Donate SIGN UP

Hms Bulwark

Avatar Image
Lynn_M | 11:53 Sun 07th Jun 2015 | News
134 Answers
This Royal Navy vessel is currently on its way towards the coast of Lybia to 'rescue refugees' who've took to the ocean in unseaworthy vessels, their intention, the invasion of Europe.

One this naval ship's decks are heaving with 'refugees,' what's its next move going to be? Where will the navy deposit those 'refugees?'
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 134rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Lynn_M. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Sandy
I am sure that could be achieved.If this underpopulated African place can provide me with generous welfare benefits, free hospital treatment, sufficient housing,schools etc then lead me to it because my little Island is trillions in debt and will be in danger of becoming over populated and civil unrest ensueing. Show me this better life and I'll pack my bags. :-)
There is no 'Libyan Government' what passes for a 'government'
( a bunch of violent 'war lords' ) actually aid and encourage the trade in refugees they make $ millions from it. They even advertise on Face-book to recruit 'customers'


I don't know if anyone has seen this youtube clip. I confess to only watching half of it so far.It is 25mins long but well worth seeing.
It will show you what a comparatively small immigrant invasion looks like as they storm the razor fence from Africa into Spanish territory in their quest for Europe.
When some immigrants are asked why they want to go to Europe they state because they don't earn enough money. One unaccompanied 16yr old boy said his parents don't have much money and he want's to make it big as a football player!!
Are these people asking for asylum on the basis of these reasons? Purely economic refugees. What if the 16yr old boy got to the UK.Would he be able to support himself or would it be another burden on our society because of his fanciful dream?
“Are you seriously suggesting that the course of action being undertaken is not preferable to any of the above?”

Yes

“Would you prefer they die?”

I don’t wish anybody dead, FrogNog. My alternative suggestion is that the vessels should be taken in tow (if they are capable of being towed) and returned to the North African coast. If the vessels are not up to being towed the passengers should be taken aboard the ships and returned (you’ve guessed it) to the North African coast. Then the operation should be wound up. Any further vessels leaving Africa will have to take their chances and any people plucked from the drink will have to be returned (I'll let you guess where to). This is quite simply an invasion of mainland Europe. You don’t rescue your invaders, bring them ashore and provide them with money, gifts and houses.

“The talk of too many people arriving spuriously and "illegally" in Britain is laughable when compared with what Greece and Italy, and also Spain, constantly experience…”

That’s their fault. They should police their borders more rigorously rsther than rescue those whom they don't want to entertain.
Did you see the captain of the Bulwark saying there were half a million people waiting to come over?
Don't worry, though, our asylum decision process will be in good hands.

Quote from that nice Mr Junckers on his website ...

a single asylum decision process would ensure equal treatment of asylum seekers in Europe
I read that yesterday Venator. Half a million making active plans to travel to Europe.

My first version read 'invade Europe'. Emotive language, but in effect that is what this is. If they were all wearing any sort of uniform, they would be seen as an invading army. They are not, however, which makes it difficult, but the effect is the same. They have to be stopped.

My response has always been to rescue, if necessary, and take them straight back. This hasn't happened and, predictably, migrant numbers have increased. This is only a stop-gap measure and perhaps a combined naval operation is needed to form a barrier across the Med. - at which point no rescues should be undertaken (unpalatable, but inescapable) and that should be made very clear to would-be migrants before they set off. They all seem to have access to phones and social media. Expensive - and there will be harrowing stories - but it will be more expensive in the long run to do nothing and, put simply, there is a limit.
I find it ironic that this "Invasion of Europe" is being discussed during the same time as the anniversary of D-Day.
I find it difficult to accept that there are people on here that would willingly let 10,000's of people drown at sea, rather than rescue them. Shame on all that take that view.

No-one on this thread has suggested letting them drown, just taking them back where they came from, get a grip Mikey!!
It would be preferable for their own safety not to go to sea in small ships in the first place.
They may not be invading Europe with arms and ammunition but their mass invasion could still leave a devasting effect if it is not checked.
About time Europe reversed the invasion and entered the lawless ungoverned Libya. Smash every boat and life raft into oblivion and place a coastal blockade on it's doorstep.
Ah !...send in some gunboats Retrocop !

Now, apart from you, who mentioned sending in Gunboats?

I assume you're in favour of admitting them to the UK, in line with your Party Policy.
Retrocop...did you mean this, or was it tongue in cheek ? ::

"About time Europe reversed the invasion and entered the lawless ungoverned Libya. Smash every boat and life raft into oblivion and place a coastal blockade on it's doorstep "
Mikey
We already have. HMS Bulwark is a Royal Navy Assault Ship. A P&O Luxury cruiser it is not.
You obviously believe that people smugglers should be allowed to earn millions of dollars by stuffing these people on unsafe vessels and sending them to their deaths.
My proposal is more humane than yours. Destroy the means in which to smuggle by destroying the boats on land in the first place.That is not gun boat policy that is destroying a criminal enterprise and saving lives before they are put at risk.
Your seemingly naive view that people smugglers are providing a valuable service is in my book shameful .
No TIC and sarcasm is not my trade.I am serious. By destroying the boats on land (unladen) will prevent thousands of drowning.That is being humane.
What is you're problem with a light,small incursion into coastal Libya and smashing the tools of the trade of the people smugglers.
It is not like your mob taking us into two invasions of Iraq and killing thousands of people is it?
Retrocop......"You obviously believe that people smugglers should be allowed to earn millions of dollars by stuffing these people on unsafe vessels and sending them to their deaths"

Nowhere have I said that I support people traffickers....please show me where, if you think that I have.

Neither have I suggested that people traffickers are providing a valuable service...again, point this out to me, if you manage to find any evidence that I have.

Your idea of sending in the military to "sort out" Libya may indeed be a long term solution, but international agreement would be needed for that. There hasn't been any great enthusiasm for military involvement in the affairs of North Africa in recent years. Bashar al-Assad has been performing atrocities on his own citizens for years, as his father did before him, and the West just stands by and let him get on with it. Some of these refugees are fleeing certain death in Syria.
Mikey, you’re not being realistic. There are millions who want, for whatever reason, to come to Europe – and then there will be millions more. We let them all in at our peril. It cannot be allowed to continue. It is unsustainable.

21 to 40 of 134rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Hms Bulwark

Answer Question >>