Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Brits finally let the Gurkhas stay

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anywhere bar here
    Posts
    3,085

    Brits finally let the Gurkhas stay

    All Gurkha veterans who retired before 1997 with at least four years' service will be allowed to settle in the UK, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has said.

    Ms Smith told MPs she was "proud to offer this country's welcome to all who have served in the brigade of Gurkhas".

    It comes after a high-profile campaign by Joanna Lumley and other supporters of Gurkha rights - and an embarrassing Commons defeat for the government.

    Some 36,000 Gurkhas who left before 1997 had been denied UK residency.
    BBC NEWS | Politics | Gurkhas win right to settle in UK

    For years the British Government had the racist policy that the Gurkhas were good enough to die for them but not good enough to live amongst them. Finally, thanks to committed campaigners, the Lib Dems and good British people like Joanna Lumley, this policy has been abolished.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Regular dresden8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,593

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruffalo View Post
    For years the British Government had the racist policy that the Gurkhas were good enough to die for them but not good enough to live amongst them. Finally, thanks to committed campaigners, the Lib Dems and good British people like Joanna Lumley, this policy has been abolished.
    Hardly racist.

    The Brits pay Gurkha mercenaries to kill people for them. "Thanks for shooting Johnny foreigner, here's your pay, now fnck off." Seems a fair enough deal to me.

    Why should they be allowed live in Britland?

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anywhere bar here
    Posts
    3,085

    Quote Originally Posted by dresden8 View Post
    Hardly racist.

    The Brits pay Gurkha mercenaries to kill people for them. "Thanks for shooting Johnny foreigner, here's your pay, now fnck off." Seems a fair enough deal to me.

    Why should they be allowed live in Britland?
    If you deem people good enought to die for you but not good enough to live amongst you then that is racist. It is simple.

    They are not mercenaries, they do not fight alongside the British Army, they are part of the British Army:

    BBC NEWS | UK | Who are the Gurkhas?

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,519

    I think that you'll find that the pay and conditions of the Gurkhas dated back to an agreement regarding Indian independence in the 1940's. India also has Gurkha regiments. It suited Britain to maintain those conditions for as long as possible. Eventually they were shamed into improving them.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anywhere bar here
    Posts
    3,085

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunlin3 View Post
    I think that you'll find that the pay and conditions of the Gurkhas dated back to an agreement regarding Indian independence in the 1940's. India also has Gurkha regiments. It suited Britain to maintain those conditions for as long as possible. Eventually they were shamed into improving them.
    Yes, they certainly had to be shamed into it.

    It does not matter where the policy originated it, it was a racist policy and it should not have taken such a fight to get rid of it.

Similar Threads

  1. Brits finally deem Gurkhas worthy of residency.
    By Mr Crowley in forum Foreign Affairs
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 7th May 2009, 10:59 PM
  2. Treatment of Gurkhas a lesson to northern Loyalists
    By 5intheface in forum Foreign Affairs
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 25th April 2009, 01:55 AM
  3. Gurkhas fail in immigration bid
    By mutley in forum Current Affairs
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24th April 2009, 06:45 PM
  4. Finally!
    By Gladstone in forum Youth Politics
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 19th February 2006, 05:21 PM