Now stop trying to argue you your betters and do something about building some sort of economy Twisted Evil
LETS FACE IT Argentenian IS BROKE THEY CAN NOT AFFORD TO GO TO WAR. AND IF THEY DID THEY WOULD ONLY GET THEY BUTT KICKED AGAIN!!!
CHALLGER 2 IS THE MOST POWERFULL TANK IN THE WORLD. (BEST ARMOUR BEST GUN AND SO ON)
Apache AH Mk1 WOULD BLOW ANY ARGIE UP
227mm Multiple Launched Rocket System (MLRS) BRING IT ON BABY!!
Typhoon!!!
Hmmm. Well, here are the requirements for enlising in the US Army from the official web site of the US Army. Scroll to the bottom of the page and read the requirements for enlisting. You can earn a college education in the US military, but notice that they will not give you a high school education - you must ALREADY have a high school education to enlist in the US military. That has been a requirement for many, many years. So, um, you obviously lie. 
Trying to support your viewpoint by making false statements does not help you. Your credibility just went way, way down.
The fact that you believe that is disturbing. :shock:
…[/quote]
Ironman, what exactly do you find disturbing about that ?
The Ghurkas are trained as other members of the British Army and do their job well.
The face that they were not born in the UK should have nothing to do with their soldiering ability, if you believe it has then it is my turn to find your views disturbing.
If you take the time to study Op Corporate even briefly, you will see how many troops are were available at the time and this should give you some insight into the Orbat of the Task Force. There are of course other factors such as Regimental pride, but availability was as ever the driving force behind it.
Or is it just the fact that they are not British citizens that disturbs you ?
Do you believe that only citizens of a country should fight for that country ?
I’m really intrigued as to your reasons for this ostensibly odd post.
Firstly the US marine corps was not the unit you were referring to when yourself and Uninformed Erwin decided to discuss the Harrier capability versus the Mirage. The only aircraft flown by the British Navy are Flown by the Fleet Air arm. Entirely seperate entity.
Gurkhas choose to join the British army becasue it is a remarkably well paid job, but also because it brings great prestige to a family of Gurkha descent to serve in their ranks. The Gurkhas are not cannon fodder for the Brits to send to their deaths, They are remarkably well trained and very effective fighting force and that is what the British Military want in their soldiers - Comments to do with Norse Beserkers etc are completely at home in this thread. The psychological effect of having a feared body of men fighting on your side damges the enemies will-to-fight. The gurkhas have a mystique about them, their violence and their Kukri’s. The Mystique benefits the British army. Whilst not special forces they are Viewed as “special” troops due to their tenacity and fervour in conflict. It is for this reason we deploy them to battlefields, and as to cries that this is cowardice, We have an army of many thousands of men, all of whom will at some point be called on to serve their country and possibly fight or die for it. we do not expect all of our soldiers to survive. We no more hide behind Gurkha blood than we do the blood of scots or welsh who also fight in the British army. Soldiers are asked to be prepared to die for their country thats the deal!
RE: citizenship and the US military view this - http://images.radcity.net/5781/985381.wmv
I think we even get a speech from George Bush, sorry mate.
to explain further. for those that cant view the film. it shows Members of the US military already serving recieveing citizenship and swearing the pledge of allegiance. This is all of course once they are in the Military. IRONMAN why am I more aware of the existence of this facet of your constitution than you are?
RE: not an imperial force -
an empire neednt be headed by an Emporer or King. The USSR had an empire and they had a Politburo, lets not go down that route. Lets stick to the fact that the Jewel in the Crown of the British Empire was founded not by expeditionary forces or British soldiers but by a trading company called the “East India Trading Company” It is possible to build an empire through trade and commerce as well military might. I beleive american has one of the largest import export economies operating in the world today with this much trade with the outside world, it is possible (even if you claim that you would then choose not to) to Influence the economies of many other smaller nations… The American economy is a great tool for power, through reward and punishment it can control many smaller states, the free market economy and capitalism and flow of currency etc are wonderful tools for this practice, I am not a communist nor a socialist, nor a radical conservative, but a basic grade of economic knowledge would ratify my claim.
