Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#1
The Gurkha,s it was only last week that four of them were killed and they were from Folkestone and what reward have they got from the blues,well 150 of them are to lose their jobs, how can that be in the time of war and they are cuting back the army,are they mad? it is a YES to that'
The Gurkha are the best fighter at hand to hand in the world and we are slowy geting rid of them,it is the blues we need to get rid of not the Gurkha.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
no surprise vic, once joanna lumley stuck her oar in they ceased to be the cheap option.
we can expect the ghurkas to be disbanded over a period of time, not too quickly or the public will make a fuss.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#3
Howard
Thats the very point I made at the time of the furore that once the Ghurkas obtained full pay,conditions and the right of abode that they would no longer be a 'cheap mercenary fighting force' and pressure would be brought down to replace them with British troops. I was shot down in flames by most of the forum at that time.
So as much as I grieve their loss of life a rod was made for their own back. So Vic who supported their claim lacked foresight and now has no right to complain.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#4
They should not have been acheap mercenary,in the first place,I have seved with them,and they are the best.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
i remember that at the time marek, unfortunately emotion took over from reason with an actress using the media to gain attention.
the british army will be the worse for losing them, only last week another got a gong for bravery in afghanistan.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#6
The Armed Forces are to scale down about 17,000 military personel, adding to the numbers already deducted. So it is not surprising that the Gurkas are among them.
The idea of Gurkas being paid less money stemmed from the fact that in Nepal, the average wage is a fraction of Britain's. This meant that a Gurka could enjoy a dignified life in Nepal after serving in the British Army. Nothing unfair in that.
As for sentimentalism, Vic, what about the many British soldiers who have been decommissioned, and who will be in the near future. Is it any less unfair?
Soldiers in the Army cannot be separated into priviledged and less priviledged, and bravery is a special characteristic of British soldiers in all times.
As for hand to hand fighting, the British Army adopted the bayonet from the Highlanders, and the Highlanders cannot be second to any other soldier in the British Army.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#7
You can not win wars by cuting back your army,how can you expect to get the very best from them when they know that they could be out of a job when they come home,and like us they have familys to look after to,but we are not puting our lifes on the line when we go to work like they are.
They all deserve better then that.
The blues are are doing abetter job at destroying our armed forces then the enemy.
#8
Agrees with Vic .
#9
I don't understand your arguement Alexander. If a Ghurka or any other soldier is serving with the British Army he or she should be paid exactly the same. If they then choose to live in their own country of origin, and that makes them a very rich person, I am sure that most of them would use this money to ensure a better standard of living for their families.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
What Alex referring was correct when the Ghurkas main base was Hong Kong. You are right Diana, that is no longer a justification as they are based in the UK.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#11
spotted this in the london road today, maybe they should have added after the "be the best" bit, until we throw you on the scrapheap.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#12
It's cheaper to replace seasoned soldiers on their maximum pay say £30 k with a raw recruit on a starting salary of £16k.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
