'Refugees welcome' banners at German football matches/The Valley
Comments
-
I wonder why none of these people are heading to Countries closer to home like Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia etc6
-
Liverpool ?kentaddick said:Refugees from Syria =\= immigrants, whether illegal or otherwise.
They are fleeing torture, enslavement and brutal death. We should take them with open arms. If we don't have the money or school places then tbh they really needed investment in the first place!
It's not about them wanting to come to the UK, they want to go anywhere safe whether it's Liverpool or Latvia. We can't just let Greece deal with it, we need to all shoulder this responsibility.
3 -
Nonsense;cafc999 said:Football is sport. IMHO sport and politics should not mix.
This thread has turned into a debate with many positive and negative sides on both sides of the argument. However, the original question was about a banner.
Jesse Owens
Ali
The Revolutions that brought down the USSR (particularly in Poland)
Only a fool would ignore the power of sport in bringing about political and social change.8 -
Show some compassion FFS. Send them to Liverpool?kentaddick said:Refugees from Syria =\= immigrants, whether illegal or otherwise.
They are fleeing torture, enslavement and brutal death. We should take them with open arms. If we don't have the money or school places then tbh they really needed investment in the first place!
It's not about them wanting to come to the UK, they want to go anywhere safe whether it's Liverpool or Latvia. We can't just let Greece deal with it, we need to all shoulder this responsibility.11 -
The population of Britain in the 1930's was 15 million less than it is today.
to the question raised by Rothko.
Take Somalians, so the people who come into Britain in the last 20 years, were just the persecuted not the Persecutors ?
Do you think the British authorities are discerning enough to tell the difference.
I'm not saying your hearts aren't in the right place,
but that's why on charity nights on TV,
People reach for their phones when multi millionaire celebs
Plead for your money.
1 -
Well, I had to come up with a place more depressing than Eastern Europe to illustrate my pointlolwray said:
Liverpool ?kentaddick said:Refugees from Syria =\= immigrants, whether illegal or otherwise.
They are fleeing torture, enslavement and brutal death. We should take them with open arms. If we don't have the money or school places then tbh they really needed investment in the first place!
It's not about them wanting to come to the UK, they want to go anywhere safe whether it's Liverpool or Latvia. We can't just let Greece deal with it, we need to all shoulder this responsibility.
1 -
its very true. A real example of that for all to see is the protestants in Northern Ireland every July..........nth london addick said:Bollox to that idea they won't ever leave and have bonfires then jump In the back of vehicles leaving just to cause a bit of trouble
I will create a banner saying not welcome1 -
65 comments already, I bet this thread turned into a car crash by post 50
-
3 -
More should be done and should have been done to have avoided the situation we find ourselves in.
The world has slept walked into this and now its like sticking a plaster on a gapping wound.
This is what happens when the rich nations have the " I'm all right jack and sod the rest of you" attitude.
In the past 20 odd years we have fought 3 wars, bombed the crap out of Libya, done little and stuck our head in the sand over Syria. I would say we have collectively failed miserably. Our servicemen have been killed and maimed by the hundreds and so have countless men women and children in these countries. Now "we" as nation are shrugging our shoulders and getting the hump with people so desperate to leave their hole in the ground they are willing to jump into an inflatable beach toys, with their children, and cross the seas in them.
Anyone who make to these shores deserves our help, god knows they seem to have a bit more lust for life than many indigenous beings in this country.8 -
Sponsored links:
-
Apologies, I thought it was common knowledge - I'm astonished that it isn't.AddicksAddict said:
I'm not saying your wrong, but it would help if you quoted a source.se9addick said:
Trust me "the vast, vast, vast majority" of refugees do not "pass through safe countries to get to the UK".cafcnick1992 said:
Of course they do. You have to cross the whole of Europe to get to the UK.se9addick said:
The vast, vast, vast majority don't. Educate yourself.cafcnick1992 said:If the refugees are so desperate, why do they pass through safe countries to get to the UK?
We should take in more than we currently do, however.
Total number of refugees worldwide = 10.5m
Refugees in the UK = 193,500
Hopefully that clarifies that I was spot on in saying "me "the vast, vast, vast majority" of refugees do not "pass through safe countries to get to the UK""1 -
There's another whole thread to be had out of this.LenGlover said:
The key phrase being PRIVATELY OWNED.EastStand said:http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/why_we_campaign/the_housing_crisis/building_more_homes/empty_homes
Shelter say "279,000 long-term privately owned empty homes in England". England alone.
Or are you perhaps suggesting State confiscation of legitimately acquired private property?0 -
leftbehind said:
I wonder why none of these people are heading to Countries closer to home like Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia etc
I make you right. More suited to there way of life etc
0 -
See this is why so many people struggle to get on board with ideas of what the left come up with. Whilst they are usually kind-hearted and caring ideas, the way they are put across is often patronizing (eg - calling someone a "fool" because they have a different opinion).se9addick said:
Nonsense;cafc999 said:Football is sport. IMHO sport and politics should not mix.
