, capture,rape and kill them.

Or all 4 of them can take a chance and flee the country in search of safety.

I know which choice I would make for my family.

Hate it when people give it the "they should stay and fight ISIS otherwise they are cowards" b*llocks. Stay and fight against people who will execute you and your family in some of the most barbaric ways that they can think of? No thanks. I know I f*cking wouldn't, and I bet most of the people who give it the "they should stay and fight" b*llocks wouldn't either. It's just bravado bullsh*t. Put them in that situation and they'd f*cking sh*t it like the rest of us.

It's like all these far right, Britain First type spackers who go on about fighting the enemy and wank off over "our boys over in such and such a country". if they're so bothered about fighting the enemy then why haven't they gone and joined the army?

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

Exactly so lets have a points system that does work then.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

And whats the density of population of Canada compared with the UK ? Basically were full and theyre a long way off it and the same argument applies to just about every country thats accepting large numbers inc Germany.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

To the best of my knowledge weve never bombed Syria and if these people who are now infecting Europe had had the balls to stay at home and fight they could have defeated both ISIS and Asad a long time ago but give it 6 months and ISIS will have been wiped out and they can all go home. Wonder what their excuse will be then ?

.

That would probably work yes.

No basically we are not full. Only 7%of the UK is designated as being urban, this includes roads and urban developmental, so we are very far from being full.

Yes the 7% figure is correct but you try trying to build 300 houses for British residents never mind 300 Syrians outside of that 7% of urban areas and see what happens resulting in them just being crammed into your 7% whereas in your example of Canada its possible there for whole new cities to be build in undeveloped land.

Well your knowledge is wrong then isn't it, because have been. These people aren't 'infecting' anywhere, they have had their homes and lives destroyed because we (the west) decided that we wanted to interfere in a region to suit our own needs.

Just checked on Janes Defence website and that confirms my knowledge is correct.If you dont think theyre infecting everywhere try speaking to the residents and business owners on islands like Kos whos decades of building up their islands finances businesses comunities and tourist industry just to have it decimated and destroyed in 2 years by these people who are there illegally with no right to be there.

Do you really think that every bomb dropped in Syria hits its target (ISIS), what happens when they are in the towns and cities they have occupied ?

Its called collateral damage it happens in War. Did all the people from the East End of London get on boats and head for the nearest neutral country when they were bombed in the second world war ? Did they hell as like the stayed and helped out with the war effort which as i say if the Syrians had done that 5 years ago there wouldnt be any need for anyone to be getting in boats would there ?

You really think it's as simple as they should just stay and fight ? I'll give you a scenario. Syrian man with a wife and 2 kids decides to stay and fight, is killed, his wife can't work (Muslim country), so her and his kids now have no provider and are destitute. ISIS roll into their town, capture,rape and kill them.

I think you.ll find ISIS wont be rolling into anywhere in the near future so wont be raping and killing anyone.The sooner they are finished off and we can leave the Kurds and Assad to fight it out for control of the bloody place the better.

Or all 4 of them can take a chance and flee the country in search of safety

Well thats fine let them do that but not in this direction. If 5 years ago the EU had supported countries like Italy and Greece to turn the boats round and sent them back the traffickers would of got the message by now and would be sending them elsewhere I understand theres a lot of room in Russia now i wonder why theyre not so keen on going there ?.

I know which choice I would make for my family.

A lot is made of those who decide to vote out wanting to do so because of immigration being the main issue.

For me, immigration is the least of my worries. I'm looking purely at economy, sovereignty, governance. If you get the chance, watch 'Brexit the movie'... shit title but tells you all you need to know about club Europe.

Out, without a doubt.

kells wrote: A lot is made of those who decide to vote out wanting to do so because of immigration being the main issue.

For me, immigration is the least of my worries. I'm looking purely at economy, sovereignty, governance. If you get the chance, watch 'Brexit the movie'... shit title but tells you all you need to know about club Europe.

Out, without a doubt.

