Following, what I would deem the shocking scenes in Hungary last night, how do folk feel we should be dealing with the sudden (and it is a sudden) influx of refugees and asylum seekers into the EU / UK?  I'm of the opinion that currently, a lot of these people are fleeing areas which we (as in the West) have had an influence on.  We've bombed these countries, interfered where not required for probable murky reasons.  We actually have a moral responsibility to take more in, it's not like there are 100's of thousands, just a few thousand.

 

The UK needs to do more and take a leaf out of, ironically, the German book.  I love Germany and am very pleased to see them taking the lead on this.  But what do you all think?  The media, much like with Jeremy Corbyn, I feel have been blowing things out of proportion slightly, probably because fear sells news.  Do Hungary have a right to protect their border the way they have?  Surely this isn't a long term solution.

I'm with you on this one, Manc. Every human being deserves to be and feel safe. And thanks to us they're not safe. I know it's not as simple an issues as that. I do think ISIS pose a threat that probably needs to be fought. But whatever the reason they need shelter and they should get it. It's that simple.

Is that an ironic post or have you actually decided that media coverage of pockets of anti-west propoganda is a fair and accurate representation of how millions of people think?

 

The west by no means has any right to a moral high ground on anyone.

After seeing the horrific videos from syria, and the west and particularly Arab countries doing nothing to stop the bloodshed in syria. We have a moral high ground over these so called "terrorists". These people preach the west is evil and must be destroyed (infidels they call us) yet who are the syrian people running too?

 

Surely not into the hands of IS or the thugs, but they are fleeing West to Europe so why run to us if we are hated that much. So its good to see Muslims running to Christian countries for help and we should bloody well help them!

 

I listen to the racists here at my work (most of the ones vocal about saying they will come here and take our houses / jobs) are actually Huns.

 

Do they? You've been watching too much shite telly I think!

 

It's not about if they hate us or anything like that. It's about getting to a place of safety first and foremost. And your knuckle-dragging hun colleagues needn't worry as most of the refugees are aiming to reach Germany, not the UK. 

Germany gets a lot of credit for its stance, and it's certainly doing a lot. However, its stranglehold on the Euro makes it a lot easier for Germany than it is for Greece or Italy for example. The attempted forcing of Euro countries to "balance their books" (not run a deficit) means that those countries are making an either/or choice regarding helping refugees - where the either/or is between helping refugees or helping its own citizens struggling under the weight of ridiculous austerity and debt conditions.

 

Similarly in the UK. The refugee situation is presented as an either/or situation. The suggestion in the media, and parroted by many you see being interviewed in the streets, is that at a time of food banks, unemployment, so-called housing shortages and benefit cuts we "can't afford to take in any more people". The basic challenge to this mantra doesn't seem to exist, anywhere, despite the fact it has absolutely no truth in it whatsoever. Unlike our Euro counterparts, we are a sovereign country with a sovereign currency (take note SNP, get a f'n proper alternative on currency for the next indyref, ye useless fucks). We have an ageing population, a crumbling and inefficient housing stock and a terrible public transport system outside of London. England alone has over 200,000 permanently unoccupied homes (600,000 total). Austerity is an ideology. A choice. The suggestion that in some way we don't have the resources, the room, the money, the employment to welcome refugees is simply a lie. We (our government) are choosing not to - nothing more.

 

Should there be a limit? Possibly, but it should be based on our ability to process them in a safe and respectful manner, ensuring that they are provided for and not some arbitrary figure made up by government because they think it's the least they can offer to appease both sides of a biased argument.

Whether we've been part of the cause or not is irrelevant, I think. As long as we are in a position to help people who need help, then we should help.

I wouldn't sit next to any of them on a bus.