RE: Oil,
You neednt “use” the oil in Iraq, to hold control over its movement is enough to benefit your own economy. There is a finite amount of Oil in existence, as supplies dwindle which they will in the next thirty years it will become more and more valuable (MAD MAX my friend, its all about MAD MAX) Then American oil will become more valuable and lucrative. surely if America can influence middle Eastern oil revenue, then it stands to benefit.
RE: Gurkha recruitment
The GCSE level explanation of Indian amalgamation, was necessary as at times in Eartlier posts you ahd suggested they were a conscripted force. Equally if I am to explain that they are more than a militia but a prestigious unit then it is necessary to show they are steeped in History and have a long record with HM forces. The same cannot be said of the warlords that were armed in various Military campaigns put forth by Fort Benning. The Respect we show the gurkha’s and the reason that many travel for days merely to attend selection in Pokara, and have been known to refuse to travel home if they fail selection is becasue it is a privilege to fight in their ranks. Small boys in the Himalaya dream of wearing crosses Kukris in a way that small boys from Idaho and the midwest dream of getting to fight for their army. It is a choice between fighting in the Nepalese army - (done much recently?) or the British Army. We want them to fight for us because of their fierce loyalty and fighting spirit. something not found in weeny waster kids that sit in internet chatrooms discussing their “favourite gun?” and “which computer game is most like real conflict?”
and I quote
“you don’t like the flak Britain is taking for sending foreigners into war on foot in the Faulklands while British soldiers sat in their air craft carriers by the thousands listening to reports on the COM and playing cards, but it isn’t working”
Anyone that has been to Port San Carlos, want to explain to IRONMAN what exactly happened in Bombers alley, Soldiers were posted with rifles to the Bridge of the Support vessels to put smal arms fire onto the inbound Argentine planes, we were desperately underprotected in San Carlos Water, the boat was the last place anyone would have wanted to keep their infantry? anyone that has seen Bluff Cove or North Fitzroy or Pleasant Sound want to give this boy an Idea of how difficult it is to play cards when your troop carrier is on fire? if we had sent the troops in to play cards would it not have been simpler not to have sent them at all. It is very poor judgement on your part to suggest that our boys went their to sit on ships when they were infantry. They were on the ships to get to their insertion points to yomp to stanley to liberate the Islands. they all were. certain troops didnt get to Stanley they died fighting through, or on the troop ships, so have some respect for the fallen. You my son are an ignoramous (MOD please do not edit that, I believe he is, the facts show he is, this is not an offensive comment it is an observation - that may cause him offence)
RE: War for oil
“and that would insure the US’s ability to fully continue functioning industrially, even when other nations have run out of oil and thier industries are brought to a stand-still. Betcha didn’t know that either eh? War for oil? LMAO”
Firstly i presume you meant Ensure - youre speaking my language so get it right.
World supplies of oil will dwindle and fall through. Whoever holds the most oil will control the price of crude. Brent crude is going to run out Alaskan Crude will run out, Middle Eastern crude will run out. Now imagine that you were garuanteed to always owe one oil supply, limited as it is “It will always be yours.”
It would be good practice to hold it for as long as possible, price goes up with demand etc. (consider the principal of Ebay) Now imagine that you could force some of the other sellers to sell at lower prices, by artificially deflating the market. They would sell their produce at a loss, or a significant reduction in profit. suddenly this “other” seller gets all his produce bought friom his stock of mineral wealth is gone! What does this mean for the other parties who holdthe same item? There is a gap in the market that needs to be filled. As you state in your argument, the US will hold oil to successfully manage its industry for many years to come. but suppose I had an industrial nation that was dependent on oil, and I needed some, how much would I pay the states to get a couple of barrels of crude over my way?
Here Endeth the lesson
(P.s. “If I cant afford to buy oil - I’ll invade” does not count as a response!)
RE: Gassing of the Northern Kurds.
