|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 9, 2024 22:29:11 GMT
yes, but when helping costs everything changes. It should also be a two way street. Do you think the UK should take all the migrants queued up in Calais wanting to be here, to take the cost and pressure off France? No. I think that we should make the journey pointless . Using your principal we should stop helping the Ukraine war until it directly affects us . You added directly. I never mentioned directly, it was not part of my argument. Indirectly would be fine. You surely understand how they way we left the EU was not conducive to cooperation. All the claims about a dictatorship, bureaucrats, etc. All very insulting if you wish to leave on good terms. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 9, 2024 22:41:10 GMT
No. I think that we should make the journey pointless . Using your principal we should stop helping the Ukraine war until it directly affects us . You added directly. I never mentioned directly, it was not part of my argument. Indirectly would be fine. You surely understand how the away we left the EU was not conducive to cooperation. All the claims about a dictatorship, bureaucrats, etc. All very insulting if you wish to leave on good terms. Yes I added it but I didn’t need to . The UK has no dispute with Russia . Russia has no dispute with the UK. The problem is in East Europe and with EU members ( or prospective ones ) in East Europe . Even Germany doesn’t want a fight . Why should we be involved when the UK could has nothing much to,lose and perhaps a lot to gain not to get involved in a far away war ? But somehow we want to be involved and cooperate with EU countries involved . No the claims of a dictatorship was just a few characters involved in the campaign and the EU does have its fair share of bureaucrats but if you are saying the lack of cooperation is because of spite due to perceived insults then I might agree . |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 9, 2024 22:52:24 GMT
You added directly. I never mentioned directly, it was not part of my argument. Indirectly would be fine. You surely understand how the away we left the EU was not conducive to cooperation. All the claims about a dictatorship, bureaucrats, etc. All very insulting if you wish to leave on good terms. Yes I added it but I didn’t need to . The UK has no dispute with Russia . Russia has no dispute with the UK. The problem is in East Europe and with EU members ( or prospective ones ) in East Europe . Even Germany doesn’t want a fight . Why should we be involved when the UK could has nothing much to,lose and perhaps a lot to gain not to get involved in a far away war ? But somehow we want to be involved and cooperate with EU countries involved . No the claims of a dictatorship was just a few characters involved in the campaign and the EU does have its fair share of bureaucrats but if you are saying the lack of cooperation is because of spite due to perceived insults then I might agree . Lets leave Ukraine, its a bit of a red herring in this conversation. On the EU. You have to remember how long Nigel Farage was the UK's representative in the EU parliament and all the ridicule you all found so funny. That is not how you treat someone you wish to do business with. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 9, 2024 23:10:20 GMT
Yes I added it but I didn’t need to . The UK has no dispute with Russia . Russia has no dispute with the UK. The problem is in East Europe and with EU members ( or prospective ones ) in East Europe . Even Germany doesn’t want a fight . Why should we be involved when the UK could has nothing much to,lose and perhaps a lot to gain not to get involved in a far away war ? But somehow we want to be involved and cooperate with EU countries involved . No the claims of a dictatorship was just a few characters involved in the campaign and the EU does have its fair share of bureaucrats but if you are saying the lack of cooperation is because of spite due to perceived insults then I might agree . Lets leave Ukraine, its a bit of a red herring in this conversation. On the EU. You have to remember how long Nigel Farage was the UK's representative in the EU parliament and all the ridicule you all found so funny. That is not how you treat someone you wish to do business with. I don’t think it is . The UK could have sat back but it didn’t . It has put itself in the Cross hairs of Russian ire when we didn’t need to . This is about cooperation for mutual benefit. Friends and allies help each other sometimes when they don’t directly benefit because they are friends and allies . I’m sure you have have done a friend an ‘ I owe you one ‘ favour . God almighty are you really saying that the EU is butthurt over Farage? ….really ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2024 0:17:03 GMT
Or made it easier for the EU not to cooperate ? More blaming others?
The UK cannot control its borders — despite the promises of the Brexiteers.
It is blindingly obvious that he whole migration issue needs international cooperation — a concept the UK's politicians are rubbishing while it's still in a confused mess and unable to lawfully deter migrants with its plan to transport asylum seekers to Rwanda...
It just requires a backbone to address the enemy within. There is little point expecting external support or cooperation when the country is governed by liars and rats, who simply lie to the people for votes whilst maintaining the status quo. It's the same pattern going back and forth between two corrupt parties, who work together against the people. It's why I supported Brexit, so we can see this corruption and parasitic behaviour from the political classes without it being blamed on some external force.