This thread has turned into a debate with many positive and negative sides on both sides of the argument. However, the original question was about a banner.
Jesse Owens
Ali
The Revolutions that brought down the USSR (particularly in Poland)
Only a fool would ignore the power of sport in bringing about political and social change.
I realized this morning with Facebook that so many people are putting their left wing opinions across in a way that is purely to mock right wing stereotypes ("All these immigrants coming over here, doing good things for our country").
Does my head in.3 -
Close the thread it's nonsense, every person is welcome to go to football why does such a big deal have to be made to highlight minority groups does my head in
All people want is a reaction2 -
Who's armed forces? Us, the septics, the UN, NATO? I can see that being a raging success.SE9 said:Not welcome
Vast majority are not refugees or they would stay in the 1st country they came to which in most cases is Turkey. The reason they carry on is for economic reasons.
The help of Europe should be to secure some land in one of these countries they are fleeing And keep them there with armed forces protecting them until it's safe to go home.0 -
Conclusive proof......right there!se9addick said:
Apologies, I thought it was common knowledge - I'm astonished that it isn't.AddicksAddict said:
I'm not saying your wrong, but it would help if you quoted a source.se9addick said:
Trust me "the vast, vast, vast majority" of refugees do not "pass through safe countries to get to the UK".cafcnick1992 said:
Of course they do. You have to cross the whole of Europe to get to the UK.se9addick said:
The vast, vast, vast majority don't. Educate yourself.cafcnick1992 said:If the refugees are so desperate, why do they pass through safe countries to get to the UK?
We should take in more than we currently do, however.
Total number of refugees worldwide = 10.5m
Refugees in the UK = 193,500
Hopefully that clarifies that I was spot on in saying "me "the vast, vast, vast majority" of refugees do not "pass through safe countries to get to the UK""1 -
Why not? These people are fleeing for the lives. They would be grateful for any protection surely?AddicksAddict said:
Who's armed forces? Us, the septics, the UN, NATO? I can see that being a raging success.SE9 said:Not welcome
Vast majority are not refugees or they would stay in the 1st country they came to which in most cases is Turkey. The reason they carry on is for economic reasons.
The help of Europe should be to secure some land in one of these countries they are fleeing And keep them there with armed forces protecting them until it's safe to go home.
1 -
Look at the graphic earlier in this thread. There are approximately four million Syrian refugees in the countries around Syria. I make your "none" very wrong.SE9 said:leftbehind said:I wonder why none of these people are heading to Countries closer to home like Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia etc
I make you right. More suited to there way of life etc5 -
This is a very difficult subject, and one I have sympathy with Cameron over. This is a humanitarian crisis and I have no time for the little Englander approach where there is no empathy for the plight of these fellow human beings. But unless there is unlimited immigration, I can’t see how letting significant numbers in will result in anything other than more and more people trying to get in which will only make things worse. However, we can’t dissolve ourselves of blame. Foreign policy mistakes over many years have contributed to the mess and we have a responsibility to try to put them right. The problem with the mistakes is that nobody played through the consequences and that is exactly what has to be done now. If we do this what is the likely effect in 3 months, 6 months, a year, 6 years etc…Trying to compete on who is the most humanitarian country because we have seen some harrowing pictures of dead children won’t help. Children have been dying for years with the west trying to fob the problems off onto each other!
For me the big problem is ISIS. The conditions for their growth and power were created by the west and we have reached a point where we have to sort it out. ISIS won’t go away and they will get more and more dangerous as they act illogically and are capable of anything. The bigger they become the more likely they will have the ability to do some major damage to us. So, there is an interest for the west in joining together (good and bad – USA, Russia, Europe China…..) and wipe them from the map irrespective of the plight of the poor souls we see trying to escape. Then we have to support the persecuted people to rebuild their lives and countries. To me that is the only solution and I was strongly against the war and previous interventions, but now I think there isn’t another answer.
10 -
Sponsored links:
-
I don't see why refugees HAVE to come to the UK, like many have said they pass through many safe countries in doing so, ( you cant get into the uk without passing through Europe) without flying and I cant imagine its for the green green grass of England.
and agree with other posters about football and politics not going together, as someone previously said the lee Rigby issue was scoured for being political as is this. so no need.0 -
Good to see i find it hard to believe that many left a war torn country to go to another in Iraq, nothing on the Countries i mentioned though ??Rothko said:
0 -
Some may want to specifically come to England but the vast majority just want to get out of their country. Generalising and putting them all in the same boat is human but wrong. We shouldn't be demonising desperate people, willing to die to escape their current circumstances.10
-
Imagine what the 2m people that fled could have achieved if they had stayed and started the 'Syria Party', chants of 'we want our Syria back' echoing around Damascus town hall.