The US state department was arming Iraq with WMD right up until the year that Iraq invaded Kuwait. The US administration ignored the reported human rights abuses because whilst he may be a bastard he is our bastard was a pervading aspect of politics at the time. Its called realism its supported by a “Maersheimer” read a book, not a forum and (dont research Gurkha’s on this website)
Anyway. arming the Kurds during teh libeartion of Iraq was a polticial move you had the choice to either arm foreign troops or not to, you chose to arm them. You couldnt field a large enough force or chose not to send that many troops into theatre so you utilised local forces. Its Ok they all do it! you dont have to be ashamed. Arming them did not prevent genocide, it ensured a victory it was a tactical decision to arm local groups, to ensure a military victory in Iraq. If the Kurds had not been gassed in earlier years It would still ahve been beneficial to arm them. More firepower bought to bear on the Iraqi regime, a shorter conflict when all is said and done.
RE: we wont be sending Iraqi troops elsewhere.
No you are right you wont, we have a small unit of vicious soldiers who are very good at their jobs. We admire their ability to fight and so each year invite a new group of them to fight with us. We select the best, they come to the United kingdom and learn their trade and join their regiment. their wages are remarkable compared to the alternative in Nepal.
The US will accomplish their goal in Iraq, and then F-O with little or no thought for the troops that died alongside them and certainly no intention of ever honouring the men that died fighting to protect the US soldiers.
Gurkhas fight alongside the British born soldiers. and it so happens that as soldiers its common sense to protect your oppo, or else you get shat on. No soldier is in the army as a sandbag!
get your head down, and do some homework. in 1998 there was only 1 place for every 300 applicants. these are men that want to fight, its a bit of a bastard if your on the other end ofthe kukri Id agree, but if we find a supply of men that want to fight for us. who are we to say no! NB we had only 1 place for every 300 applicants, if your claim that we want to hide behind them is to hold water then surely there is a BMF’ing hole right there. Why not have a gurkha brigarde 300 times the size, then we would never have to deploy a caucasian soldier!
But we dont do we, We have rigorous selection carried out at Pokara and only take the best, because we dont want casualties in our ranks. your a fool to claim otherwise.
Our Gurkha regiments have been made smaller recently and amalgamated. The 6th Queens gurkha riflesfounded in 1817 was disbanded and cutback in 1995 to become the first battalion royal Gurkha rifles. this is not the action of an army looking to spill foreign blood instead of our own.
chew on that, then give us a broadside from the “USS Pram” when you feel the need.
Their have been 17 VC’s awarded to Gurkas since 1911. “For Valour” Do not suggest that these awards are given lightly, Gurkhas are respected and valued members of our forces, not just human shields to protect our soldiers who equally joined up in order to fight, and if necessary die.
Hmmm. Well, here are the requirements for enlising in the US Army from the official web site of the US Army. Scroll to the bottom of the page and read the requirements for enlisting. You can earn a college education in the US military, but notice that they will not give you a high school education - you must ALREADY have a high school education to enlist in the US military. That has been a requirement for many, many years. So, um, you obviously lie.
Trying to support your viewpoint by making false statements does not help you. Your credibility just went way, way down.
http://www.goarmy.com/JobCatList.do?fw=careerindex[/quote]
Ironman, I think perhaps Bluffcove means that it is indeed possible to obtain a fake High School Diploma in order to join the US armed forces.
If you believe this is a mistaken assumption then you are at liberty to say so, but baldly stating that another member is a liar does not seem to fall within your remit.
sorry that this is an internet source, but,
IRONMAN, its time to gather those toys back into your pram, think you should read this
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200409/quirkh
www.erinysinternational.com/iraq/iraq.shtml paragraph in the bottom left hand corner seems to suggest the US is using “contracted” soldiers to defend its engineers in Iraq.
http://www.dyn-intl.com/customers/ seems these guys are employed by the US to do all sorts of things.
Im not saying its wrong, Im saying it happens governments start wars and want to win them. if you can do so by paying an external contractor then why not?
