Send Illegal Immigrants Back In Chinooks ?

[Khandro]

A bold idea, would it work?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1802430/Tory-MP-Channel-Migrants-crisis-chinooks

[gulliver1]

This Tory Govt couldn't organise a pee up in a Brewery They ain't got a cat in hell's chance of winning the next GE the way they are handing this migrant crisis........The Tories will be Kicked out before the migrants are....GOOD!

[Old_Geezer]

So you are expecting Reform to win by a landslide ? Good for you.

[naomi24]

:o)

[gulliver1]

OG 10.33 I Couldn't give a toss who wins the next GE as long as it ain't
The Cons

[ichkeria]

“ Nothing needs to be voided if there is agreement that it is valuable”

Exactly making my point: wanting the best but not the whole package

[saintpeter48]

Why can't the Royal Navy patrol the Channel and directly these illegal boats enter British water they are turned around and escorted back into French water.

[sandyRoe]

There are millions of refugees in Pakistan (fleeing from Afghanistan) and an equal number in Turkey(fleeing from Syria).
We're not being flooded by refugees, whatever the press may tell us.

[retrocop]

//We're not being flooded by refugees, whatever the press may tell us//

Yes I noted that Sandy. Perhaps the rubber boaters still think there is a civil war in Belfast.

[New Judge]

//There was an arrangement called the Dublin agreement but we voided that by leaving the EU.
I think it’s called giving up your cake and then asking for the best bits back.//

Much is made of the Dublin agreement and how “foolish” it was of the UK to ditch it as part of the Brexit negotiations. So let’s take a look.

The agreement was not the panacea that many would have us believe. In fact it was a two-edged sword. It provided for the UK to return some migrants to the EU – only those who had applied for asylum in another EU country but who had subsequently travelled to the UK. But it also provided for migrants to be allowed into the UK from Europe for “family reunion” purposes. Figures up to 2019 make interesting reading:

2015 – Transfers into the UK: 131; Transfers out of the UK: 510
2016 – 558; 362
2017 – 461; 314
2018 – 1,215; 209

the 2017 figures of 461 transfers in (against 314 transfers out) came despite the fact that there were over twice as many requests under the Dublin rules to transfer out (5,712) than requests to transfer asylum seekers into the UK (2,137). In fact, as time went on, the UK seemed increasingly less successful with requests to transfer migrants out under the agreement. Here are the requests and successful removal figures between 2012 and 2016:

2012 – Requests: 1,356; Removals: 706 (52%)
2013 – 1,766; 771 (43%)
2014 – 1,831; 652 (35%)
2015 – 3,489; 510 (14%)
2016 – 4,237; 362 (8%)

Bear in mind that these are annual figures. When the weather improved a week or so ago, more than 1,600 migrants made the crossing in small boats in the three days between the 10th and 12th of August. It is little wonder, therefore, that the UK declined to participate in “Dublin IV”, the revised agreement the EU drafted following the migrant crisis of 2015. It is clear that more migrants will become eligible to settle in the UK than will be returned, and in any case the numbers involved are so low (compared to the influx) that the agreement, as far as the UK is concerned, is simply not worth the bother. Looking at the “cake” you mentioned, not only was the Dublin Agreement not among the best bits, I doubt it was even among the crumbs that were swept from the floor.

//There are millions of refugees in Pakistan (fleeing from Afghanistan) and an equal number in Turkey(fleeing from Syria).
We're not being flooded by refugees, whatever the press may tell us.//

So because those two countries are up to their necks in the brown stuff, we’re OK because we’re only up to our waists? You need to take a look around, Sandy.

[Old_Geezer]

More like, wanting what is sensible going forward for all parties, but not wanting the unnecessary, unaccountable, and unacceptable foreign federal control that is demanded as the price. Not quite the same thing.

[douglas9401]

Sovereignty, that's the very ticket.

Control. :-)

[Old_Geezer]

When it's predicted that a number of illegal immigrants about the size of Birmingham's population, will come across annually, and authorities aren't keeping up with rejecting the vast majority and returning them, then that is getting swamped, or invaded, or whatever synonym you wish to call it.

[Old_Geezer]

Yeah, doug. But one also needs a PM, a party, and a parliament, who are going to try and control it. We seem to have a bunch of milksops and antiBrits in place at present.

[Khandro]

Sir Francis Drake repelled the Spanish armada; the R.A.F. (inc. my Dad) fought off the Luftwaffe & the British government of today day can't even stop a few rubber dinghies !

Are there no real men left ?

[douglas9401]

They identify as real men, that should be enough in these strange times.

[Untitled]

“ But it also provided for migrants to be allowed into the UK from Europe for “family reunion” purposes. ”

what is the problem with this? you appear to think that the problem with Dublin was that it allowed migrants a legal means of reaching the uk at all

if you had to flee the uk due to persecution or disaster what would you do and how would you expect to be treated?

[Untitled]

the spanish armada and the luftwaffe were people attacking this country with hostile intentions… the people crossing the channel are a different situation

[New Judge]

//what is the problem with this? you appear to think that the problem with Dublin was that it allowed migrants a legal means of reaching the uk at all//

I do as it happens but this isn't my point with regards to this thread. The Dublin Agreement is often touted as a panacea and the means by which the UK could return migrants to other EU countries. We were, apparently, extremely foolish to abandon it and if only the UK was still a participant then all our troubles would be over. However, two things are clear about it from the figures I provided:

1. In recent years we were compelled to admit more migrants than we were allowed to send elsewhere (thus exacerbating the problem rather than easing it).

2. The numbers involved are so pitifully small compared to the influx that the agreement is scarcely worth the trouble.

//if you had to flee the uk due to persecution or disaster what would you do and how would you expect to be treated?//

You keep on asking questions in this vein and my answer will always be the same: firstly I doubt I would desert my family; if it was unsafe for me it would in all likelihood be unsafe for them too. Then I would make absolutely sure there was nothing I could usefully do in the UK. If not, I would be happy to have reached the first safe haven I encountered, remain there until the threat to me and mine subsided and would not demand admission to any other destination. That is the purpose of asylum; not to travel the globe to "make a new life."

[Khandro]

untitled, //the spanish armada and the luftwaffe were people attacking this country with hostile intentions… the people crossing the channel are a different situation//

Immigrants illegally entering the country have been identified as terrorists,

https://www.poolre.co.uk/19-individuals-with-suspected-links-to-terrorism-allegedly-enter-the-uk-as-irregular-migrants/

There will be many more who have NOT been identified you can bet.

The largest ethnic group in H.M. Prisons are Albanian criminals who now control the U.K. drug industry. There have been bombings & many instances of attacks on women including rapes.

How do you define "hostile intentions"?

[ichkeria]

“You need to take a look around, Sandy.”

That, surely, is exactly what Sandy HAS done”