The reason why a few posters on here encourage the cultural genocide is because they don't want anyone challenging the ongoing problem (the clock is ticking). People can't even speak up about the damage this establishment is doing to the young, from racially motivated child rape gangs to promoting mental illness in schools. Anyone who raises these and any other issues are automatically smeared as bigots, usually by semi-literates and retards.
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Mar 10, 2024 7:50:08 GMT
Lets leave Ukraine, its a bit of a red herring in this conversation. On the EU. You have to remember how long Nigel Farage was the UK's representative in the EU parliament and all the ridicule you all found so funny. That is not how you treat someone you wish to do business with. I don’t think it is . The UK could have sat back but it didn’t . It has put itself in the Cross hairs of Russian ire when we didn’t need to . This is about cooperation for mutual benefit. Friends and allies help each other sometimes when they don’t directly benefit because they are friends and allies . I’m sure you have have done a friend an ‘ I owe you one ‘ favour . God almighty are you really saying that the EU is butthurt over Farage? ….really ? It's just a lazy excuse, tis all. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 10, 2024 8:18:38 GMT
Northern Ireland; many cities in the ME over hundreds of years had quarters whereby different groups kept to themselves; the Landsker line; as regards Vikings the Pale existed for many years in Ireland; the Pale in Russia where Pogroms were commonplace; Walloons and Flems in Belgium; German ethnic groups in Czeoslovakia, Poland and Belarus, Russians in the Baltic states, the Balkans have blown up many times as regards ethnic tensions; Israel and Palestine; Biafra; Rwanda; Kenya and Uganda and Asians, South Africa: the list is almost endless. Are you really claiming there was no movement between these groups. Ethnic tensions between countries is not the same as a minority moving to live in a new country. No I am not claiming, nor have I claimed, there is no movement or integration, what I am saying is that the movement of ethnic groups, either in small numbers or en mass, brings with it the arrival of a different culture(s) that to greater or lesser degrees jars with the existing cultures and results in tensions. All the examples I gave are directly the result of cultural/ethnic tensions as a result of the movement of peoples. Saying it is not so and we would all get along just fine if it was not for a few bigots in our midst is just pie in the sky. EDIT All the above examples are of groups moving to be in the same country in general terms. Or if you like; immigration. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 10, 2024 8:21:53 GMT
yes, but when helping costs everything changes. It should also be a two way street. Do you think the UK should take all the migrants queued up in Calais wanting to be here, to take the cost and pressure off France? No. I think that we should make the journey pointless . Using your principal we should stop helping the Ukraine war until it directly affects us . Of course Two people, who hold two differing aims, will have two entirely different actions in mind when they use the word 'co-operation' The left often seem to use the word 'co-operation' as a kind of code for doing what they want and not arguing. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 10, 2024 8:40:08 GMT
Lets leave Ukraine, its a bit of a red herring in this conversation. On the EU. You have to remember how long Nigel Farage was the UK's representative in the EU parliament and all the ridicule you all found so funny. That is not how you treat someone you wish to do business with. I don’t think it is . The UK could have sat back but it didn’t . It has put itself in the Cross hairs of Russian ire when we didn’t need to . This is about cooperation for mutual benefit. Friends and allies help each other sometimes when they don’t directly benefit because they are friends and allies . I’m sure you have have done a friend an ‘ I owe you one ‘ favour . God almighty are you really saying that the EU is butthurt over Farage? ….really ? I didn't mean it was a red herring in that way, more a subject in its own right. The reasons for helping Ukraine are to do with many things, put simply (Too simply)in order of importance. 1, To demonstrate to aggressive states that invasion doesn't work. 2, To reduce future military costs. 3, To secure future food avenues. 4, To keep Europe stable. 5, To do the right thing. That's why we help Ukraine and yet not Guyana. I think the EU were hurt by the fact that our government allowed Farage to behave as he did. Many were quite glad to see us go. Seeing us as disruptive and uncompromising. Have you ever looked up the UK re-joining the EU from the EU's perspective? Not because you want it to happen, but to better understand the current situation. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 10, 2024 8:48:34 GMT
