33 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

Of course, the Royal Navy is told what to do by the government of the day.

 

However, the government in power could be utilising the Royal Navy to far better use by putting fast patrol boats and coastal vessels, many of which were sold off or mothballed, and putting them in the Channel near French waters to deter and force back dinghies before they enter our waters.

 

It's amazing how certain EU countries are ignoring EU directives and ECHR rules and just totalling refusing entry to migrants, and the UK government does absolutely nothing.

 

Much of these exercises performed in and around the UK coast and in the North Atlantic, by the Royal Navy, perform exercises known as shadowing, the purpose is to gather as much information as possible on foreign military vessels near our shores, looking for signs of new vessels, new weaponry, upgrades, propulsion etc.

So you want the Royal Navy to track rubber boats, riiiiiiiiiight...................🙄

The North Sea and the English Channel are international passages. I am sure the British Government knows that. 

Perhaps if they said, "Kill 'em all" there would be cheers from some.

2 hours ago, transam said:

So you want the Royal Navy to track rubber boats, riiiiiiiiiight...................🙄

 

I said let's have them in the water as a deterrent as opposed to the RNLI performing a taxi service for them to the UK.

 

We have drones and various other methods at our disposal, and the government is well aware of the favourite routes smugglers take.

1 minute ago, Scouse123 said:

 

I said let's have them in the water as a deterrent as opposed to the RNLI performing a taxi service for them to the UK

RNLI is a free service whose job it is, is to save lives.........

And you think the R.N will go blow them out of the water.........🥴

1 minute ago, transam said:

RNLI is a free service whose job it is, is to save lives.........

And you think the R.N will go blow them out of the water.........🥴

 

RNLI is operating a taxi service, and it is well known. 

 

You are being deliberately obtuse, nobody is suggesting, blow them out of the water, although water jets to push them back might not be a bad idea...😅

 

One thing for sure, this cannot continue with an inept government doing nothing.

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

The North Sea and the English Channel are international passages. I am sure the British Government knows that. 

Perhaps if they said, "Kill 'em all" there would be cheers from some.

 

Probably would.

 

Crime rises when systems are slow, chaotic, and unenforced. Speed, certainty, removals, and legal alternatives reduce crossings far more effectively than slogans or one-off schemes.

If the goal is to reduce dangerous crossings and the knock-on effects on crime, the approaches that actually work tend to be practical, legal, and upstream, not headline-driven.

 

The most effective mix would look like this:

 

1. Kill the business model, not the people

• Treat people-smuggling as organised crime: joint UK–EU taskforces, financial tracking, asset seizures, long sentences for organisers.

• Target logistics upstream (boats, engines, storage sites) in France/Belgium with funding and shared enforcement.

2. Fast, firm, credible asylum decisions

• Rapid processing (weeks, not years) with swift removal of failed applicants.

• The current backlog incentivises crossings; speed removes that incentive.

• Appeals strictly time-limited, with removals enforced.

3. Safe, controlled alternatives — or people will still come

• Limited offshore or third-country processing with guaranteed returns for failed claims.

• Clear, capped legal routes (e.g. work visas tied to shortages) so asylum isn’t used as a back door.

4. Immediate right to work + dispersal

• Let genuine claimants work quickly → less black-market labour, less street crime.

• National dispersal with proper funding, so no single area is overwhelmed.

5. Border enforcement that’s lawful and boring

• Surveillance, interceptions, returns under existing law — not theatrics that fail in court.

• Consistency matters more than toughness rhetoric.

On 12/13/2025 at 1:40 PM, gargamon said:

Transam is a car, fool.

I thought he was a prolific poster of non-sequiters.... and maybe closet trannie !

On 12/15/2025 at 12:53 PM, Scouse123 said:

If the goal is to reduce dangerous crossings and the knock-on effects on crime, the approaches that actually work tend to be practical, legal, and upstream, not headline-driven.

 

The most effective mix would look like this:

 

1. Kill the business model, not the people

• Treat people-smuggling as organised crime: joint UK–EU taskforces, financial tracking, asset seizures, long sentences for organisers.

• Target logistics upstream (boats, engines, storage sites) in France/Belgium with funding and shared enforcement.

2. Fast, firm, credible asylum decisions

• Rapid processing (weeks, not years) with swift removal of failed applicants.

• The current backlog incentivises crossings; speed removes that incentive.

• Appeals strictly time-limited, with removals enforced.

3. Safe, controlled alternatives — or people will still come

• Limited offshore or third-country processing with guaranteed returns for failed claims.

• Clear, capped legal routes (e.g. work visas tied to shortages) so asylum isn’t used as a back door.

4. Immediate right to work + dispersal

• Let genuine claimants work quickly → less black-market labour, less street crime.

• National dispersal with proper funding, so no single area is overwhelmed.

5. Border enforcement that’s lawful and boring

• Surveillance, interceptions, returns under existing law — not theatrics that fail in court.

• Consistency matters more than toughness rhetoric.

AI slop - we all do it !