Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

Post your thoughts here if you are not sure where to post it!

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: mortiboy » April 25, 2009, 9:13 pm

Welcome to the uk. you think you have problems in the LOS you want to live here.

NO THANKS! Thats would be suicide! :yikes:
User avatar
mortiboy
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 1263
Joined: April 25, 2008, 8:59 pm

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: Michael C » April 27, 2009, 7:40 pm

seymourbutts wrote:They went to the falklands but were really kept behind the action, couldnt have a foriegner winning a british war now could we!!!


Battle Atlas of the Falkland's War 1982 - by Land, Sea and Air
by Gordon Smith wrote:
In preparation for their attack on Mount William, they again helicoptered forward on Sunday 13th to a position just south of Two Sisters. As the Scots Guards battled for Tumbledown, the Gurkhas marched along the line of Goat Ridge, and just to the north of Tumbledown ready for their assault, and on the way suffered casualties from Argentine shellfire. As dawn approached and the Guards had still not secured Tumbledown, it appeared the Gurkhas would have to make a daylight assault on Mount William.

With 5th Infantry, the Gurkhas were ready to make a daylight attack on Mount William, but the Argentines disappeared and D Coy moved onto the summit that morning without any opposition.


I do not know about anyone else, but this does not appear to be 'really kept behind the action' to me nor is it to anyone that has studied this battle. It is well known that the Argentine government complained to the UN about the Ghurka involvement in the Falkland's War and it is a little more than a coincidence that the Argentines abandoned the commanding terrain of Mount William before the Ghurka attack. Few troops in the world are as respected as the Ghurkas.

No reason to denigrate the Ghurkas because of this topic by comparing them to the Pakistanis. I have been around both of them, the Ghurkas when they were in Hong Kong and the Pakistanis in the combat environment of Somalia; there is NO comparison.
User avatar
Michael C
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 97
Joined: April 15, 2008, 9:08 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: seymourbutts » April 27, 2009, 9:20 pm

The sg took tumbledown before the gurkhas were allowed any where near any glory , bear in mind they never took mt william, They had to go over tumbledown to get there!!! Tumbledown having been already cleared by the SG.... Then the argies ran from mt William when they knew the gurkhas were coming because they heard the gurkha's were cannibals!! So no action there then!!! And what to you does constitute being kept back from the action???? because i really dont know what you mean!!! if they were front line troops they would have been sent to take tumbledown surely or south of tumbledown directly to mt william!! ??? Not wait for the sg to clear the way and then get the scraps thats left!!!Anyway i am not saying they are bad soldiers i am saying they are taking us for a ride, for a change!!!

its exactly the same as a british soldier now helping the iraqi army in training and defense asking to be housed and benifited there after he leaves the army... i know what they would tell him to do too!!! unlike our namby pamby govt!!! They got paid a kings ransom for their services and there it should stop! They dont belong in England they belong in Nepal... As trained soldiers they should be defending nepal not claiming benefits in UK....
seymourbutts
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 118
Joined: September 15, 2008, 12:08 pm

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: aznyron » April 27, 2009, 9:36 pm

the soldier does the work and the government makes the money that a good business slave labor
User avatar
aznyron
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 4450
Joined: November 4, 2006, 8:38 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: seymourbutts » April 27, 2009, 10:11 pm

There were a lot of politics going on in this war, and all the "Proper British Regiments" wanted battle honours and glory, so although the Gurkhas were good soldiers they were sadly not a true british regiment. they were also only paid help, without any "field commanders" E.g. their commanding officer was always a Brit, they could do nothing by themselves. They dont have an education system in Nepal that would equate them to british officers, so sadly they do as they are told by their british superiors!! Yes theyre given commisssions etc to play the game but sadly no real authority!!