The Gurkhas are a recognised part of HM forces. These guys are in it for the money, and profit, the Gurkhas fight for their reasons. I’d suggest hte guys employed in teh above sectors fight for cash, or thrills.
I repeat this is a fact, my opinion regarding its legitimacy is secondary, Id jsut like IRONMAN to agree the US employs foreigners to fight for it in a fashion that could be termed mercenary, or at least more mercenary than the Gurkha’s
The Brits do too, Im not saying we are morally superior just that you need to realise all fighting nations are tarred with a similair brush
If ‘Erwin Schätzer’ is unable to identify the questions I shall repost them later.
When you say I should act in ‘a more grown-up manner’ in what way do you mean ?
I have asked questions without resorting to profanity, racism or poorly concealed insults based on homophobia.
When I have written that someone posts in a childlike fashion it is a statement of fact, ‘shouting’ (ie using upper case letters,) and abuse have no place in an adult discussion.
I believe that I have followed the forum rules as posted, which is more than can be said for certain other members.
I understand that FW-190 Pilot is a moderator too, and he suggests that posting ‘fake news’ should be a banning offence and the sending of offensive PMs can result in the sender being from using the PM system again.
I have not asked for ‘Erwin’ to be banned despite his flagrant disregard for the rules, rather I thought and hoped that he would be able to participate in a mature debate using proven facts rather than inflammatory and grossly inaccurate ‘information’ propogated by extremist political organisations.
However I accept that I may have been mistaken, and that sadly he is unable to do so.
how many of the warlords fighting for the US at present will be commemorated like this?
Erwin, depth your of out You are,
USE A TRANSLATOR
This Topic is locked untill Fw190 and I figure out what we want to do with it. Do not post any topics or replies in any forum dealing with the Falklands conflict as it will be deleted.
I guess the British don’t know much about Americans. Kiddo, I AM an American. Like I said, how do you explain to Brits what it means to be an American?
“The Gurkhas have been on the British frontlines since 1815. More than 200,000 enlisted for the First World War, and a tenth of their number were killed or injured. In the Second World War, 250,000 Gurkhas fought the Germans in famous battles such as Monte Casino and Tobruk and ruthless Japanese soldiers in the Far East, again suffering heavy casualties.
Better to Die than to Be a Coward. That is the motto of the hill men recruited into the British Army. But that system - which plucked thousands of youths from tiny, impoverished villages, trained them and showed them the world - is in crisis. Today there are 300 applicants for every vacancy and some who fail commit suicide rather than face the disgrace they bring upon their families.”
http://www.john-parker.co.uk/thegurkhas.htm
No, you have a big cup of Shut the Fluck Up about the Gurkhas NOT being used as front line soldiers for Britain, as you Brits claim.
It seems that the British not only send them into battle, but they also mistreat them, and this got a whole bunch of prominent people in Nepal to get something legal going with financial support from the Canadians:
World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerence
“Whereas the Kathmandu Declaration adopted by the participants of the International Conference on the Plight of the Gurkhas held in Kathmandu on September 18-20, 1999 details ways in which discrimination by the United Kingdom against the Gurkhas in the British Army has manifested itself.”
http://www.hri.ca/racism/Submitted/Country/gurkhas.shtml
It seems also that the Gurkha pensions are nbased on Indian Army pensions, which one can only assume is something notably less than that of British soldiers.
And the stink just gets higher with a sperate issure:
"The claimants, ex-Gurkhas of the British Army accuse the British Government of discrimination and unequal treatment. Nepalese Gurkha soldiers have been recruited into the British Army for almost two hundred years. Many thousands of them lost their lives while fighting on behalf of Britain in many bloody battles in the First and Second World Wars. Since the 1947 Tripartite Agreement between India, Nepal and UK, their recruitment into the British Army has been regulated by that agreement, which linked remuneration of Gurkhas to the Indian Army’s Pay Code, resulting in a significant disparity in the payment of salaries and pensions between British Gurkhas and other British soldiers.
