Independent Leyton Orient Forum

The main thing is that people are dying and the world as a whole should be doing more to stop the traffickers making money out of misery.

Stop getting all caught up in the minutia and technicalities of international law, EU rules and asylum policy. As Australia has proven and as events on the Polish border are demonstrating, when push come to shove, none of that really matters or will be enforced.

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:00 am Bera- where has your '70% are genuine refugees' figure come from?

Imagine challenging him on the validity of the 70% figure when he’s throwing around numbers like 20 MILLION.

Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:33 am The blanket has lifted. We'll now see whether or not our foreign policy, for all it's many many faults, was actually a Net force for good in the world or not.

Unfair.

You can’t go around f*cking things up for decades, walk away, then miraculously expect everything to resolve itself. The damage has already been done.

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:00 am

Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:33 am The blanket has lifted. We'll now see whether or not our foreign policy, for all it's many many faults, was actually a Net force for good in the world or not.

Unfair.

You can’t go around f*cking things up for decades, walk away, then miraculously expect everything to resolve itself. The damage has already been done.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing - and I'm not comfortable with how any of this is being handled by the way. But you cannot just look at things in terms of decades. The historic norm for almost all regions throughout human history has been conflict, instability and misery. The damage was always done. Periods of calm and prosperity are very rare.

I believe the the last 70 years has been one of those rare periods. It was created due to two super powers (the USA and the Soviet Union) throwing a fire blanket over their areas of interest. This meant that many regions suddenly didn't have to worry about military spending or foreign policy, and could focus more attention on trade and investment.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, we were just left with the USA. For a while they carried on with their foreign policy, which enabled many developed nations to further prosper. It also enabled some developing nations (i.e. China) to prosper too. It's no coincidence that we have experienced the greatest age of globalisation, and the health and prosperity of the average person is of a higher standard, than at any time in our history. And that is even accounting for those who have suffered misery in those conflicts that still did persist (i.e. Iraq, Vietnam).

But the trend of US politics and Presidential Elections has been to grow increasingly disinterested in being the world's policeman. Trump wasn't an aberration. He was a continuation. Biden's foreign policy is very similar to Trumps, but just with more polite words. Those of us (including me) who have marched against American intervention in places such as Iraq, are getting our wish.

And this isn't about expecting everything to resolve itself. That's not going to happen, because from a historic perspective, there is no happy state of being for those regions to revert to. Instead, everything is now reverting to the historic norm. It's just that we've lost our collective memory of what the historic norm was like.

I genuinely think that this century has the potential to witness the greatest bloodbath in human history.

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:00 am Bera- where has your '70% are genuine refugees' figure come from?

Was in the guardian and mentioned on Twitter yesterday. Perhaps I have made a rookie mistake. Hotdogs proving my point by even refusing to acknowledge millions could come never mind giving a figure that he would be comfortable with.

jamespevans wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:01 am

Darren Grimes is an utter fanny.

Millions already go to countries with far less resources than us. Vast majority of refugees are in low or middle income countries.

There is a grim reality to what you're saying though, people will offer platitudes but their generosity is probably only going to extend as far as it doesn't seriously impact on their lives. Climate change is going to, and already is, displacing people on a scale not seen since ww2, and will likely be far worse than that. That's tens, if not hundreds, of millions of people needing somewhere safe to live. The pool of countries that will be safe will have shrunken a lot and those countries that will have the resources to accommodate people (se Asian powers, possibly middle East) tend to be pretty unaccommodating to migrants. I don't know how democracy and basic fairness to people becomes compatible in that scenario.

It all gets quite children of men quite quickly.

Would watch that and I've no idea who Darren Grimes is.

Beradogs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:08 am

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:00 am Bera- where has your '70% are genuine refugees' figure come from?

Was in the guardian and mentioned on Twitter yesterday. Perhaps I have made a rookie mistake. Hotdogs proving my point by even refusing to acknowledge millions could come never mind giving a figure that he would be comfortable with.