Well Kells we agree on something then and yes i.ve watched the movie and anyone thinking of voting STAY IN Should have a copy pushed thru their letterbox NOW

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

Exactly so lets have a points system that does work then.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

And whats the density of population of Canada compared with the UK ? Basically were full and theyre a long way off it and the same argument applies to just about every country thats accepting large numbers inc Germany.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

To the best of my knowledge weve never bombed Syria and if these people who are now infecting Europe had had the balls to stay at home and fight they could have defeated both ISIS and Asad a long time ago but give it 6 months and ISIS will have been wiped out and they can all go home. Wonder what their excuse will be then ?

.

That would probably work yes.

No basically we are not full. Only 7%of the UK is designated as being urban, this includes roads and urban developmental, so we are very far from being full.

Yes the 7% figure is correct but you try trying to build 300 houses for British residents never mind 300 Syrians outside of that 7% of urban areas and see what happens resulting in them just being crammed into your 7% whereas in your example of Canada its possible there for whole new cities to be build in undeveloped land.

Well your knowledge is wrong then isn't it, because have been. These people aren't 'infecting' anywhere, they have had their homes and lives destroyed because we (the west) decided that we wanted to interfere in a region to suit our own needs.

Just checked on Janes Defence website and that confirms my knowledge is correct.If you dont think theyre infecting everywhere try speaking to the residents and business owners on islands like Kos whos decades of building up their islands finances businesses comunities and tourist industry just to have it decimated and destroyed in 2 years by these people who are there illegally with no right to be there.

Do you really think that every bomb dropped in Syria hits its target (ISIS), what happens when they are in the towns and cities they have occupied ?

Its called collateral damage it happens in War. Did all the people from the East End of London get on boats and head for the nearest neutral country when they were bombed in the second world war ? Did they hell as like the stayed and helped out with the war effort which as i say if the Syrians had done that 5 years ago there wouldnt be any need for anyone to be getting in boats would there ?

You really think it's as simple as they should just stay and fight ? I'll give you a scenario. Syrian man with a wife and 2 kids decides to stay and fight, is killed, his wife can't work (Muslim country), so her and his kids now have no provider and are destitute. ISIS roll into their town, capture,rape and kill them.

I think you.ll find ISIS wont be rolling into anywhere in the near future so wont be raping and killing anyone.The sooner they are finished off and we can leave the Kurds and Assad to fight it out for control of the bloody place the better.

Or all 4 of them can take a chance and flee the country in search of safety

Well thats fine let them do that but not in this direction. If 5 years ago the EU had supported countries like Italy and Greece to turn the boats round and sent them back the traffickers would of got the message by now and would be sending them elsewhere I understand theres a lot of room in Russia now i wonder why theyre not so keen on going there ?.

I know which choice I would make for my family.

Your basic racist/bigoted view of the world makes it impossible to have a reasonable debate with you.

My only hope is that when we do vote to REMAIN, the likes of you can't take the defeat and combust.

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

DeckchairBlue wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

Flatcap wrote: The biggest proportion of immigrants coming to this country are from outside the EU which supposedly we have full control of. We do not seem to be very good at controlling these numbers never mind those from the EU.

And who do you think is making us take the Syrians in the first place with their concocted agreements ?

Greece wanted a couple of Million Euros to pay for a force to shove them back out to sea and what did the EU do ? Set up a scheme that costs hundreds of millions of Euros to let them in. You simply couldnt make it up could you.

Almost twice as many Non-EU citizens migrate to the UK each year than EU Citizens, so the claims that a points system works to reduce migration is false, because we already have one and migration has risen both from within the EU and outside of it every year for the last 10 years.

Exactly so lets have a points system that does work then.

We've agreed to take 20k over the next 5 years. As a comparison, Canada resettled 25k last year alone. It's hardly like we are taking a lot is it.

And whats the density of population of Canada compared with the UK ? Basically were full and theyre a long way off it and the same argument applies to just about every country thats accepting large numbers inc Germany.

Why shouldn't we provide relief to those in need ? We are the ones that destabilised the whole region and bombed their homes. Why shouldn't we deal with the consequences ?

To the best of my knowledge weve never bombed Syria and if these people who are now infecting Europe had had the balls to stay at home and fight they could have defeated both ISIS and Asad a long time ago but give it 6 months and ISIS will have been wiped out and they can all go home. Wonder what their excuse will be then ?

.

That would probably work yes.