2 -
Best post on this threadMuttleyCAFC said:This is a very difficult subject, and one I have sympathy with Cameron over. This is a humanitarian crisis and I have no time for the little Englander approach where there is no empathy for the plight of these fellow human beings. But unless there is unlimited immigration, I can’t see how letting significant numbers in will result in anything other than more and more people trying to get in which will only make things worse. However, we can’t dissolve ourselves of blame. Foreign policy mistakes over many years have contributed to the mess and we have a responsibility to try to put them right. The problem with the mistakes is that nobody played through the consequences and that is exactly what has to be done now. If we do this what is the likely effect in 3 months, 6 months, a year, 6 years etc…Trying to compete on who is the most humanitarian country because we have seen some harrowing pictures of dead children won’t help. Children have been dying for years with the west trying to fob the problems off onto each other!
For me the big problem is ISIS. The conditions for their growth and power were created by the west and we have reached a point where we have to sort it out. ISIS won’t go away and they will get more and more dangerous as they act illogically and are capable of anything. The bigger they become the more likely they will have the ability to do some major damage to us. So, there is an interest for the west in joining together (good and bad – USA, Russia, Europe China…..) and wipe them from the map irrespective of the plight of the poor souls we see trying to escape. Then we have to support the persecuted people to rebuild their lives and countries. To me that is the only solution and I was strongly against the war and previous interventions, but now I think there isn’t another answer.1 -
I do wonder if the people stating 'football and politics don't mix' have any idea of the history of our club, specifically our exile from the Valley.
I have no objection to bringing in more refugees as long as we have the space to house them. We have a housing crisis in the UK already - bringing in refugees just so that they can die on the streets is not helping, hence why other countries that are housing refugees should and do take more in than the UK.5 -
I've not spoken yetkentaddick said:
Best post on this threadMuttleyCAFC said:This is a very difficult subject, and one I have sympathy with Cameron over. This is a humanitarian crisis and I have no time for the little Englander approach where there is no empathy for the plight of these fellow human beings. But unless there is unlimited immigration, I can’t see how letting significant numbers in will result in anything other than more and more people trying to get in which will only make things worse. However, we can’t dissolve ourselves of blame. Foreign policy mistakes over many years have contributed to the mess and we have a responsibility to try to put them right. The problem with the mistakes is that nobody played through the consequences and that is exactly what has to be done now. If we do this what is the likely effect in 3 months, 6 months, a year, 6 years etc…Trying to compete on who is the most humanitarian country because we have seen some harrowing pictures of dead children won’t help. Children have been dying for years with the west trying to fob the problems off onto each other!
For me the big problem is ISIS. The conditions for their growth and power were created by the west and we have reached a point where we have to sort it out. ISIS won’t go away and they will get more and more dangerous as they act illogically and are capable of anything. The bigger they become the more likely they will have the ability to do some major damage to us. So, there is an interest for the west in joining together (good and bad – USA, Russia, Europe China…..) and wipe them from the map irrespective of the plight of the poor souls we see trying to escape. Then we have to support the persecuted people to rebuild their lives and countries. To me that is the only solution and I was strongly against the war and previous interventions, but now I think there isn’t another answer.12 -
Since we need to provide sources to back up everything we say, here is a map - I've highlighted Syria for you;leftbehind said:
Good to see i find it hard to believe that many left a war torn country to go to another in Iraq, nothing on the Countries i mentioned though ??Rothko said:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Syria/@34.8149145,39.0464523,5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x1518e6dc413cc6a7:0x877546f4882af620
The main population centres are in the west (that's the bit on the left). To get to the closest country you mentioned, the Iran, most of Syria's population would have to travel East across Syria and Iraq to get there. Or they could go to the countries that surround Syria (which millions have done) or try their luck crossing the Mediterranean sea, which is the blue thing on the western border of the country and attempt to make it to Europe.1 -
In the thirties there was no Welfare State, in the sense it exists today anyway, so "basic services jobs" didn't exist partly because less people means less demand and partly because people were more self sufficient and, for want of a better way of putting it, 'looked after their own.'kentaddick said:
The population was a lot lower so there were less people to do basic services jobs. Your logic doesn't make sense. But I agree about successive governments failing to make the investments in infrastructure and housingLenGlover said:
The population was a lot lower in the 30s so we could cope.Rothko said:Most of you would have kept the Jews out in the 30s
I am very much in favour of offering succour to genuine refugees but there are undeniable difficulties in separating those refugees from other less deserving immigrants.
Successive governments, red and blue, have ballsed this up, whether by accident or design, for the best part of 20 years now.0 -
Wasn't this thread about bringing a banner to a football match? Jeez.
Everyone has a democratic right to air their views. If you'd like to make a banner to welcome refugees, you go for it, good for you. If you don't want to because you don't agree with it, then don't.
0
