I watch Syrians who don't like Assad or Isis; just want to live; to have their families exist in a peaceful society. Yet the majority of Brits & even Europeans scream Not In MY Backyard. It is time we started behaving like human beings and looked after humans. Just because people have a different skin colour is no reason to reject them. If they are vulnerable, hopeful, ambitious we should welcome them, like America used to. Mind you, not today (poor Mexicans). I never thought, in my life time, I'd see an era when only Germany seemed to have a decent attitude towards humanity and decency and kindness (and not all Germans). Merkel is a finer leader than any other.

I agree.

But if you open all borders and the migrants congregate through necessity in the poorer areas only this will lead to intolerable pressures with the resulting fall out.

We would have as a country to offer access to priviliged areas,and because of housing pressures take ownership of second homes from the wealthy to balance the need.

As this will never happen and the Tories won't risk their "blue collar" Brexit vote..it will never happen.

Broadly I would share your views - and would point to the abject failure of the United Nations to organise meaningful humanitarian and peace keeping efforts.

Set up just after the war (in NYC), the impotency of the UN necessitated the involvement of the US in so many international disputes and problems - from Korea to Vietnam.

And including WW2. Until Trump said - no more; and now the world, with countries carefully guarding their own interests, has no real alternatives to bring into play.

Quite apart from being a proxy-UN for many decades - the US remains the major financial contributor to the UN - and now wants to replicate the sedentary role the other members adopt.

Ironically perhaps


Ms Merkel and the new Germany

Have outstripped us all


More class and helpful logic

Than anywhere...

I agree with the principal of looking after everyone and treating them all the same, but opening the borders would be taking advantage of the influx of strong, healthy and relatively wealthy people who would come, and leave the poorer, weaker ones in a worse condition at home.

Yes Honey and some criminals would come in too but I think the overall benefits far outweigh the negatives and as a society we simply need to adapt (and continue overseas aid - if not even increase it).

JK2006 wrote:
Yes Honey and some criminals would come in too but I think the overall benefits far outweigh the negatives and as a society we simply need to adapt (and continue overseas aid - if not even increase it).

Oh yes, WE benefit, but I think it exploits desperate people.
We should do more to make other countries better and safer, because most people wont uproot themselves to another country unless it is absolutely vital, and those who need it the most, can't.

Yes we should increase overseas aid too (one of the things that has most impressed me over this century was the army of volunteers that went out to Africa to combat Ebola; sometimes getting the disease themselves). Open All Borders - and other countries need to do the same. Especially as Climate Change affects the word; we, as a species, may soon be having to populate previously ignored areas like deserts, frozen zones.

JK2006 wrote:
Yes we should increase overseas aid too


Taking assessed and voluntary contributions to the UN, the US is the world leader.

Contributing c$11 billion a year - more than the next three countries put together.

Including the UK - at less than $3 billion. Something Trump bashers often prefer to forget.

Apart from being the most active member in times of strive and deprivation, the US pay almost a quarter of the UN's budget.

Barney wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
Yes we should increase overseas aid too


Taking assessed and voluntary contributions to the UN, the US is the world leader.

Contributing c$11 billion a year - more than the next three countries put together.

Including the UK - at less than $3 billion. Something Trump bashers often prefer to forget.

Apart from being the most active member in times of strive and deprivation, the US pay almost a quarter of the UN's budget.





Just handing money over clearly is not going well. The aid needs to be increased, but it looks like it could be managed far better.

I suspect that, like so many charities, it is a giant money-making scheme for rich people.