No basically we are not full. Only 7%of the UK is designated as being urban, this includes roads and urban developmental, so we are very far from being full.

Yes the 7% figure is correct but you try trying to build 300 houses for British residents never mind 300 Syrians outside of that 7% of urban areas and see what happens resulting in them just being crammed into your 7% whereas in your example of Canada its possible there for whole new cities to be build in undeveloped land.

Well your knowledge is wrong then isn't it, because have been. These people aren't 'infecting' anywhere, they have had their homes and lives destroyed because we (the west) decided that we wanted to interfere in a region to suit our own needs.

Just checked on Janes Defence website and that confirms my knowledge is correct.If you dont think theyre infecting everywhere try speaking to the residents and business owners on islands like Kos whos decades of building up their islands finances businesses comunities and tourist industry just to have it decimated and destroyed in 2 years by these people who are there illegally with no right to be there.

Do you really think that every bomb dropped in Syria hits its target (ISIS), what happens when they are in the towns and cities they have occupied ?

Its called collateral damage it happens in War. Did all the people from the East End of London get on boats and head for the nearest neutral country when they were bombed in the second world war ? Did they hell as like the stayed and helped out with the war effort which as i say if the Syrians had done that 5 years ago there wouldnt be any need for anyone to be getting in boats would there ?

You really think it's as simple as they should just stay and fight ? I'll give you a scenario. Syrian man with a wife and 2 kids decides to stay and fight, is killed, his wife can't work (Muslim country), so her and his kids now have no provider and are destitute. ISIS roll into their town, capture,rape and kill them.

I think you.ll find ISIS wont be rolling into anywhere in the near future so wont be raping and killing anyone.The sooner they are finished off and we can leave the Kurds and Assad to fight it out for control of the bloody place the better.

Or all 4 of them can take a chance and flee the country in search of safety

Well thats fine let them do that but not in this direction. If 5 years ago the EU had supported countries like Italy and Greece to turn the boats round and sent them back the traffickers would of got the message by now and would be sending them elsewhere I understand theres a lot of room in Russia now i wonder why theyre not so keen on going there ?.

I know which choice I would make for my family.

Your basic racist/bigoted view of the world makes it impossible to have a reasonable debate with you.

My only hope is that when we do vote to REMAIN, the likes of you can't take the defeat and combust.

Well yes youre right its very hard to have a reasoned debate when the person youre trying to debate with has no reasoned or logical or just very poor arguments like yours.

But trying to call people racists and bigots just because you cant see whats good for you isnt really a very good stance as youre going to have to call a hell of a lot of people that after the Referendum the term that suits us best is realist not racist.

No if the referendum doesnt go our way we will just assist the Tories to self destruct and get the OUT element into power which will be double bubble as we.ll then have a government who fundamentally disagree with everything the EU stands for and i.ll get what i really want stay in and destroy it from within or even better take it over and run it a way that works better for Britain and the British people rather than thousands of bloody immigrants from God knows where.and East European countries who should never of been given membership in the first place.

Think the referring to human beings as a source of infection is just about the worst thing I've ever read on this message board. Very disturbing.

Voting leave and yes its on the immigration issue .

And before anyone starts if the NHS ,Schools and public services could cope with the mass influx i would have a different veiw but they are struggling now almost at breaking point in some areas and seeing as the only way to reduce this influx is a leave vote i dont see any other choice .

Alan wrote: Voting leave and yes its on the immigration issue .

And before anyone starts if the NHS ,Schools and public services could cope with the mass influx i would have a different veiw but they are struggling now almost at breaking point in some areas and seeing as the only way to reduce this influx is a leave vote i dont see any other choice .

It's a tricky one with public services and the NHS, they have got this way because of a lack of investment from successive governments.

Even if we come out of the EU we will still have net migration in the hundreds of thousands as we already do with non-EU migrants. At the very least they will remain at breaking point.

Deckchair, If the referendum chooses to leave the EU, do you believe we will actually leave?

Personally, I don't. I suspect there will be concessions and deals done, and we will be told that all is now well with us and the EU, there won't be another referendum and we are now staying in. Quite where this would leave the countries main political parties is any ones guess. There are divisions in both tory and labour as it is now, what would happen at the next election?