|
| + Visit Rotherham United FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Great question. The previous governments all chose to stop the boats or smash the gangs.none of them have.
The leaders have been nothing but puppets in a game played in front of our eyes.
The European governments have been the same. The Americans under the democrats were the same. There are a few that haven?t allowed it to happen and they have been fined large sums of money.
Political damage to a party isn?t the same as a political leader being able to make millions after they leave office.
It?s shameful. It?s not the political set up that we grew up with!
Or it could be that we have millions of displaced people coming throughout Europe, many of whom would risk their lives to get to a place where they want to claim asylum and it might be that it is simply difficult to stop that flow of people without military force which is currently against international law. Governments representing their people them have very difficult decisions in acting under that law. Some parties would like to suggest using military force and breaking international laws, and have stood for elections across Europe but as yet, haven't achieved power as the majority of people haven't voted for them on the back of those policies (except Hungary? ).
So conservatives and now Labour have never had the mandate from their people sufficient enough to act on such suggestions. I suspect that if Farage is looking likely to seriously challenge there will be enough Labour, lib dems, tory and all others that will tactically vote to stop them as currently I think the majority of people recognise the complexity of the situation and wouldn't have the appetite for extreme solutions such as escalating a military action against France etc which is where we'd end up on acting without international consent.
Not sure how we got to these points but do you mean what about Islamic nations not taking their share?
I had a double take at this as I always thought some predominantly Islamic nations take most of the world's refugees but looked it up:
For last 10 years up to 2025:
1. Iran - 3.75 million (Islam)
2. Turkey - 3.15 miliion (Islam)
3. Germany - 2.66 million (Christian)
4. Uganda - 1.65 million (Christian)
5. Pakistan - 1.58 million (Islam)
6. Chad - 1.24 million (Islam)
7. Russia - 1.22 million (Christian)
8. Ethiopia - 1 million (Christian/Islam)
9 Bangladesh - 984k (Muslim)
10. Poland - 980k (Catholic)
I think this is only data for people who have claimed asylum but gives an idea of where the majority of AS are headed, maioinly just based on nearness to warring countries
https://www.concern.org.uk/news/thes...AaAqjbEALw_wcB
https://www.concern.net/how-we-raise...utional-donors
Forgive me for not taking this propaganda seriously.
Ok then. There's:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ies-worldwide/
https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ees-by-country
https://www.unhcr.org/global-trends-report-2024
https://www.nrc.no/global-figures
I suspect that they will all be corrupt in your eyes though.