Migration crisis is putting the UK at grave risk.

[stek]

Oxfam is an organisation dedicated to taking one group of peoples money and giving it to others. Of course they'll put a figure on it.

£40b would not end poverty. Nor would £400b Or even £4000B.

Because poverty is not caused by a lack of money. It is caused by a lack of skills and assets that the poor person can use to exchange with another person.

If you want people in different parts of the world to have the same life-style and opportunity as you then you need to ensure that

• That their countries are safe and stable.
• That they live in a relatively corruption free environment.
• The have access to the same markets to sell their goods and services.
• That they have access to the same education.

Handing over cash does nothing to help address those issues. Letting a few thousand people into the UK does nothing to address those issues.

You're not thinking either.

Think 'teach a man to fish...' or are these savages too thick to be taught?

[tomtomagain]

You're not thinking either.

Think 'teach a man to fish...' or are these savages too thick to be taught?

You're not thinking either. 'teach a man to fish...' and allow him access to global markets is exactly what I am saying.

"these savages too thick to be taught?"

That's your racist view. Not mine.

I have worked in West Africa, have experienced the grinding poverty of these countries at first hand and count a number of Africans as good friends. Don't you dare try and paint me as some sort of racist bigot.

[stek]

You're not thinking either. 'teach a man to fish...' and allow him access to global markets is exactly what I am saying.

"these savages too thick to be taught?"

That's your racist view. Not mine.

I have worked in West Africa, have experienced the grinding poverty of these countries at first hand and count a number of Africans as good friends. Don't you dare try and paint me as some sort of racist bigot.

Sorry mate, I apologise.

[vetran]

You're not thinking either.

Think 'teach a man to fish...' or are these savages too thick to be taught?

the problem is as soon as someone catches a fish some nutter with a gun comes & steals it whilst shooting the fisherman & his family.

[seanraaron]

We have to start from somewhere. Clearly you have better ideas. You could start by analysing what happens (geopolitically as well as practically) when we get rid of trident and the rest of the armed forces we do not use

I wouldn't expect anything to happen if we get rid of Trident - or do you expect me to believe the only reason the Russians haven't invaded is every day a new threat is made against Moscow by our Glorious Leader?

[DodgyAgent]

I wouldn't expect anything to happen if we get rid of Trident - or do you expect me to believe the only reason the Russians haven't invaded is every day a new threat is made against Moscow by our Glorious Leader?

The fact that the UK has had a deterrent has kept Russia at bay in the past. It is NATO that is the deterrent of which the UK is part of. I am not going to say that in todays world the UK's nuclear deterrent is making much difference but it helped bring down the Soviet Union in the past. What is particularly worrying is people like you who blithely dismiss the lessons of History and seem to think that human beings have changed (they have not) and that we are all safe now. Part of our problem are the self loathing privileged useful idiots like yourselves who are only too happy to congratulate enemies of the Uk and sneer at UK foreign policies. You lot will be the first to come squirming back to the military (though you wont be found in the trenches - unless forced, now there is an idea) if your own pampered livelihoods are ever at risk. Those are the livelihoods by the way that many Britons fought and died for in the last century.

[xoggoth]

Oxfam put the cost to end world poverty at £40bn

Eh???Are you sure that's not tn?

[seanraaron]

The fact that the UK has had a deterrent has kept Russia at bay in the past. It is NATO that is the deterrent of which the UK is part of. I am not going to say that in todays world the UK's nuclear deterrent is making much difference but it helped bring down the Soviet Union in the past. What is particularly worrying is people like you who blithely dismiss the lessons of History and seem to think that human beings have changed (they have not) and that we are all safe now. Part of our problem are the self loathing privileged useful idiots like yourselves who are only too happy to congratulate enemies of the Uk and sneer at UK foreign policies. You lot will be the first to come squirming back to the military (though you wont be found in the trenches - unless forced, now there is an idea) if your own pampered livelihoods are ever at risk. Those are the livelihoods by the way that many Britons fought and died for in the last century.

What I think is the UK is a small power and has been for most of the last century. Having nukes to "feel important" is childish and stupid when you cannot afford them. And I seem to recall Stalin calling Churchill's bluff and marching into Eastern Europe so I'm pretty sure Britain's nukes weren't relevant to anyone but the American arms industry during the Cold War.

I'm a student of history, you just appear to like spouting the Mail version rather than actually analysing and learning from it.

[woohoo]

The fact that the UK has had a deterrent has kept Russia at bay in the past. It is NATO that is the deterrent of which the UK is part of. I am not going to say that in todays world the UK's nuclear deterrent is making much difference but it helped bring down the Soviet Union in the past. What is particularly worrying is people like you who blithely dismiss the lessons of History and seem to think that human beings have changed (they have not) and that we are all safe now. Part of our problem are the self loathing privileged useful idiots like yourselves who are only too happy to congratulate enemies of the Uk and sneer at UK foreign policies. You lot will be the first to come squirming back to the military (though you wont be found in the trenches - unless forced, now there is an idea) if your own pampered livelihoods are ever at risk. Those are the livelihoods by the way that many Britons fought and died for in the last century.

Do you think anyone after a tirade like that said, oh i see you are right, I've changed my mind and well done for persuading me?

[woohoo]

What I think is the UK is a small power and has been for most of the last century. Having nukes to "feel important" is childish and stupid when you cannot afford them. And I seem to recall Stalin calling Churchill's bluff and marching into Eastern Europe so I'm pretty sure Britain's nukes weren't relevant to anyone but the American arms industry during the Cold War.

I'm a student of history, you just appear to like spouting the Mail version rather than actually analysing and learning from it.

I don't see the point of us having nukes or at least spending a fortune on Trident. I'm also happy for us to be a small power, but the truth is Britain is an extremely powerful country, daft to deny it. Though I would like to see us topping the tables in looking after our citizens.