Beowulf wrote

Woodkid wrote

Beowulf wrote Haha Woodkid you are just moving the goal post to try and prove your point.
Trying to twist your words to suit and my words against me is weak at best.
Come up with a valid argument and maybe you will get the right point across !.

Half are women. The majority being women would mean a 1% increase in the number of women refugees.

You said:
'You would find us British a lot more welcoming if the majority of these people were women and children.'

That means that you are saying we should turn away 15 million people, 6 million of whom are children, because only 7.5 million of them are women and that number needs to be 150,000 higher before we consider it.
That's what 1% of 15 million is. You are turning away 15 million over a 150,000 person difference.

This isn't me twisting your words, this is what you just said.

You also just said:
'Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT).'

I could bring up so many examples of the brilliant British spirit and love for women and children in war when we burnt innocent people's farms down in South Africa and raped our way across europe during WW2, but putting that aside, this is horrible logic.

You are saying that we should turn away these refugees, 7.5 million of whom are women, and 6 million of whom are children, and send them back to war zones because of the men from these countries fleeing. We should condemn the women and children to death, sex slavery, and famine to prove a point that we wouldn't do the same?

If anything what you should be saying with this logic is that we will ONLY accept the women and children. Not that we should just turn them all away.

This isn't me twisting your words, this is what you just said.

HAHAHAHA...
Please look at my original post and point out where I said "Turn away"...Oh you can't Because I never said it.
This is what I mean by "Twisting my words".
I say something you do not agree with and you try to make me look bad by sprouting complete bull to justify your argument.

Yes I did say and still stand by.."Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT)."
And it's true we have never left OUR women and children behind in a warzone., Now I am sure you could bring up many war atrocities committed by the British forces of the past but my statement would still be the truth.

You said ..Half are women
Simply NOT true !..
Example..
The IOM also released data on Thursday for people entering the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, a state on Greeces northern border that presents a major through-point for people heading northwards after arriving by land or sea into Greece, then moving towards Serbia and on to Hungary.

In the three months between 19 June and 17 September, some 81,649 people entered declaring an intention to later claim asylum. They included 54,484 men, 11,156 women, 13,542 children with relatives and 2,467 children alone.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
So you see your math is way off the mark !.., Most are Men (no not children but MEN)

Anyway I have wasted enough time on this ..So I am moving on.
Good luck with the bubble you are living in ,You are going to need it !.

So when you said 'we would be much more welcoming' you weren't saying we should turn them away?
Please. Don't obviously imply something and then deny it when you're called out on it because it makes you look bad.
Answer this: Should we let refugees into the UK?
Yes or no.

...More than 15 million of the uprooted are refugees who fled their home countries...

...Children constitute about 41 percent of the worlds refugees, and about half of all refugees are women

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

You cherry picked one area of the world where there are more male than female refugees, I'm talking about the big picture.

Woodkid wrote

Beowulf wrote

Woodkid wrote

Beowulf wrote Haha Woodkid you are just moving the goal post to try and prove your point.
Trying to twist your words to suit and my words against me is weak at best.
Come up with a valid argument and maybe you will get the right point across !.

Half are women. The majority being women would mean a 1% increase in the number of women refugees.

You said:
'You would find us British a lot more welcoming if the majority of these people were women and children.'

That means that you are saying we should turn away 15 million people, 6 million of whom are children, because only 7.5 million of them are women and that number needs to be 150,000 higher before we consider it.
That's what 1% of 15 million is. You are turning away 15 million over a 150,000 person difference.

This isn't me twisting your words, this is what you just said.

You also just said:
'Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT).'

I could bring up so many examples of the brilliant British spirit and love for women and children in war when we burnt innocent people's farms down in South Africa and raped our way across europe during WW2, but putting that aside, this is horrible logic.

You are saying that we should turn away these refugees, 7.5 million of whom are women, and 6 million of whom are children, and send them back to war zones because of the men from these countries fleeing. We should condemn the women and children to death, sex slavery, and famine to prove a point that we wouldn't do the same?

