A thought experiment. Nothing more nothing less.

Bangkokhibby

Just chillin'
Private Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2021
We should all understand and accept that people need to flee their country of birth for various reasons.
Assuming an International ruling that a neighbouring country should be your destination and not a country thousands of miles away, would countries be wrong in protecting their borders by destroying for example illegal migrant boats?
Would that be worse than what's happening in Gaza for example?
 
Last edited:
I’m a sympathetic type, I want to take in people who are genuinely fleeing from danger.

However!!!!!

What’s happening here in the UK and in Edinburgh now more to the point it’s really become much more noticeable that the numbers that have arrived here by whatever means legal/illegal are huge.

Whole areas of the Capital have now been turned into little nations of their own.

My feeling is that’s it’s more by design than anything else.
There are agenda’s at play here.

Cheap labour, dilution of workers rights are what I believe is behind all of this and it has very little to do with helping refugees flee from war torn countries.

Giving illegals a mobile phone, a credit card and a hotel room on arrival just proves my point in my opinion.
 
Do you mean destroying boats with migrants in them, or destroying the vessels so they cant be used ? I think the former is a hard no, hopefully obviously, but the latter i could see why folk would do it.
 
Do you mean destroying boats with migrants in them, or destroying the vessels so they cant be used ? I think the former is a hard no, hopefully obviously, but the latter i could see why folk would do it.
As its only a thought experiment I'm not totally sure. Also not just talking about UK. With all the trouble in the world we read about caused by migrants, would it be so bad to treat every asylum seeker who has massively passed his first country of safety as an unwelcome invader?
One lot murdered stops any more?
Again I'll say any worse than Gaza?
 
As its only a thought experiment I'm not totally sure. Also not just talking about UK. With all the trouble in the world we read about caused by migrants, would it be so bad to treat every asylum seeker who has massively passed his first country of safety as an unwelcome invader?
One lot murdered stops any more?
Again I'll say any worse than Gaza?
It's not really anything like Gaza. A better analogy for that would be a battleship sat off a country's coast and bombarding it.

Would they be justified in sinking it if it was loaded with women and kids the assailants had kept on board as a human shield?

Whatever the answer to that is, its a better comparison to the Gaza conflict.

Coming back to your question no i dont think you could justifiably sink migrants boats. But some kind of solution is needed and it may have to be radical. Like some form of internment whether in a Rwanda type set up or more local facilities. I also think its probably justified to send special forces after the gangs per Dominic Cummings.
 
Would they be justified in sinking it if it was loaded with women and kids the assailants had kept on board as a human shield?
Are they though? Doesn't seem to be a lot of women and children arriving on England's shores. But remember I'm not specifically talking about UK just an International willingness to stop the spread of migrants to wherever they fancy.
 
Are they though? Doesn't seem to be a lot of women and children arriving on England's shores. But remember I'm not specifically talking about UK just an International willingness to stop the spread of migrants to wherever they fancy.
I still don't think its an option when noone on the boats is launching direct attacks at the time they are on the boats.

I think the gangs are the only target for military action and possibly also regimes that are deliberately engineering the situation, such as Russia.
 
I still don't think its an option when noone on the boats is launching direct attacks at the time they are on the boats.

I think the gangs are the only target for military action and possibly also regimes that are deliberately engineering the situation, such as Russia.
Yes. Would it though stop at a stroke the worldwide Islamic based crime prevalent in many European countries?
 
Yes. Would it though stop at a stroke the worldwide Islamic based crime prevalent in many European countries?
Very possibly, or at least new additions to it. I still dont think that justifies it. I think violence is only justified in response to violence or perhaps the imminent threat of it. You may say the last point could apply to some on these boats and yes it possibly could but we can't prove it.
 
We have an example just now in Epping where a recently arrived migrant has been charged with three sexual assaults.

Locals protested and the 'anti racism' crowd were there to counter protest the citizens.

