Pretty disingenuous when those 'refugees' were simply planning on illegally entering the UK, and everyone involved knew it.
>The refugee said it was his fourth attempt to cross the Channel. During the previous three attempts French police had caught them on the beach and punctured their dinghies with knives.
Honestly didn't realize though refugees thought the benefits in the UK were better than France's.
Not disingenous at all. They were lost at sea and there were no irrational levels of resources thrown into trying to find them. There were not even rational level of resources thrown into trying to find them. There were not even half-assed-pretending-to-care level of resources thrown into trying to find them.
This is a simple observation of facts. If you don’t like some implication if it so bad for you. I don’t like it either, but I suspect we disagree in what way we don’t like the implications.
Absolutely irrelevant. When hundreds of peoples' lives are at risk, and you have the opportunity to save them, you do so. If they're doing something you fundamentally disagree with (like piloting an obviously-unsafe vessel to 4km underwater), you do your best to rescue them anyways.
>The refugee said it was his fourth attempt to cross the Channel. During the previous three attempts French police had caught them on the beach and punctured their dinghies with knives.
Honestly didn't realize though refugees thought the benefits in the UK were better than France's.