If anything what you should be saying with this logic is that we will ONLY accept the women and children. Not that we should just turn them all away.

This isn't me twisting your words, this is what you just said.

HAHAHAHA...
Please look at my original post and point out where I said "Turn away"...Oh you can't Because I never said it.
This is what I mean by "Twisting my words".
I say something you do not agree with and you try to make me look bad by sprouting complete bull to justify your argument.

Yes I did say and still stand by.."Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT)."
And it's true we have never left OUR women and children behind in a warzone., Now I am sure you could bring up many war atrocities committed by the British forces of the past but my statement would still be the truth.

You said ..Half are women
Simply NOT true !..
Example..
The IOM also released data on Thursday for people entering the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, a state on Greeces northern border that presents a major through-point for people heading northwards after arriving by land or sea into Greece, then moving towards Serbia and on to Hungary.

In the three months between 19 June and 17 September, some 81,649 people entered declaring an intention to later claim asylum. They included 54,484 men, 11,156 women, 13,542 children with relatives and 2,467 children alone.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
So you see your math is way off the mark !.., Most are Men (no not children but MEN)

Anyway I have wasted enough time on this ..So I am moving on.
Good luck with the bubble you are living in ,You are going to need it !.

So when you said 'we would be much more welcoming' you weren't saying we should turn them away?
Please. Don't obviously imply something and then deny it when you're called out on it because it makes you look bad.
Answer this: Should we let refugees into the UK?
Yes or no.

...More than 15 million of the uprooted are refugees who fled their home countries...

...Children constitute about 41 percent of the worlds refugees, and about half of all refugees are women

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

You cherry picked one area of the world where there are more male than female refugees, I'm talking about the big picture.

First off I said that we do not leave our women and children in war zones while our men look for a better life and yes I also implied that the Uk would be more welcoming if it was mostly women and children.

The first comment was a factual statement and the second was a generalisation.
You seem to have taken it to heart.
As for cherry picking as you put it ,No this was just one of many examples I could of used
to prove my point ,The fact of the matter is "it's the truth".
Now you could of brought some actual facts to prove yours but you decided not too ,You like it or loathe it did try to twist my words against me.
As the old saying goes .. "Assumption" the mother of all f**k ups.
Don't get me wrong ,I do think these people deserve help but to open up the borders and allow everybody/anybody in would be complete madness.

Answer this: Should we let refugees into the UK?
Yes or no.
My answer .. Yes but it needs to be controlled.


Now can we just agree to disagree and move on ,This is no place for a tit for tat argument.

Beowulf wrote

Woodkid wrote

Beowulf wrote

Woodkid wrote

Beowulf wrote Haha Woodkid you are just moving the goal post to try and prove your point.
Trying to twist your words to suit and my words against me is weak at best.
Come up with a valid argument and maybe you will get the right point across !.

Half are women. The majority being women would mean a 1% increase in the number of women refugees.

You said:
'You would find us British a lot more welcoming if the majority of these people were women and children.'

That means that you are saying we should turn away 15 million people, 6 million of whom are children, because only 7.5 million of them are women and that number needs to be 150,000 higher before we consider it.
That's what 1% of 15 million is. You are turning away 15 million over a 150,000 person difference.

This isn't me twisting your words, this is what you just said.

You also just said:
'Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT).'

I could bring up so many examples of the brilliant British spirit and love for women and children in war when we burnt innocent people's farms down in South Africa and raped our way across europe during WW2, but putting that aside, this is horrible logic.

You are saying that we should turn away these refugees, 7.5 million of whom are women, and 6 million of whom are children, and send them back to war zones because of the men from these countries fleeing. We should condemn the women and children to death, sex slavery, and famine to prove a point that we wouldn't do the same?

If anything what you should be saying with this logic is that we will ONLY accept the women and children. Not that we should just turn them all away.

This isn't me twisting your words, this is what you just said.

HAHAHAHA...
Please look at my original post and point out where I said "Turn away"...Oh you can't Because I never said it.
This is what I mean by "Twisting my words".
I say something you do not agree with and you try to make me look bad by sprouting complete bull to justify your argument.