It’s hard to ignore (immoral, even) that our foreign policy over the last 70 (150, 300 etc) years will have consequences which many of these people are currently migrating from. But, whatever approach we now choose to adopt will need to consider the high risk of increasing failed states, instability, and conflict across many regions. There is a very real prospect of the number of people attempting to migrate into Europe and the UK reaching the millions in any given year.

There will have to be a line in the sand somewhere and, wherever that line is drawn, at that point there will be misery and suffering. We also have the dilemma that any acts of compassion, no matter how well intentioned, have the real potential to act as a pull-factor for more desperate people. Therefore leading to more deaths.

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Cant we just re-establish the empire and bring stability and democracy to these war torn countries?

Odd that Albania is there

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:18 am Would watch that and I've no idea who Darren Grimes is.

He's a Tufton Street stooge / 99p shop Farage who broadcasts from his mum's spare room. He's also known as "Crafty w*nk" following a fellow pupil of his claiming that Dazza liked shuffling one off under his school desk.

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:41 am Odd that Albania is there

Which ones of these are 'our fault'?

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:41 am Odd that Albania is there

Not entirely surprising.

There was a trend with Albanians pretending to be from Kosovo in the late 90s, and many settled here after claiming asylum so have established communities in the country already. As Albania continues to be a corrupt and crime-ridden sh*thole, the UK is an attractive destination for anyone looking to escape.

I've been following what is happening at the moment in the whole Balkan region, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it ain't looking good. We probably need to brace ourselves for instability and conflict to occur within Europe as opposed to being in further flung places.

Some very good points by dunners and mista. Why don’t we do this then. Why don’t we say that over the next 20 years we will accept say 2million migrants and that is all. Start processing them in France and get them over safely. From that point we will accept no more even if other regions fall into conflict. It’s written in law. I think it’s something most reasonable people could accept. It still requires compromise from both sides including from the left/liberals who will have to abide by numbers as much as they hate doing so.

Also. We avoid any conflicts over the next 20 years so the arguments that our involvement in these places necessitates the need to take migrants would become mute after 20 years.

Beradogs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 12:02 pm Some very good points by dunners and mista. Why don’t we do this then. Why don’t we say that over the next 20 years we will accept say 2million migrants and that is all. Start processing them in France and get them over safely. From that point we will accept no more even if other regions fall into conflict. It’s written in law. I think it’s something most reasonable people could accept. It still requires compromise from both sides including from the left/liberals who will have to abide by numbers as much as they hate doing so.

Mad. They'd all come at once.

Beradogs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 12:02 pm Why don’t we do this then. Why don’t we say that over the next 20 years we will accept say 2million migrants and that is all.

Do you mean 2million in each year, or 100,000 in each year over that 20 year period?
And, either way, what's the admission criteria?
Where's the line in the sand as to who is fortunate and who is not?
How will those who meet the fortunate criteria be prioritised?
What happens to those who try and cheat the system and get caught out?
Who decides on all of the above?
How do we police such a processing facility in France?
It will no doubt require a significant military presence on French soil to keep out the desperate masses who will try their luck regardless of the consequences. How do we and the French square that sovereignty issue?

Beradogs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 12:08 pm Also. We avoid any conflicts over the next 20 years so the arguments that our involvement in these places necessitates the need to take migrants would become mute after 20 years.

But we're only just about to get started in the Indo-Pacific region?

I understand why they want to flee their countries, but I don’t get why they risk their lives and sometimes their families lives to get to here. Is it so much better here than in the EU?

Story of O wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 12:17 pm I understand why they want to flee their countries, but I don’t get why they risk their lives and sometimes their families lives to get to here. Is it so much better here than in the EU?

I wouldn't be busting a gut to get here.

Language, existing connections and cultural influence of the UK all contribute it seems like. There are a fair few European countries that get way more asylum applications than we do either way.

Maybe, but is it worth the risk?