As a result of this disparity, serving Gurkhas were paid substantially less than other British soldiers and over 30,000 Gurkhas retired from service in the British Army without an adequate pension and benefits. Moreover, while serving, Gurkhas suffered discrimination in their everyday life. Consequently, Gurkhas started proceedings against the UK government on the basis of several violations of their human rights through applications for judicial review.
The main discrimination case resulted in the Ministry of Defence conceding that all non-financial discrimination must end, apart from accompanied leave rules. Thus discrimination about different rules on weekend leave, accommodation, dress code, religion, food, mess facilities, baggage allowance and other matters has ended. The case concerning pay, pensions and accompanied leave was heard in the High Court from 17-21 February 2003 before Sullivan J.
On 21 February 2003 Sullivan J gave judgment. On accompanied leave he found that the 1947 Tripartite Agreement, between the UK, India and Nepal, does not justify the different treatment of Gurkhas. The UK Government relied on a rule that allowed the Gurkha soldier to be with his family for a maximum of 3 out of 15 years. The judge ruled that the Ministry of Defence bring this policy into line with the rules for British soldiers. However, he refused to give the Gurkhas a declaration that the law did not allow this discrimination. Instead it was left to the discretion of the Ministry of Defence as to how and when to review and change this policy. This aspect of the judgment is to be appealed.
As for pay and pensions, the judge dealt with these as a single issue. The Gurkhas had accepted that it was lawful for there to be some differential between a Gurkha pension and a British soldier pension as the cost of living in Nepal is cheaper, and the majority of Gurkhas retire to Nepal. The judge found that once this was accepted it then became a question of whether the differential was such as to be irrational. The judge found it was not. Further, he said that the Gurkhas were not analogous to British soldiers because they were retiring to Nepal.
Both aspects of this judgment on pay and pensions will be appealed. In relation to the issue of “analogous”, the claimants will say it is self-evident that Gurkhas ought to be compared to British soldiers. They serve in the same army, with loyalty to the British crown. They fight alongside each other, subject to broadly similar terms and conditions, and any differences in these terms and conditions cannot now be relied on by the Ministry of Defence to justify their own discrimination. While it is obvious that a difference arises at the end of service, with most Gurkhas retiring to Nepal and most British to the UK, that is not the end of the matter. Some British go to live in other parts of the world, cheaper than the UK, and some Gurkhas retire in the UK. As for justification, it is self-evident that the Ministry of Defence have never carried out a proper justification exercise to establish what differential in pensions is proportionate.
The point of law arising from this case will have major implications for other human rights and discrimination cases. Post Human Rights Act 1998 it can be argued that where there are violations of human rights, especially in the sensitive areas of race or sex discrimination, the body responsible must now undergo a radical change of approach. Previously, it was enough to satisfy a court, if challenged, that the public body was not behaving rationally. Now the human rights element requires such discrimination to be justified, and to be proportionate. Therefore, it is argued that such a justification exercise should be in writing, especially in a case of this importance and sensitivity, and must be coherent and rational."
"Gurkha Prisoners of War Case
Many ex-Gurkhas were captured by the Japanese during the Second World War. British soldiers have received an ex-gratia payment of £10,000. The UK Government refused to pay the ex-Gurkhas saying that they were not fighting for the British during the Second World War but were in the Indian Army. Our clients noted that white and European officers of the Indian Army, and specifically Gurkha officers, had received the payment and, therefore, their exclusion from this scheme was for reasons of racial discrimination. On 30 November 2002 a judgment of the High Court ruled in favour of our clients. Mr Justice McCombe found that the decision was tainted by racial discrimination and repugnant to the “principle of equality which is at the cornerstone of our system.”
The Ministry of Defence appealed the case but then in a remarkable defeat it withdrew its appeal in the light of new evidence introduced by the PIL team on behalf of our clients. The collapse of the MOD’s case means that the entire compensation scheme will now have to be overhauled and payments made to the three elderly claimants who live in Nepal and to the 343 other Gurkha POWs, previously denied compensation. The High Court decision will be crucial to future discrimination cases."
http://www.publicinterestlawyers.co.uk/gurkhas_litigation.htm
Appearently, there are a lot of people who think that using Gurkhas is not only distasteful, but sad because the British themselves won’t even treat them the same as they do native Brits.
