Ghurkas Win Court Battle

[Triple H]

Don't feed the Troll called Sebrof.

[manxy]

Congrats to the Ghurkas

[Sebrof]

Don't feed the Troll called Sebrof.

 

I suggest you do two things.

 

First, look up the definition of troll.

 

Second, try to understand that on every issue there is likely to be more than one point of view, and that yours is not invariably better than anybody else's.

 

If the UK were awash with space, and enjoyed harmonious relations between the races, I wouldn't care. But presently it is over-crowded and full of simmering tensions, which erupt periodically into violence. This is a bad idea, based on sentiment rather than facts and logic.

 

As I mentioned in an earlier post, people in Nepal are falling over themselves to get into the Gurkhas, which hardly suggests they have been mistreated.

 

S

[Skeddan]

If the UK were awash with space, and enjoyed harmonious relations between the races, I wouldn't care. But presently it is over-crowded and full of simmering tensions, which erupt periodically into violence. This is a bad idea, based on sentiment rather than facts and logic.

I'd think the Gurkhas could look after themselves and wouldn't be afraid of a few racist yobs if that's what you're worried about.

 

Otherwise it looks a bit like you think 'other races' should not be admitted if at all possible. There's always 'simmering tensions' - usually not racist as such but simply between any groups. Racial violence - when does it erupt? Usually in response to racism by police and authorities - so that's the thing to care about.

 

Giving them nationality - if that is indeed the case - might perhaps be based on sentiment rather than good reason - but I doubt it if that's what a court has decided is the right thing - they're not usually swayed by sentiment, but go by facts, law and logic.

[manshimajin]

Just for clarity -

 

Troll:

 

 

Ghurka:

 

 

Sebrof I am happily quite sure that you do not resemble either.

Our views obviously differ. I believe that people who have loyally served the UK should have priority in being allowed in there over those who do not like UK society and wish to radically change its customs once they have got in. Apart from anything else it is some indication of the mental ability to assimilate. I accept that it is not the only one - but its a pretty good starting point!

[Skeddan]

From what I could gather the decision applied to those who retired pre-1997. Gurkhas retired after that date already had pensions and right to settle in UK, but this was denied to the pre-1997 lot. The reason was that until 1997 the Gurkha base had been in Hong Kong, and after that date it moved to the UK - and HMG felt that unlike the post 1997 retirees, the pre-1997 lot didn't have 'close connection to the UK'. High Court Judge said this was 'irrational' and decided in favour of the Gurkhas.

 

That decision seems sound enough to me - I can't see how one could decide otherwise without doing violence to facts and logic - and insulting pretty much everyone who has served in HM forces by treating those in services as if there were mercenaries.

[Sebrof]

If the UK were awash with space, and enjoyed harmonious relations between the races, I wouldn't care. But presently it is over-crowded and full of simmering tensions, which erupt periodically into violence. This is a bad idea, based on sentiment rather than facts and logic.

I'd think the Gurkhas could look after themselves and wouldn't be afraid of a few racist yobs if that's what you're worried about.

 

I'm sure you're right there.

 

Otherwise it looks a bit like you think 'other races' should not be admitted if at all possible. There's always 'simmering tensions' - usually not racist as such but simply between any groups. Racial violence - when does it erupt? Usually in response to racism by police and authorities - so that's the thing to care about.

 

There are two aspects here. First and foremost, England is so over-crowded that I don't think we should be letting anybody in. And second, if more people are to be allowed in, it would be better if they were European because they will be assimilated much more easily. Presently the UK has huge ghettoes of non-Europeans who are living totally separate lives. This breeds problems, as we have seen. Fortunately not yet on the scale of Paris.

 

Giving them nationality - if that is indeed the case - might perhaps be based on sentiment rather than good reason - but I doubt it if that's what a court has decided is the right thing - they're not usually swayed by sentiment, but go by facts, law and logic.

 

This thread has shown how strongly people feel about this, and I am convinced the judge was swayed by having views sympathtic to the Gurkhas. This is what he said: "the Gurkhas' long service, conspicuous acts of bravery and loyalty to the Crown all pointed to a "moral debt of honour" and gratitude felt by British people."

 

Those Gurkhas who were based in Britain already had a right to remain. This ruling applies to those based in Hong Kong. It is quite possible that some of them have never visited Britain at all in their lives. The judgement effectively said "these are plucky little fellows, so they can come and stay". That was the extent of the "facts, law and logic".

 

S

[Sebrof]

Just for clarity -

 

Troll:

 

 

Ghurka:

 

 

Sebrof I am happily quite sure that you do not resemble either.

Our views obviously differ. I believe that people who have loyally served the UK should have priority in being allowed in there over those who do not like UK society and wish to radically change its customs once they have got in. Apart from anything else it is some indication of the mental ability to assimilate. I accept that it is not the only one - but its a pretty good starting point!

