Refugees

Oh Trident is for THE ENEMY. I am sure there are no civilians and tinies amongst them. You should know that dj.
Besides it makes so much more sense to spend the money on an update no-one wants or will use rather than fitting our new aircraft carriers with the appropriate stuff, like aircraft

No-one is going to ask the Syrian civilians to leave as no-one wants to deal with the problem so that won't work.
Perhaps the Saudis will overlook the difference in religion as we are doing and offer massive help. Like that is going to happen.
We are stuffed!

www.stopwar.org.uk/news/queen-long-to-reign-over-us-the-truth-about-the-monarchy-money-and-guns

Can't ask the royals to go. They are too busy helping to sell guns to the Saudis.

Whitewave, what else do we want Trident for?

If we encourage all the civilians to leave, give them a deadline, then bomb whoever is left? Do you think that will work?
Can't believe there are no SAS there at the moment.

Can't bomb them as there are millions of civilians still there and around the IS strongholds.

If we do nothing the Syrians will be forced out and add to the refugee crises.

Can't see anyone making sense with the IS at the moment - may do long term. Meanwhile,.......

There you go again with your assumptions, durhamjen!

I am saying nothing of the sort. You're the one who's advocating 'talking' but although Corbyn is the obvious choice, you don't seem to want him to be the one to go and sort things out with IS...

alarming, I meant.

Are you suggesting that there is nobody in the Tory party who could talk to parties in the Middle East about peace, Ana? I find that quite sad, and alrming at the same time.
What you are saying is the only way to stop the war is by bombing them.

Are they all contentious objectors then.

It would be stupid.

It would be karma.

Tory government. I can think of a few Tories I'd like to send

But would they be as well-qualified as the two I suggested djen?
You may want to send them for reasons of your own, but I doubt they would have the experience of Blair and Corbyn in that situation.

Presumably you'd want someone who could actually attempt to broker peace with IS, durhamjen.

It would be cutting off your nose to spite your face to send someone just because they're in the Tory government.

Tory government. I can think of a few Tories I'd like to send.
Did you see Philip Hammond not saying anything on the news yesterday?

Oooh Rosequartz you are awful - but I like you! (Thanks Dick Emery)

Well, Tony Blair has experience as a Middle East Peace Envoy, I volunteer him.
Jeremy has experience in speaking to terrorists, they could go together.

Exactly, rosequartz and as for talking to IS, maybe Jeremy Corbyn should seek advice from Terry Waite.

Seeing the absolute mess and chaos that has happened in the past few weeks alone, is anyone still criticising Cameron's measured approach?
Donating about £1 billion to help people in refugee camps and taking into the UK the most vulnerable of refugees in smaller numbers and, we hope, looking after them properly and helping them to integrate.

If they want to stop the war while there is still a Syrian state, they will have to talk to IS
I assume that Jeremy is volunteering himself for the task then

Tinderbox!! More like a ticking time bomb. My worry is that now 1,000 s will be walking towards Dunkirk or Calais. Then I think the pressure will be too much for us to refuse to let more people in. And these will be people who we have no idea who they are.

We hear a lot of reasons for Saudi Arabia et al not taking migrants. However, if 800,000+ people turned up in their country they'd have to change their ways pdq! Probably the only way that they would. Meanwhile Europe has to mop up these displaced disaffected people. Tinderbox!

Whilst I understand that this whole refugee crisis is horrible for all concerned I don't understand why it is a European crisis, surely it is a global crisis. Where is the rest of the world? Barak Obama was eager to tell us we should be staying in Europe when it is none of his business but he has gone very quiet now. Why can't the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South America and even China take a share of refugees. Europe alone does not have the infra structure to take all of these poor people. Am I missing something?

Well said, harrigran. But, I have to say that Germany's output will go through the roof now. Every migrant that's interviewed is an engineer. Strange that, because every time I saw images of Syria the country looked half finished.
Half finished was putting it politely.

Any lasting change within a country can only be achieved by the people of that country. Other countries can intervene a little, or can help them if they are struggling against a powerful regime, but eventually change has to come from within, often only after a bitter struggle. The usual result of massive outside "interference" is generally resentment at the country being taken over by an greater power.

In Britain we went through the stages of that struggle for change in past centurie. We forged a country which may not be perfect but has a democratically elected elected government which is capable of being renewed according to the wishes of the people.

The young single men who come here may go on to make a new life for themselves here, but if they want to improve things back home they will eventually have to grasp the nettle and do it themselves.

Frau Merkel will be remembered as the woman that brought Europe to it's knees.
Yes durhamjen you can send young men back to fight. A country depends on it's fit young men to protect it not to have them running away from the conflict.

durhamjen. That's funny, that's the second time this week that that subject has come up. The other one was my Dr talking about it.
So maybe the conspiracy theorists (9/11) weren't so far off the mark. Ie, GW and all his cohorts needed a good excuse.

jane10 and rosequartz. The scenario that you paint, the bored etc young ethnic men turning to trouble. We already have this in our own country.
Can you imagine what's going to happen when another culture is thrown into the mix. I've heard several ethnic young men getting very angry at the prospect of the No. of migrants coming.

"Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO from 1997 to 2000 Wesley Clark claims that in 2001, Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld put out a memo proposing to take over seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. The basic outline of this plan was confirmed by none other than former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who in 2010 pinned it on former Vice President Dick Cheney:

"Cheney wanted forcible 'regime change' in all Middle Eastern countries that he considered hostile to US interests. He would have worked through the whole lot, Iraq, Syria, Iran, dealing with all their surrogates in the course of it ; Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. In other words, he [Cheney] thought the world had to be made anew, and that after 11 September, it had to be done by force and with urgency. So he was for hard, hard power. No ifs, no buts, no maybes.'"

US State Department cables released by WikiLeaks trace US efforts in Syria to undermine the government back to at least 2006. In 2013, the White House went public with plans to lob some unspecified number of missiles into Syria, which was in the midst of a horrible civil war already fueled in part by US arms and training camps, as well as by wealthy US allies in the region and fighters emerging from other US-created disasters in the region. "