Please login or click here to join.
Forgot Password? Click Here to reset pasword
 |  |  |  |  |  |
Xxxx Xxxx Posts: 292 Joined: 22nd Mar 2009 Location: Canada | quotePosted at 17:53 on 6th May 2009 excerpt below from:
Why won't the Government allow them to live in the UK? Nepal is not a member of the Commonwealth. Gurkhas have never been subjects of the British Crown. The government says that letting all 36,000 ex-Gurkhas into the UK would lead to "massive pressure" on the immigration service. Gordon Brown has claimed that the country cannot afford to look after them all. But hardly anyone else in the country seems to agree with him. Should the government allow all ex Gurkha soldiers to settle in the UK? Yes... * The country owes a duty of care to men who have served it with the particular dedication typical of Gurkhas. * The amounts on money involved a trifling compared with what the government has produced for other causes recently. * Conditions back in the Gurkha hill villages of Nepal as particularly tough for those suffering from injuries incurred in the Army. No... * Nepal is not a member of the Commonwealth and Gurkhas are not British subjects. * Letting in all 36,000 ex-Gurkhas into the UK would lead to "massive pressure" on the immigration and social services. * The country has to balance its duty to the Gurkhas with its reduced abilities to finance such deals. Edited by: Ceridwyn at:6th May 2009 18:00 |
| lancashirelove Posts: 1986 Joined: 18th Feb 2009 Location: UK | quotePosted at 17:57 on 6th May 2009 i dont think you understand cerideyn, these guys are 110% loyal to the British and have been for a long time, I'm afraid to insult these guys is to insult the british, and vice versa. Yes Burma has a problem with civil rights but the Gurkas are a different issue. can i suguest you look-up the relationship with the Gurkas and the British and you'll understand the situation a little more clear 9may I also remind you that the gurkas fought alongside our alise in the last war, they are a brave and trusted regiment in the british army. |
| Xxxx Xxxx Posts: 292 Joined: 22nd Mar 2009 Location: Canada | quotePosted at 18:02 on 6th May 2009 Michael... the decision of your UK government is not driven by passion.. it is formed by LAW. |
| lancashirelove Posts: 1986 Joined: 18th Feb 2009 Location: UK | quotePosted at 18:27 on 6th May 2009 we live in one of the oldest democratic countries in the world, our law is made by the people and their elected representatives and signed off through the House of Commons then the House of Lords. If the law needs changing it can be changed by the PASSION of our people, we are not ruled by dictatorship, even our Queen is governed by OUR say-so and subject to laws passed through the democratic process. |
Ron Brind Posts: 19041 Joined: 26th Oct 2003 Location: England | quotePosted at 18:36 on 6th May 2009 Say what you like, I reckon the Gurkhas have more right to stay here than some of the scrounging non English b......s that drain every ounce out of wealth out of our country, and then send the money home to finance their own needs elsewhere! Cheeky robbing b......s!! |
| lancashirelove Posts: 1986 Joined: 18th Feb 2009 Location: UK | quotePosted at 18:39 on 6th May 2009 calm down Ron, lol  hey gang, check Rons pulse, quick! |
Debbie Adams Posts: 2043 Joined: 8th Mar 2009 Location: USA | quotePosted at 18:48 on 6th May 2009 Just dropped in dont know what this is all about but I think you are right Michael about checking Ron's pulse,,lol I think his face is getting red in his picture,,,LOL |
| Ron Brind Posts: 19041 Joined: 26th Oct 2003 Location: England | quotePosted at 18:52 on 6th May 2009 Anna say calm down also Ron, and yes his face is red!! Very red, a whiskey or two, too many maybe? |
| Debbie Adams Posts: 2043 Joined: 8th Mar 2009 Location: USA | quotePosted at 18:53 on 6th May 2009  LMAOF!!!! |
| Xxxx Xxxx Posts: 292 Joined: 22nd Mar 2009 Location: Canada | quotePosted at 20:13 on 6th May 2009 This reminds me of a Hallowe'en party I attended long, long ago on a distant island..... a guy came in wearing a styrofoam cooler on his head. from Independent Minds: It was not only Gurkhas who fought for Britain
Thursday, 30 April 2009 at 09:49 am (UTC) There is a broader aspect to this question. During the Second World War and after very large numbers of troops fought for the British Army Airforce and Navy from all over the empire. If they, in Uganda or Pakistan or Jamaica or wherever are unable to get adequate medical care should they not also have the right to come to Britain for care? Are we going to differentiate between those Gurkhas whose units stayed in the British Army and Gurkhas who having fought for Britain in the Second World War served in units that were subsequently transferred to the Indian Army after independence? Perhaps it would be better to spend rather more money on providing a better standard of care to Gurkha's in Nepal than give them the right to come to Britain where ultimately they might end up living and dying in some miserable care home. away from family and culture. Maybe what we need instead is a world wide network of Chelsea Hospitals where those old warriors who fought for Britain could live out their lives in decency and pride. Edited by: Ceridwyn at:6th May 2009 20:21 |
Follow PicturesOfEngland.com on social media and help share the beauty of England....
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}