Are you really claiming there was no movement between these groups. Ethnic tensions between countries is not the same as a minority moving to live in a new country. No I am not claiming, nor have I claimed, there is no movement or integration, what I am saying is that the movement of ethnic groups, either in small numbers or en mass, brings with it the arrival of a different culture(s) that to greater or lesser degrees jars with the existing cultures and results in tensions. All the examples I gave are directly the result of cultural/ethnic tensions as a result of the movement of peoples. Saying it is not so and we would all get along just fine if it was not for a few bigots in our midst is just pie in the sky. EDIT All the above examples are of groups moving to be in the same country in general terms. Or if you like; immigration. Well here we agree. I have stated several times in the past that multiculturalism is not working well for those living with it. Integration should be integration. Try speaking to a Spaniard you lives near an Expat enclave. What I'm fighting is the idea that our countries issues are caused by immigrants. Even B4 is closer on this, saying that the real culprits for our countries are more than happy for you to point the finger away from them while they continue to make money by destroying the country. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 10, 2024 8:49:40 GMT
I don’t think it is . The UK could have sat back but it didn’t . It has put itself in the Cross hairs of Russian ire when we didn’t need to . This is about cooperation for mutual benefit. Friends and allies help each other sometimes when they don’t directly benefit because they are friends and allies . I’m sure you have have done a friend an ‘ I owe you one ‘ favour . God almighty are you really saying that the EU is butthurt over Farage? ….really ? I didn't mean it was a red herring in that way, more a subject in its own right. The reasons for helping Ukraine are to do with many things, put simply (Too simply)in order of importance. 1, To demonstrate to aggressive states that invasion doesn't work. 2, To reduce future military costs. 3, To secure future food avenues. 4, To keep Europe stable. 5, To do the right thing. That's why we help Ukraine and yet not Guyana. I think the EU were hurt by the fact that our government allowed Farage to behave as he did. Many were quite glad to see us go. Seeing us as disruptive and uncompromising. Have you ever looked up the UK re-joining the EU from the EU's perspective? Not because you want it to happen, but to better understand the current situation. 1 Very much depends on what you class as aggressive states and how they go about 'invading'. 2 Our military costs have soared and seem to be rising at a rapid rate. 3 Is that why the EU could be classed as aggressive in the first instance. 4 Empires do not create stability as a lasting thing. 5 The right thing is very conjectural, the right thing would not to have been involved in Ukraine some ten years ago but those with the power gleam in their eyes could not resist. Why on earth would the EU think the UK government held any sway over anything that Farage did within the legal framework of both the UK and the EU parliament. Once again being disruptive and uncompromising is a euphemism for not rolling over and giving in. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 10, 2024 9:19:53 GMT
I didn't mean it was a red herring in that way, more a subject in its own right. The reasons for helping Ukraine are to do with many things, put simply (Too simply)in order of importance. 1, To demonstrate to aggressive states that invasion doesn't work. 2, To reduce future military costs. 3, To secure future food avenues. 4, To keep Europe stable. 5, To do the right thing. That's why we help Ukraine and yet not Guyana. I think the EU were hurt by the fact that our government allowed Farage to behave as he did. Many were quite glad to see us go. Seeing us as disruptive and uncompromising. Have you ever looked up the UK re-joining the EU from the EU's perspective? Not because you want it to happen, but to better understand the current situation. 1 Very much depends on what you class as aggressive states and how they go about 'invading'. 2 Our military costs have soared and seem to be rising at a rapid rate. 3 Is that why the EU could be classed as aggressive in the first instance. 4 Empires do not create stability as a lasting thing. 5 The right thing is very conjectural, the right thing would not to have been involved in Ukraine some ten years ago but those with the power gleam in their eyes could not resist. What I feared Bentley the thread swerves onto a new track. Never mind. 1, Yes of course. 2, Not compared to what a war in Europe would cost if Putin thought his expansion was successful. 3, No 4, No idea what you mean here. 5, I disagree. Yes both sides think they are right. Friendship demands compromise on things you don't agree on. If that friendship is not important to you that's fine, but then don't moan that they wont help you as friends. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 10, 2024 9:52:02 GMT