 

You're quite right, Manshimajin, I resemble neither.

 

I am dead against ANY immigration into the UK, but I happily concede that the Gurkhas will probably make reasonable citizens.

 

S

[P.K.]

The judgement effectively said "these are plucky little fellows, so they can come and stay". That was the extent of the "facts, law and logic".

The judgement also effectively said that "Despite how we view ourselves in the civilised world we should never forget that mostly on Planet Earth power comes from the barrel of a gun". Napoleon coined it with "God is on the side of the big battalions". So the likes of smug bastard Sebrof can only sit in comfort and expound his version of bollocks simply because there are still those like the Gurkhas who are prepared to go and risk their lives to do his killing for him. It is said that poor boys make the best soldiers and Nepal is dirt poor. If I understand this correctly it's not about EU citizenship anyway but just right of abode in the UK with the free health service etc that comes with it. So in the grand scheme of things the numbers involved are a bit of an irrelevance but if Sebrof is that worried about the numbers that may come into the UK well Sebrof, why don't you simply vote with your feet and leave? Simple as. I understand Zimbabwe is trying to encourage immigration as they seem to be losing folks at quite a rate. If you feel that strongly about it why don't you give it a go as they're not expecting an influx of Nepalese into Zimbabwe any time soon...

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Sebrof I am happily quite sure that you do not resemble either.

Our views obviously differ. I believe that people who have loyally served the UK should have priority in being allowed in there over those who do not like UK society and wish to radically change its customs once they have got in. Apart from anything else it is some indication of the mental ability to assimilate. I accept that it is not the only one - but its a pretty good starting point!

 

There are two aspects here. First and foremost, England is so over-crowded that I don't think we should be letting anybody in. And second, if more people are to be allowed in, it would be better if they were European because they will be assimilated much more easily. Presently the UK has huge ghettoes of non-Europeans who are living totally separate lives. This breeds problems, as we have seen. Fortunately not yet on the scale of Paris.

 

Lets be clear, the Gurkhas served the UK Government, not the UK or the betterment of the UK people itself, so seen in this light it doesn't make a difference to their residency unless the government looks favourably upon those who serve in the armed forces, which it clearly does not.

 

I am a bit puzzled about this loyalty issue. Why do the Gurkhas choose to join the British forces rather than their own Nepalese forces? Are they paid more? Is it about loyalty?

 

You do seem to have some Daily Mailesque views: "...Radically changing customs" and "...mental ability to assimilate", oh my god! There have hardly been any RADICAL changes made or proposed by those who have recently moved over here. British customs are not going to disappear. What customs are you talking about?

And why should these people ASSIMILATE? I see no requirement for them to completely lose their culture and adopt the British. Why should they? People should be free to travel the globe and settle where they like and not have to RADICALLY change themselves to calm the racist and xenophobic fears of the indigenous population.

 

I have read instances in the papers when some Muslim idiot is being treated preferentially because of their religion after they had complained or grumbled about something. Unfortunately, these people are not told to simply make do, or even 'tough shit' because there is absolutely no requirement to sidestep people because of their religious beliefs. But I think the idea of assimilation is repugnant. It is about pressuring people to lose their identity and reform another one which is more acceptable. Assimilation is just a way of making people more acceptable.

 

The over-crowdedness of of the UK is not an issue in my view. Yes, the country is densely populated, but there are far more densely populated areas in the world. But even if density was a very real problem, there is little that can be done about it, and in fact I don't think anything in the conventional sense should be done about, i.e. having a more strict immigration policy. It is a problem, however, that these communities form ghettoes as it limits the cultural exchanged between these peoples. It is as much a product of these peoples own racism (and I use the term loosely) and that of the 'indigenous' population.

 

But you are talking about assimilation too. Maybe one of the reasons why these people don't want mix is because they quite rightly are telling everyone else to piss off, that they do not wish to assimilate and lose their culture. Maybe they would be far more willing to simply communicate and mix, but not integrate and assimilate. It is not that I don't recognise the problems the problems with 'ghettoes' area or even areas which are wholly of a particular ethnic group, but given the racism in Britain and the racism of those moving here it is something that may be with us for a while. I don't think having Euopean settlers over the UK makes that much of a difference and I think it racist to differentiate between what region a person is coming from. Yes the cultural differences will be less profound, but other Europeans would be no more willing to assimilate than anyone else.

 

I am convinced the judge was swayed by having views sympathtic to the Gurkhas. This is what he said: "the Gurkhas' long service, conspicuous acts of bravery and loyalty to the Crown all pointed to a "moral debt of honour" and gratitude felt by British people."

 

Agreed. I might have a distinct lack of understanding where the law is concerned but how can a judge be impartial? They are human for starters, with a culture background and own opinions on things. It is him who sees it as a 'moral debt of honour'. Such a thing is an aritificial concept. And it is certainly his opinion that the British people feel gratitude.