So um, there you have it.
“Secondly, Nepal was and is a poor country. This, combined with the fact that Nepal had (and retains some remnants of) a caste system, made any opportunity to make one’s way in the world quite desirable. The Gurkhas were essentially recruited from every caste, so as a result, hundreds (or even thousands) of young Nepalese men apply to join the Gurkhas for every slot available in the Brigade of Gurkhas (something on the order of 28,000 applicants for 200 openings). This was due not only to the prospect of obtaining a pension and good standards of pay, the 10 month basic training of Gurkhas also included education in some skills, such as language and manners expected of the crown’s soldiers. This may not sound like much, but for some aspiring Gurkhas a century or more ago, it may have been their only chance at formal schooling.”
http://anticipatoryretaliation.mu.nu/archives/043872.php
"The GAESO delegation includes Captain Pahalman Gurung, 82, and Hukum Singh Pun, 85, who were both imprisoned by the Japanese. “I was kept as a PoW by the Japanese for four and a half years,” Pun said. “We fought against the Japanese bravely with our Khukuris (Nepali knives) but our battalion was finally overcome by them and we were taken as prisoners of war between 1941 and 1945. “In the battle, many Japanese and our brothers were killed,” he said.
“But after the war, the British government sent us back without pay or pension.” "
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_29-10-2002_pg4_15
Now, I can understand Britain wanting excellent soldiers, and I do not doubt that the Gurkhas are that, But the idea of some British General sitting at a table saying…
“Hey, lets figure out who some of the fiercest fighters in the third-world world are, then go over there and offer them a paltry salary to fight for us. It could save British lives!”
…is simply unpaletable to Americans.
As you enjoy your steeming hot mug of Shut the Fluck Up, allow yourself to smell the bullsh*t you blathered about how the US has a similar singular foreign source of foreign tribesmen as it’s front line fodder.
As you enjoy your steeming hot mug of Shut the Fluck Up, allow yourself to smell the bullsh*t you blathered about how the US has a similar singular foreign source of foreign tribesmen as it’s front line fodder.[/quote]
Do you even understand the term “front line troops”?
And I’ll be more than happy to retract any post of mine you can refer to where I made the statement you claim above.
You seem to prefer to change the subject, rather than prove your own points, but that’s hardly surprising, since you have had several opportunities to do so over the last week or so, since I first asked you to back up your claims that the British used the Gurkhas in front of ethnically British troops, or played cards while they sent Gurkhas to fight in the Falklands.
And one more time, sonny, I am not a “kiddo”.
Personally, I don’t deny that the Gurkhas have recieved rough and unequal treatment with regards to conditions and pensions; but your original statement that started all this off, was that Gurkhas in the Falklands war were sent into battle ahead of British troops in order to save caucasian lives. Obviously, as the Gurkhas didn’t go into action in the Falklands, this is not true, and it is not true to say that the Gurkhas have been recruited in order to save British lives, rather, they were originally recruited because there simply weren’t enough Brits to maintain the size of Army that we needed, and tbh, there still aren’t.
I don’t disagree with anything you have written above, except for your previous assertion that the Gurkhas are used when caucasian troops are not, as caucasian lives are “more valuable”, this is simply not true. If you look at the operational deployments of the British forces recently, I think you will find that it is the Parachute Regiment and the Royal Marines who have had the most ‘sharp end’ work, along with possibly the Royal Green Jackets. The Gurkha battalions are deployed in the same roles etc. as any of the counties Regiments, to equally dangerous or safe tasks.
