New Years attacks in Germany

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:The strain on infrastructure is a valid point, however there is absolutely no doubt at all that we can cope by taking in more than we have currently committed to. If we can afford to spend half a million per bombing mission in Syria at the blink of an eye then we can afford to support more of the refugees we're now helping create. 

The Tories narrative that this country is totally broke is rubbish, used as an excuse to shrink the state under the guise of austerity. We can afford to support our schools, hospitals and other public services far more than we currently are.

So when are you taking in a family?

bwfc1874 wrote:The strain on infrastructure is a valid point, however there is absolutely no doubt at all that we can cope by taking in more than we have currently committed to. If we can afford to spend half a million per bombing mission in Syria at the blink of an eye then we can afford to support more of the refugees we're now helping create. 

Reebok Trotter wrote:We might be the 7th richest country in the world but that wealth is actually shared by less than 5% of the current population of the UK. And you can bet your bottom dollar that it won't be that 5% that will be expected to take the burden of the ubiquitous immigration problem.

xmiles wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:The strain on infrastructure is a valid point, however there is absolutely no doubt at all that we can cope by taking in more than we have currently committed to. If we can afford to spend half a million per bombing mission in Syria at the blink of an eye then we can afford to support more of the refugees we're now helping create. 

Yes it's nice to be nice but exactly how many refugees do you think we can take?

Reebok Trotter wrote:We might be the 7th richest country in the world but that wealth is actually shared by less than 5% of the current population of the UK. And you can bet your bottom dollar that it won't be that 5% that will be expected to take the burden of the ubiquitous immigration problem.

As SK says, Charity begins at home.

Breadman wrote:I can play the Internationale on a comb and paper.

Am I in?

bwfc1874 wrote:If that's the best argument you can come up with then you're proving my point really.

When are you going to fight in Syria?
When are you going to start culling fat people?
When are you going to start supporting another club?

bwfc1874 wrote:You kept saying we should bomb Syria to fight ISIS, so what you really mean is we should bomb Syria providing you don't have to do anything?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:You kept saying we should bomb Syria to fight ISIS, so what you really mean is we should bomb Syria providing you don't have to do anything?

I'm pretty sure civilians can't just pitch up at a UK army base and demand to take control of the drones, planes and bombs.

Whereas anyone can take in a refugee or two.

Try again.

bwfc1874 wrote:

Really no need for me to try again, I'm waiting for you to come up with a serious reason why we shouldn't take more than 20,000 refugees.

You want to bomb these countries you should deal with the consequences.