I don’t think it is . The UK could have sat back but it didn’t . It has put itself in the Cross hairs of Russian ire when we didn’t need to . This is about cooperation for mutual benefit. Friends and allies help each other sometimes when they don’t directly benefit because they are friends and allies . I’m sure you have have done a friend an ‘ I owe you one ‘ favour . God almighty are you really saying that the EU is butthurt over Farage? ….really ? I didn't mean it was a red herring in that way, more a subject in its own right. The reasons for helping Ukraine are to do with many things, put simply (Too simply)in order of importance. 1, To demonstrate to aggressive states that invasion doesn't work. 2, To reduce future military costs. 3, To secure future food avenues. 4, To keep Europe stable. 5, To do the right thing. That's why we help Ukraine and yet not Guyana. I think the EU were hurt by the fact that our government allowed Farage to behave as he did. Many were quite glad to see us go. Seeing us as disruptive and uncompromising. Have you ever looked up the UK re-joining the EU from the EU's perspective? Not because you want it to happen, but to better understand the current situation. We could say that mass uncontrolled immigration is a subject in its own right and it’s not helped by one country allowing uncontrolled illegal immigrants to pass through it into another country . That isn’t doing the right thing is it ? uncontrolled mass immigration isn’t exactly going to help keep Europe stable . Ukraine is on the EUs doorstep, not ours . Our government has no control over Farage and if the EU officials are so ridiculously thin skinned as to be spiteful to the UK because of him then it doesn’t show the EU in a particular good light . I doubt that the UK will join the EU unless or until there is a dire need to do so . I’m not interested in EUs perspective but I’m sure the UK would be a great asset to the EU if it decided to apply to re join . |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 10, 2024 10:42:59 GMT
I didn't mean it was a red herring in that way, more a subject in its own right. The reasons for helping Ukraine are to do with many things, put simply (Too simply)in order of importance. 1, To demonstrate to aggressive states that invasion doesn't work. 2, To reduce future military costs. 3, To secure future food avenues. 4, To keep Europe stable. 5, To do the right thing. That's why we help Ukraine and yet not Guyana. I think the EU were hurt by the fact that our government allowed Farage to behave as he did. Many were quite glad to see us go. Seeing us as disruptive and uncompromising. Have you ever looked up the UK re-joining the EU from the EU's perspective? Not because you want it to happen, but to better understand the current situation. We could say that mass uncontrolled immigration is a subject in its own right Indeed. And its one of only two topics ever discussed on here. I wish it were possible to discuss it logically, but the constant muddling between Illegal immigration which is not mass and government controlled immigration which is very much mass, make any progress on the subject impossible. Again the expectation for France to help with this even though we (Our press and even ministers) endlessly insult them and the EU. There's that word mass again. put together with uncontrolled implying the mass of immigration is illegal. In the UK Invited immigration accounts for 12,000,000 people since 2004. That's 17% In the UK Asylum granted accounts for 26,000 people since 2004. That's 0.04% I really wish we could separate the two so the newspapers would lose the power to blame France and the EU for our governments decisions. I don't see it happening. So was Poland in WW2. But you see what happens when a dictator finds conquest easy. So thin skinned. And you want these people to be friendly. Is this how you treat friends? Sadly, that's what I thought you'd say. But your narrative remains blinkered if you fail to look at both sides. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 10, 2024 10:56:25 GMT
We could say that mass uncontrolled immigration is a subject in its own right Indeed. And its one of only two topics ever discussed on here. I wish it were possible to discuss it logically, but the constant muddling between Illegal immigration which is not mass and government controlled immigration which is very much mass, make any progress on the subject impossible. Again the expectation for France to help with this even though we (Our press and even ministers) endlessly insult them and the EU. There's that word mass again. put together with uncontrolled implying the mass of immigration is illegal. In the UK Invited immigration accounts for 12,000,000 people since 2004. That's 17% In the UK Asylum granted accounts for 26,000 people since 2004. That's 0.04% I really wish we could separate the two so the newspapers would lose the power to blame France and the EU for our governments decisions. I don't see it happening. So was Poland in WW2. But you see what happens when a dictator finds conquest easy. So thin skinned. And you want these people to be friendly. Is this how you treat friends? Sadly, that's what I thought you'd say. But your narrative remains blinkered if you fail to look at both sides. Depends on your definition of mass . There is a significant amount of illegal immigrants to make it a very costly exercise in containing them but the main focus is on our inability to stop them and/ or get rid of them . We don’t endlessly insult France . This is nonsense . Im referring to mass immigration into Europe . In 1939 the UK was a world power . Today we are a small island on the back of a would be world power. The problem is on the far side of it. Why would we want to re join the EU that is so petty that it doesn’t want to help us because of Nigel Farage ? |
|