 

I am dead against ANY immigration into the UK, but I happily concede that the Gurkhas will probably make reasonable citizens.

 

...but they are foreign, so we're not sure, who knows? As long as they behave like decent english gentleman they are ok in my books

[bluemonday]

So if this terrible threat isn't nipped in the bud, in a few years time; there'll be thousands of Gurkhas living in a traditional Nepalese village on the slopes of Barrule.

 

The weak morning sunlight glinting on their razor sharp Kukris as with fierce cries of Ayoo Gurkhali! they sweep down the slopes to Ramsey to pillage Shoprite and buy books at St Pauls bookshop.

[Sebrof]

You do seem to have some Daily Mailesque views: "...Radically changing customs" and "...mental ability to assimilate", oh my god! There have hardly been any RADICAL changes made or proposed by those who have recently moved over here. British customs are not going to disappear. What customs are you talking about?

 

These were the OP's words, not mine.

 

And why should these people ASSIMILATE? I see no requirement for them to completely lose their culture and adopt the British. Why should they? People should be free to travel the globe and settle where they like and not have to RADICALLY change themselves to calm the racist and xenophobic fears of the indigenous population.

 

Generally speaking, the USA has tried to make immigrants become apple-pie Americans, whilst Europeans have tended to let people continue to do their own thing. In my view, the American way has worked better; although there are tensions in America, these are mainly to do with the "indigenous" black population, and illegal Hispanics. There seems to be little problem with immigrants from the Middle East, the sub-continent, and points East.

 

I am therefore, on pragmatic grounds, in favour of immigrants being assimilated into the culture and traditions of their host nation.

 

I have read instances in the papers when some Muslim idiot is being treated preferentially because of their religion after they had complained or grumbled about something. Unfortunately, these people are not told to simply make do, or even 'tough shit' because there is absolutely no requirement to sidestep people because of their religious beliefs. But I think the idea of assimilation is repugnant. It is about pressuring people to lose their identity and reform another one which is more acceptable. Assimilation is just a way of making people more acceptable.

 

Nobody forced people to come here. "When in Rome........" has always seemed a pretty good motto to me.

 

The over-crowdedness of of the UK is not an issue in my view. Yes, the country is densely populated, but there are far more densely populated areas in the world. But even if density was a very real problem, there is little that can be done about it, and in fact I don't think anything in the conventional sense should be done about, i.e. having a more strict immigration policy. It is a problem, however, that these communities form ghettoes as it limits the cultural exchanged between these peoples. It is as much a product of these peoples own racism (and I use the term loosely) and that of the 'indigenous' population.

 

Sorry, but here I think you are completely wrong. Over-population is the root cause of most of the problems we have, globally and locally. Over-fishing, pollution, high house prices, poor air quality, the coming wars over water, immigration, oil prices, you name it.

 

But you are talking about assimilation too. Maybe one of the reasons why these people don't want mix is because they quite rightly are telling everyone else to piss off, that they do not wish to assimilate and lose their culture. Maybe they would be far more willing to simply communicate and mix, but not integrate and assimilate. It is not that I don't recognise the problems the problems with 'ghettoes' area or even areas which are wholly of a particular ethnic group, but given the racism in Britain and the racism of those moving here it is something that may be with us for a while. I don't think having Euopean settlers over the UK makes that much of a difference and I think it racist to differentiate between what region a person is coming from. Yes the cultural differences will be less profound, but other Europeans would be no more willing to assimilate than anyone else.

 

I disagree. Show me a second generation Polish immigrant who still speaks Polish as a first language. European immigrants tend to become wholly assimilated in two generations, despite retaining cultural and family ties with their original home country. It's because we have so much in common to start with.

 

As far as I am concerned, this is not racism, it's being practical. I have Muslim and Hindu friends and discuss these matters with them. They recognise the problem themselves, but they don't live in the ghettoes. They have assimilated. They play golf.

 

Anyway, this is drifting from Gurkhas, and I am running out of arguments. Thank you for debating the issue rather than resorting to name-calling.

 

S

[Lonan3]

They've spent all these years convincing the Ghurkas that Britain was not only a mighty nation but a virtual paradise on earth. Imagine the reaction if they were allowed to live there and discover that its actually the asshole of the world.

[P.K.]

As far as I am concerned, this is not racism, it's being practical. I have Muslim and Hindu friends and discuss these matters with them. They recognise the problem themselves, but they don't live in the ghettoes. They have assimilated. They play golf.

Taken a stroll through Bradford recently? They're a bit short of golf courses I'm afraid...

[manshimajin]

Taken a stroll through Bradford recently? They're a bit short of golf courses I'm afraid...

 

Actually, I have - and it's a very nice place, with terrific access to some of the finest scenery and best ancient monuments in the UK. Architecturally much nicer than Leeds.