so they were at the back of the queue for honours unfortunately.. This was a hot topic at the time as the para's were the "heroes" on TV during the conflict even to the point where they were shown marching down the high street of Port Stanley, leading people to believe the battle for port stanley was won by the para's, For the uk audiences sake of course, where in actual fact it was the marines that took stanley!!! You may or may not remember it was a race for stanley the paras had to win because they wanted the battle honours and really the marines are not Army but Navy, now that wouldnt look good on the front page of the sun "The Navy marines beat the paras to stanley" now would it??
seymourbutts
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 118
Joined: September 15, 2008, 12:08 pm

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: Michael C » April 27, 2009, 10:27 pm

aznyron, isn't that exactly what the US did with the Filipinos serving with the US Navy? They had to serve 20 years then they could get citizenship and bring their families over to the US. At least that was the deal that they were getting until they closed the bases down in the Philippines.

seymourbutts, I just did not like the Ghurkas being denigrated. The situation with the Ghurkas in the UK is no different than what the US did with Filipinos and what the French do with their Foreign Legion (good soldiers that have served on my flank).
User avatar
Michael C
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 97
Joined: April 15, 2008, 9:08 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: seymourbutts » April 27, 2009, 10:42 pm

it is completely different mike... we dont have or didnt have bases in nepal where we employed nepalese soldiers to work...They had a contract of employment to work for the british army... This contract included repatriation at the end of their time!!! They all very eagerly signed it too....
The british took advantage of their lack of education for sure, but for the last time... They are Nepalese and they belong there not in England.... Dont forget when they leave the army and go back to nepal they get a pension again enough to keep them comfortable... but no they want more!!!!
seymourbutts
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 118
Joined: September 15, 2008, 12:08 pm

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: steveorch » April 28, 2009, 2:24 am

i say allow them in,but stamp on their passport NO ACSSES TO PUBLIC FUNDS,they won't stay here long
steveorch
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 3
Joined: January 23, 2009, 2:42 am

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: westerby » April 28, 2009, 4:30 am

steveorch wrote:i say allow them in,but stamp on their passport NO ACSSES TO PUBLIC FUNDS,they won't stay here long


Yeah, just need to make sure the man making the stamps isn't dyslexic.
User avatar
westerby
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 3053
Joined: November 22, 2005, 3:06 pm
Location: No fixed abode - a homeless refugee

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: saint » April 28, 2009, 5:43 am

westerby wrote:
steveorch wrote:i say allow them in,but stamp on their passport NO ACSSES TO PUBLIC FUNDS,they won't stay here long


Yeah, just need to make sure the man making the stamps isn't dyslexic.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: . now , now , be nice to the newbies . and welcome to the dunces corner steveorch . :roll: :roll: :roll:
User avatar
saint
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 1637
Joined: February 28, 2008, 5:31 pm
Location: the truth is out there

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: konstabel els » April 29, 2009, 8:18 pm

well lads , the prove is in the pudding -(all sarcasm accepted ) the BBC - on their politics show - said that this is the first time they have been overloaded in support of of any cause - Ghurkas right to settle in the UK , one email read out out on TV - ' If they are prepared to to fight and die for this country - then they have to right to settle here ' . BBC -12:00 29/04/09 - I rest my case.
User avatar
konstabel els
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 192
Joined: May 24, 2008, 7:31 pm
Location: nongbua / England

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: westerby » April 30, 2009, 1:14 am

Brown defeated over Gurkha rules

Source: BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8023882.stm

Gordon Brown's government has suffered a shock defeat in the Commons on its policy of restricting the right of former Gurkhas to settle in the UK.

MPs voted by 267 to 246 in favour of a Lib Dem motion that all Gurkhas be offered an equal right of residence.


The one-eyed idiot misreads the political landscape again.
User avatar
westerby
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 3053
Joined: November 22, 2005, 3:06 pm
Location: No fixed abode - a homeless refugee

Re: Ghurkas not given right to settle in UK

PostAuthor: saint » April 30, 2009, 7:19 am

commons sense prevails . seymorebutts will be overcome with joy . :D :D :D :D :D
User avatar
saint
nongkhaimap.com
nongkhaimap.com
 
Posts: 1637
Joined: February 28, 2008, 5:31 pm
Location: the truth is out there

Previous

Return to Open Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

  • Advertisement