I do not believe any Gurkhas should be allowed to come to this country at any age, retired or otherwise.
Right: The campaigner for the Gurkhas "rights" to settle in the UK, Joanna Lumley. The road to hell is paved with good intentions... retired Gurkhas can best be helped in Nepal.
These people are mercenaries, whom the MoD employs because they are cheaper to hire, so the blame for the situation as it has historically arisen lies with the MoD.
They get a good pension by Nepalese terms, still cheap for the MoD of course.
Although I am loathe to support any form of mercenary forces, if absolutely necessary here and now, then let their pensions be increased to UK standard and give them a gold standard health insurance too.
Ripping these people out of their homeland, Nepal, is not right.
No doubt in a few years their families will also be cajoled into claiming the "right" to come here and then we'll have more generations of rootless, culture-clash, chip-on-shoulder third generation immigrants with no sense of "loyalty."
So no, not a single Gurkha should come here.
Personally I think the hiring of mercenaries is wrong, but while it exists there are all sorts of things the tightwads at the MoD (who, remember send all our troops into battle without the correct body and transport armour) can do to make the lives of ex-servicemen in Nepal comfortable enough that we don't get more Asian "communities" over here.
And before a liberal moans, I will say this:
If it was wrong to 'colonise' India and other parts of Asia, then it also wrong to let all manner of Asians colonise vast areas of England and the other nations of these isles.
And before a blustering Colonel Bufton-Tufton moans, I will say this also:
Two wrongs do not make a right. By all means carry out any moral obligation to previous and existing Gurkha soldiers, but taking people out of their own homeland is not a good thing, and for short term gain and populist "patriotic" headlines you will create misery both here and in Nepal.
I like people who (to use the Godfather/Sopranos parlance) 'bust balls' of government ministers, and I think back in the mists of time I even liked The New Avengers (I've worn a bowler hat ever since!) and even the weird TV series Sapphire and Steel (ref Joanna Lumley, the pro-Gurkha campaigner), but we should look at the bigger picture here.
Multi-racism kills cultures and wrecks communities.
If people want to help the Nepalese (civilians and mercenaries) then help them in Nepal!
Friday, 8 May 2009
Oi Joanna Lumley: Keep Gurkha Mercenaries in Nepal!
Posted by Final Conflict at 10:50 am
Categories: Government, Gurkhas, Pensions, War
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Totally agree, Lumley is just riding on the wave of anti-Brown populism, the Tories are accused of jumping on the bandwagon, but as pointed by them, when the Ghurkas were an issue under their governmental tenure, Hong Kong was still a British mandate.
As for the Ghurkas settling in Britain because 'they have fought for Britain' this is a LIE, the Ghurkas do not fight for Britain, they fight for the Queen and as such they are the Queen's soldiers not Britains soldiers per se.
Also the British/Ghurka-Nepalese relationship is not just a one way issue, as the Lumleyites would like to perceive it to be, but in fact it is a truth that the British/Nepalese relationship has meant that Communism/Chinese threat has been minimal if not non-existant!
The other thing that concerns me is the stupidity of our fellow-Brits regarding the settlement of the Ghurkas, fair enough they say, they have fought for Britain so ought to have the right to settle here, ok, but when one consider they will be bringing their families with them and eventually they will breed offspring, what then? we see the result of this when we took in the Jamaicans/Indians/Pakistanis etc. 'because they fought for Britain' so why have we not sent back those who now 'fight IN Britain?'
Ghurkas have a reputation for being 'warriors', well I have news for you, we are still British because we once were and still are 'warriors', what I will concede though is that the Ghurkas are vicious little bastards!
How are these Gurkas going to be able to pay £900-£1000 a month for a flat or if lucky a house.
I'm struggling and i've lived here all my life.
I agree.
Briton's are white.
We dont need the ghurka's here at all.
Very well put. A lot of sentimental tosh is spoken about the Ghurkas. If they really are the best of Nepal, then getting them to live in this country would be an example of imperialist asset stripping. Leave them in Nepal, for all our sakes.
Some very valid points.
Thanks folks.
Is ANYONE in the (to adopt media parlance) "right wing" outside of the Tories supporting the Gurkhas?
ie. is anyone vaguely patriotic saying they are "patriotic Brits"?
That would be a shock and a shame...
Griffo can't oppose the Gurkhas!
After all he thinks Sikhs and Hindus can be patriotic Britons.
Even Zimbabweans who breed half-castes in Cumbria are patriotic Britons to the man with the extension built on his expenses account.
If he says otherwise he is a flip-flop politician with no principles.
Gri££ Nickin said he supports the rights of Gurkhas and their families to come here.
RIGHT-WING TORY TOFF FAILED LAWYER PUBLIC SCHOOLBOY TW#T.
Post a Comment