Off Topic Is the UK right to get

The have some other, clever, stupid and dangerous ways. One was even found in the engine bay.

 

When did I say that they didn't know that it's illegal to enter in the back of a lorry?
Knowing that they need to claim asylum in the first safe country is far more debatable.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13691830600821901?src=recsys&journalCode=cjms20

"Few of the respondents arrived with much knowledge of the UK, and their knowledge was limited to general impressions of the country; they knew little about asylum policy and practice. There are five main reasons why they knew so little: many had not chosen their own destination; surprisingly few had family or friends already in the UK; in some cases they had been provided with false or misleading information; many had departed their country of origin in a rush; and most were relatively poorly educated. Why they ended up in the UK was often linked to the role of smugglers, who often chose the final destination."

 

It doesn't matter if they don't know , none of the people in Calais attempting to enter the UK will be genuine refugees .

 

Because?

 

They have to register asylum status at the first safe country .

Otherwise they are just economic migrants shopping for the best deal .

 

Greece?

 

So you've read the evidence that suggests that most of them don't know that and don't even know their destination, but you're sticking with that?
Sounds about right.

 

It doesn't matter if they don't know the rules they still apply .
ignorance isn't an excuse .

 

It clearly is. It doesn't mean that they're not genuine refugees, only that they haven't followed rules that they don't know.
It's a non-argument, frankly. It doesn't have a point.

 

The german air force has been so underfunded in recent years they have a massive spare parts problem. Only half a dozen operational fighters are available, no transport aircraft are airworthy and none of its 6 submarines are able to leave port.

Daft ****ers thought the cold war was over!

 

Well someone should politely tell all the people in Calais that they are not in any danger in France and attempting to illegally enter the UK is a criminal offense.

You are really struggling here , do you think some could possibly be fibbing about not knowing ?

 

they are weaker than Iceland.

 

The last one of either of them to win a war was Iceland! The cod war

 

That's wonderful. Why don't you get straight on that?
Let's stick with your spurious claims over actual studies, too. That's a wonderful method of determining the truth.
What does Donut think? That'll do for me!

 

Virtue signalling??

 

If you attack a chemical weapon storage facility, does that completely destroy the weapons or risk releasing those chemicals into the atmosphere in the immediate area or when they say weapons is that unarmed weapons?

 

I've seen you discussing this on 2 threads this morning and the responses and "wibble wobble" is strong

Now whilst I appreciate we can't all know every detail of every subject, even googling the basics would be good before they threw what they have at you

In particularly found the jk Rowling argument interesting. Last I checked if a UK citizen did in fact fill up their rooms with those in need it doesn't impact or change govt policy. For that to happen you raise it and lobby etc

The whole first country thing is also fascinating. I personally know of people from Syria who went to Sudan.
Those going to Lebanon and Jordan do so as the UK gives those countries money for programmes etc

The Calais ones have multiple reasons for wanting to come here, eg UK later allows families to join, some applied in France 6 times but rejected so look to move on, crap conditions in France done saying housing given worse than the jungle etc etc

But am sure there is 1 who diddled the system, so **** em all yeeehaaaa

 

it depends on the nature of the weapon to be honest.
Some chemical weapons are not activated by an explosion, but by an electric charge (I think).
I am no expert but causing the release of chemicals to prevent the release of chemicals doesnt make much sense

 

That's what i was thinking

 

If it doesn't exist nowt

But the weapons used could have long term impacts. See Iraq and uranium and disabled kids etc