As to the American recruitment of foreign nationals to serve in the US armed forces in return for citizenship, well, that doesn’t seem significantly different. On the one hand, the Gurkhas have a weight of tradition and prestige in the British Army and their own society which imho is something to be respected, not looked down upon with scorn. The US’ approach lacks that element, but it seems like a reasonably pragmatic approach, although the security considerations seem a bit risky. I do think that an American who criticizes the Gurkha tradition without getting their own house ‘in order’ is being a hypocrite however, neither country is behaving in a worse or better manner. I suggest that this is probably the opinion of many on this board, you are only taking so much flak because you seem convinced that we are scum whilst the US is above reproach in this matter.
No, you have a big cup of Shut the Fluck Up about the Gurkhas NOT being used as front line soldiers for Britain, as you Brits claim.
We have repeatedly said that they are deployed like any other light infantry, not that they aren’t used in the front line. You have claimed repeatedly that they are sent in first, and that we hide behind them, and there was one post where you gave the implication of them being sent in with only their knives, which you appear to have “sanitised” (words to the effect of “what chance did they have with just knives”). You put those words in our mouths.
But as far as I’m aware, and I stand to be corrected, it’s due to the tri-partite agreement regarding their pay and pensions.
Ironman,
I appreciate that you have an agenda here but have you actually asked serving or ex members of the Nepalese units in the British Army whether they see themselves as victims?
Political correctness is a middle class invention created to hide their own prejudices and hatred of democracy amongst the masses.
I have had the honour of serving with these soldiers and I can assure you that they would be disgusted by you opinions. I would also advise you to respond in a logical fashion rather than in the usual PC fashion of insulting and threatening anyone who doesn’t agree with your view.
MiB, who has no political agenda.
IRONMAN: Exactly how many Gurkhas have you spoken to? How many have you worked with? Do you actually know any of the, and i quote your own words, “hill dwellers” ? I f there so hard done by, and again i quote you, explain why there are 300 applications for every post? Yes they maybe treated differently with regards to pay/pension but if you follow current affairs you’ll see this is being addressed. What is this bollocks about being used as cannon fodder? Can you tell me how many have served in Iraq, and how many died out there as the white mans human shield? I think you’ll find that in recent times more of my Fijian comrades have fallen for the queen/country.
Bottom line is they choose to join the British Army, as it is a great honour not only to them but also to us, bigoted, racist, British folk to actually serve queen and country, something which you have no understanding about. I suggest you take a hard look at your own countries downfalls first. SOMETHING ABOUT THROWING STONES IN GLASS HOUSES AND ALL THAT.
IRONMAN - if I give you a few dollars will you use it to get your self a clue.
Your claims are spurious and unfounded. Your lack of knowledge is almost embarrasing. Please desist.
As for manners, you have no idea of the amount of foul-mouthed name calling I have been subjected to. I only started giving them a taste of their own garbage recently.
I have no problem with the Gurkhas. As I have already said, I imagine they are fine soldiers. Read back in my posts and you’ll see that. The problem here is that they hound me for reacting to anoyther member’s post, in which they stated that the british policy of using Gurkhas was distasteful. I agreed, and now they are locked in an endless attempt to prove to me that my opinion of the practice is somehow based of false information, and in so doing, they have gone so far as to hide the truth and claim that the practice does not place Gurkhas on the front lines.
All I have done is shoot down their false assertiond that the Gurkhas are indeed recruited for and used as front line fodder. I cannot help it that they dislike the opinion that it’s a bad thing. If they could control their desperation to prove to my own mind that it is a cool thing to do, they could stop hounding me about it.
The claim of this subject has been one that Gurkhas are not used as front line troops, which we all know is false. The remainder of this hogwash is an attempt to convince me that it is not a distasteful practice, which cannot be done.
Iron Man ther is a “o” in convince you are a tit with a capital T. behave or I shall call on the services of space dragon fing fam foom. You arn’t your dad ,you are a sad wannabee who thinks that playing PC games equate to real contact, it isn’t so fcuk off unless you can type the sound of an enemy round zipping past your ear. In the morning get down on your knees and thank your deity of choice that there are men unlike yourself who have the balls to wear the green in defence of your nation and stop making an illinformed twat of yourself