Unsurprisingly it kicked off with locals slapping a geezer with a red clenched fist tattooed on his arm.

Then fought the polis.

There will be major trouble starting soon in places in England.


View attachment Wolf_🐺_This_is_in_Epping,_Essex_following_protests_outside_a_migrant.mp4
 
Are they though? Doesn't seem to be a lot of women and children arriving on England's shores. But remember I'm not specifically talking about UK just an International willingness to stop the spread of migrants to wherever they fancy.
In my previous life as a lorry driver I never once had women and kids trying to get in the back of my lorry in France/Belgium , it was always young men.
They are fleeing fuck all, they are invading.
 
We have an example just now in Epping where a recently arrived migrant has been charged with three sexual assaults.

Locals protested and the 'anti racism' crowd were there to counter protest the citizens.

Unsurprisingly it kicked off with locals slapping a geezer with a red clenched fist tattooed on his arm.

Then fought the polis.

There will be major trouble starting soon in places in England.


View attachment 18705
They're not anti racists. Absolutely nowhere to be seen in relation to anti semitism for example.

They are usually the hard left and motivated by some combo of anti western / anti working class sentiment. Strikebreakers for big capital.
 
Starting tae look like Enoch Powell was right, only its no gonnae be black against white its gonnae be culture against culture
 
Going back to the thought experiment. Somali pirates ruled their seas until Russian and to a lesser degree American ships employed armed security who blew them out the water. Nobody said a word, in fact they were applauded.
Let's now take Britain as an example.
Legal migrants having gone through due process welcome. Illegal migrants turned away by gunboats. If there are deaths what will be the outcome? I'd suggest no more boats and other countries wishing they had the balls to do the same.
 
Slash the boats before they leave france is the obvious answer, nothing at all like gaza, no boats no illegals and they have to go through the proper channels to get into the uk .
 
Slash the boats before they leave france is the obvious answer, nothing at all like gaza, no boats no illegals and they have to go through the proper channels to get into the uk .
Two things....
I just used UK as an example.
If illegal invaders were turned back from any border by lethal force what would the fallout be?
And the Gaza example was used to say nobody is lifting a finger to stop the slaughter there so maybe a few hundred illegals killed at borders across Europe might solve a big problem with little consequence.
 
Going back to the thought experiment. Somali pirates ruled their seas until Russian and to a lesser degree American ships employed armed security who blew them out the water. Nobody said a word, in fact they were applauded.
Let's now take Britain as an example.
Legal migrants having gone through due process welcome. Illegal migrants turned away by gunboats. If there are deaths what will be the outcome? I'd suggest no more boats and other countries wishing they had the balls to do the same.

Slash the boats before they leave france is the obvious answer, nothing at all like gaza, no boats no illegals and they have to go through the proper channels to get into the uk .
Only one slight flaw in those suggestions is that the UK, under the Tories, removed the proper channels by refusing to deploy Border Force processing units in France where migrants seeking to enter the United Kingdom could apply in the appropriate conditions.
 
Only one slight flaw in those suggestions is that the UK, under the Tories, removed the proper channels by refusing to deploy Border Force processing units in France where migrants seeking to enter the United Kingdom could apply in the appropriate conditions.
Why would they do that 🤷‍♂️
 
Only one slight flaw in those suggestions is that the UK, under the Tories, removed the proper channels by refusing to deploy Border Force processing units in France where migrants seeking to enter the United Kingdom could apply in the appropriate conditions.
As it's a thought experiment let's imagine all countries had robust legal processes in place. Anyone choosing to bypass this is fair game.
 
Nowt like cheap exploitable labour Joe. Folk will get paid minimum wage.

That's probably double what they earn back home.

Why employ some bolshy citizen who expects a decent wage for a decent day's graft and who doesn't really want to work all the hours of the day.

The wealthy just love having workers at their beck and call. Especially if they can get them on the cheap.

All that money saved pays for a nice skiing trip for wee Justin and Chlamydia dontcha know.