Yes I did say and still stand by.."Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT)."
And it's true we have never left OUR women and children behind in a warzone., Now I am sure you could bring up many war atrocities committed by the British forces of the past but my statement would still be the truth.

You said ..Half are women
Simply NOT true !..
Example..
The IOM also released data on Thursday for people entering the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, a state on Greeces northern border that presents a major through-point for people heading northwards after arriving by land or sea into Greece, then moving towards Serbia and on to Hungary.

In the three months between 19 June and 17 September, some 81,649 people entered declaring an intention to later claim asylum. They included 54,484 men, 11,156 women, 13,542 children with relatives and 2,467 children alone.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
So you see your math is way off the mark !.., Most are Men (no not children but MEN)

Anyway I have wasted enough time on this ..So I am moving on.
Good luck with the bubble you are living in ,You are going to need it !.

So when you said 'we would be much more welcoming' you weren't saying we should turn them away?
Please. Don't obviously imply something and then deny it when you're called out on it because it makes you look bad.
Answer this: Should we let refugees into the UK?
Yes or no.

...More than 15 million of the uprooted are refugees who fled their home countries...

...Children constitute about 41 percent of the worlds refugees, and about half of all refugees are women

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

You cherry picked one area of the world where there are more male than female refugees, I'm talking about the big picture.

First off I said that we do not leave our women and children in war zones while our men look for a better life and yes I also implied that the Uk would be more welcoming if it was mostly women and children.

The first comment was a factual statement and the second was a generalisation.
You seem to have taken it to heart.
As for cherry picking as you put it ,No this was just one of many examples I could of used
to prove my point ,The fact of the matter is "it's the truth".
Now you could of brought some actual facts to prove yours but you decided not too ,You like it or loathe it did try to twist my words against me.
As the old saying goes .. "Assumption" the mother of all f**k ups.
Don't get me wrong ,I do think these people deserve help but to open up the borders and allow everybody/anybody in would be complete madness.

Answer this: Should we let refugees into the UK?
Yes or no.
My answer .. Yes but it needs to be controlled.


Now can we just agree to disagree and move on ,This is no place for a tit for tat argument.

This is the perfect place for a tit for tat argument.

Where are these other examples?

Now you could of brought some actual facts to prove yours but you decided not too

You're going to just dismiss the UN website telling you that half of all refugees currently fleeing to other countries are women and provide no reason why?

Sxwrex wrote

We have enough people in our country how it is today. We don't need anymore as Britain is having problems finding jobs because these people coming over UK and taking the jobs which we need. #RIP finding a job then 2020!

The London School of Economics has found that immigration doesn't keep down wages or lead to an increase in unemployment among people who have lived here all of their lives.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Sxwrex wrote

We have enough people in our country how it is today. We don't need anymore as Britain is having problems finding jobs because these people coming over UK and taking the jobs which we need. #RIP finding a job then 2020!

Immigrants aren't taking the jobs of British people, it's a myth concept. More like those on the unemployment don't want to do jobs that involve getting their hands dirty, whilst immigrants will take jobs like to start building up a living.

The majority of immigrants are of good profession anyway, they are doctors, nurses, lawyers, engineers, construction workers etc That are highly skilled and have degrees etc in what they do. I'm sure many are smarter than a lot of people living in Britain.

Beowulf wrote

BigRedMachine wrote

Musk wrote Just ridiculous this is why I should be priminister ;)

Tell me why helping out refugees from a war torn country is ridiculous? If the UK was war torn I'm sure you'd want to be helped out by a safer country

No !.
We English /Scottish / Welsh / Irish do not run from battle !.
Never have we left our women and children in the middle of a warzone while the young and fighting fit men flee to find a better life elsewhere (FACT).

You would find us British a lot more welcoming if the majority of these people were women and children.

That isn't what is happening. The men are risking the Journey first, i think you forget how dangerous these journeys are.

Also, just because youve seen a couple pictures with majority men in the picture doesn't mean thats whats happening with the millions of Syrian refugees. I've seen pictures with majority women.