badgerx16

Much of the surface fleet, plus ( obvs ) all of the subs, would be useless in such operations. What exactly are the RN going to do ? Blockade the French coast ? Ram and sink RIBs overloaded with women and children ? Get them off their boats and dump them back on the French beaches ?

Police

Dunkirk 1940 Dieppe 1942 Normandy 1944

You are not claiming that the Channel is a war zone, are you ? Mind you, some might claim that the refugee/ migrant problem is a direct result of our political failings.

healing

I've got no idea, perhaps you should contact PA and ask them. Where did you hear your snippet ? There's nothing in any news outlet I can find that says anything other than Priti Patel has decided that it's a good idea, ( which almost certainly means it isn't ). Not my description, the MoD source. Do you mean in the same way that what some describe as Brexiteers are in fact xenophobic ?

But a Ministry of Defence source told the PA news agency the idea of using the navy was “completely potty” and could put lives at risk. “It is a completely inappropriate and disproportionate approach to take,” they said. “We don’t resort to deploying armed force to deal with political failings." “It’s beyond absurd to think that we should be deploying multimillion-pound ships and elite soldiers to deal with desperate people barely staying afloat on rubber dinghies in the Channel." “It could potentially put people’s lives at even greater risk." “Border Force is effectively the Home Office’s own navy fleet, so it begs the question: what are they doing?” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/priti-patel-migrants-channel-royal-navy-record-a9659346.html

The international law remains the same, refugees are supposed to stop at the first "safe" country they reach. Therefore Greece, Italy, France, etc. It is possible that the UK could shirk some of it's previous collective humanitarian responsibilty because it isn't bound to EU joint commitents to provide suport to the southern border states.

Woman

Has your mum bought you a new dressing up costume ?

Will you pray for him ?

In their view, a Christian / Muslim / Jewish believer has seen all the proof they need. You choose to reject it, which is your right. It does not further burden them with the duty to further prove anything to you.

Why do they have to prove anything to you ? Why are you so special ? What 'evidence' would persuade you that God existed ?

His appreciation of you is not conditional on you changing your beliefs or opinions, why are you obsessed with trying to persuade him to change his ?

I think RB is more 'open minded' than you.

Why not try out your arguments on this lot https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/westboro-baptist-church https://www.godhatesfags.com/

And your crusade is to point out to them the error of their ways ? Who appointed you to this auspicious responsibilty ?

Ahh, so you are asking philosophical questions to better understand their knowledge and beliefs ?

Not sure this will get very far; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53684033 "New York's attorney general has announced a lawsuit aimed at dissolving the powerful National Rifle Association over alleged financial mismanagement."

So you think it is your duty to go out of your way to taunt them ?

Sabbath

empathy /ˈɛmpəθi/ noun noun: empathy the ability to understand the feelings of another

Yes there is a difference, and I was not pulling you up on this, but that does not excuse your constant badgering ( sic ) of other posters with your 'loving God that massacres babies' and 'loving God that commits Genocide' posts.It is this that is disrespectful of other people's feelings and beliefs.

But you persistently diss people who believe He does.