Poor migrants from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan

[Harrystottle 10]

We sell guns to them.

 

So do a lot of others, I should think.

[drummonds 10]

We sell guns to them.

 

would they not have had guns if we hadn't?

[TJC1 10]

would they not have had guns if we hadn't?

 

I really cant say. Its not ideal though is it? Blood on hands.

[MintPlumbing 10]

I really cant say. Its not ideal though is it? Blood on hands.

 

They are adults, they are capable of making their own decisions, if they want guns they will buy or make guns, if they want to kill each other they will kill each other even if they can't get guns, what they choose to do to each other is their responsibility and no one elses. Do you blame car manufactures every time someone is killed by a car?

[tinfoilhat 11]

Are non-EU countries like Russia taking any?

[GLASGOWOODS 10]

Its sick. We need to help these people. We are a rich country and have NO excuse for letting these people die in the sea or come to a country and have nothing not even a roof over their heads.

Its shameful.

Yet we are willing to spend billions on bombs bullets and guns.

Great

 

---------- Post added 08-08-2015 at 16:07 ----------

 

 

Careful, youre in danger of speaking good sense and the truth.

 

We have to spend billions on arms, otherwise we may find ourselves at the mercy of another nation with mental ambitions.

[The Joker 10]

We have to spend billions on arms, otherwise we may find ourselves at the mercy of another nation with mental ambitions.

 

no we don't, see this post for the reason why.

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11111907#post11111907

[GLASGOWOODS 10]

We sell guns to them.

 

So what! The French sold Exocet missiles to Argentina, Falklands war.

 

UK sold jet engines to USSR on condition they should only be use on commercial planes( that went down well:hihi:) and totally ****** the USA off.

 

Money talks.

 

---------- Post added 08-08-2015 at 21:48 ----------

 

no we don't, see this post for the reason why.

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11111907#post11111907

 

Enlighten me Joker, am struggling:huh:

[The Joker 10]

Enlighten me Joker, am struggling:huh:

 

i'm in a bit of a dichotomy trichotomy here.

 

Either the country is skint, so we're not worth invading and we don't need to spend £hundreds of billions on a replacement for Trident.

 

OR

 

Our nuclear deterrent should be used in the event of a foreign invasion. As we're currently bringing invaded by, er, invaders from France, we should nuke Northern France before it's too late.

 

 

OR

 

Both of the above.

[TJC1 10]

i'm in a bit of a dichotomy trichotomy here.

 

Either the country is skint, so we're not worth invading and we don't need to spend £hundreds of billions on a replacement for Trident.

 

OR

 

Our nuclear deterrent should be used in the event of a foreign invasion. As we're currently bringing invaded by, er, invaders from France, we should nuke Northern France before it's too late.

 

 

OR

 

Both of the above.

 

Go with a) Tridents a waste of money.

[The Joker 10]

Go with a) Tridents a waste of money.

 

I prefer option c.

 

Save money on decommissioning our nuclear deterrent by dropping them all on le French. It would solve the immigration crisis overnight.

 

Best thing is, the French won't retaliate 'cos they used up all their nukes performing scientific tests on some little islands in the Far East a couple of decades back. They even filmed a really good documentary about it, starring Jean Reno. I think it was called Godzilla.

[L00b 441]

So what! The French sold Exocet missiles to Argentina, Falklands war.

And spilled rather a lot of technological beans (no less than the missile's codes and homing radar) to MI6, plus a ton of intelligence assist to stop the Argentines getting more of them through Peru and the black market. A bit of balance never hurts