End Gurkha Recruitment in the British Army

[tim]

So they fail on the second point.

There are just three countries in the world who's armies have Gurkha regiments; the British, Indian, and Nepalese.

Knock yourself out if that makes you happy to call them mercenaries.

I actually see little wrong with a tradesman selling his services overseas to feed his family anyway. The shame is not on them but on the countries they serve who don't grant them full pay and benefits.

I see plenty wrong with joining the military and killing people (an unsavoury "trade" to be involved in) and even more in that the government of the state of which I'm a citizen employs people to kill and maim and be killed and maimed on its behalf in the furtherance of its political agenda.



I

 

[Casually Red]

N.B> if you want a military career in Ireland you can try to get a job in the Irish defence forces then spend a career doing very little or join the British military which does actually fight and recruits or if your a headcase join the legion.

As regards head cases , the fighting the British military engages in may well be against their own people . And Irish membership of ba may well, in extremis, involve looking over your shoulder or under your car every time you go home to visit your folks . Along with quite a bit of social recri inaction and basic unpopularity .

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/republicans-issue-threat-to-british-army-targets-1-4652249

 

[Limerick Red]

I've voted yes if course, but who are we making this demand off? The British government/Army? The Nepalese government?
Why the gurkahs in particular
That talk yesterday looked quite interesting, do you think that the gurkahs represent the pinecal of the Brits fetishisation of certain races as warriors?
There has being a very funny trend on the liberal british left to point out the amount of Muslims who fought for the Brits in the world wars, as some sort of anecdote to anti Islamic sentiment. It's up there with my favourite of the British lefts retort to racism /fascism "my grandad fought the nazis" but apparently didn't do anything else in the army, defintley wasn't involved in suppressing communists in Greece, or Malay or the Mau Mau in Kenya, it's like when I hear mugs in Ireland going in about "the old IRA" , people grandas were only ever in the British army that fought the nazis, not that other British army that did all them other awful things

 

[Casually Red]

do you think that the gurkahs represent the pinecal of the Brits fetishisation of certain races as warriors?

Has to be something to that . Dunno if it's anything to do with their success against the japs compared to what happened in Singapore and elsewhere under Percival when the sons of Nippon strode I on their little bicycles .

Btw that was the very same buck toothed , monacle wearing Percival who commanded the Essex in co cork , and liked to amuse himself by telling his driver to pull over so he could take potshots at random peasants working in the fields . A " bit of a character " by all accounts .

When alls said and done the BA is a rotten institution from top to bottom , inside and out and impacts just as negatively on society as its rotten counterparts ..the odious public school and class system . In which they're all deeply intertwined . Sooner they all go in history's dustbin the better and until then the less people who join it the better . If they want to help Gurkhas build them a bicycle factory. Or something .

Japan might be a good market

 

[Spymaster]

I see plenty wrong with joining the military and killing people (an unsavoury "trade" to be involved in) and even more in that the government of the state of which I'm a citizen employs people to kill and maim and be killed and maimed on its behalf in the furtherance of its political agenda.



I

But that's an argument against anyone joining any military force, not one specific to the Ghurkas in the British army.

You're shifting the goalposts.

 

[LDC]

The timing of all this is quite hilarious/tragic...

"Comrade Stalin, in the midst of all this highly unpopular war-mongering abroad shall we mount an anti-military recruitment campaign?"

"Not yet, Comrade, let's wait until the military withdraws from the wars it's been engaged in for the last 13 years, and is cutting recruitment and sacking loads of soldiers, then we'll do it, and with some selective exiting of statistics we can make it look like that was our campaign that achieved that."

Deluded muppets.

 

[Pickman's model]

I've voted yes if course, but who are we making this demand off? The British government/Army? The Nepalese government?
Why the gurkahs in particular
That talk yesterday looked quite interesting, do you think that the gurkahs represent the pinecal of the Brits fetishisation of certain races as warriors?
There has being a very funny trend on the liberal british left to point out the amount of Muslims who fought for the Brits in the world wars, as some sort of anecdote to anti Islamic sentiment. It's up there with my favourite of the British lefts retort to racism /fascism "my grandad fought the nazis" but apparently didn't do anything else in the army, defintley wasn't involved in suppressing communists in Greece, or Malay or the Mau Mau in Kenya, it's like when I hear mugs in Ireland going in about "the old IRA" , people grandas were only ever in the British army that fought the nazis, not that other British army that did all them other awful things

yeh but there was one army for ian thain and lee clegg and another army to do all the good things

 

[quiquaquo]

How come Gurkhas are considered any different from your average "common or garden" mercenaries?

 

[toggle]

How come Gurkhas are considered any different from your average "common or garden" mercenaries?

read bakunin's posts in this thread for your answer

 

[toggle]

I've voted yes if course, but who are we making this demand off? The British government/Army? The Nepalese government?
Why the gurkahs in particular
That talk yesterday looked quite interesting, do you think that the gurkahs represent the pinecal of the Brits fetishisation of certain races as warriors?
There has being a very funny trend on the liberal british left to point out the amount of Muslims who fought for the Brits in the world wars, as some sort of anecdote to anti Islamic sentiment. It's up there with my favourite of the British lefts retort to racism /fascism "my grandad fought the nazis" but apparently didn't do anything else in the army, defintley wasn't involved in suppressing communists in Greece, or Malay or the Mau Mau in Kenya, it's like when I hear mugs in Ireland going in about "the old IRA" , people grandas were only ever in the British army that fought the nazis, not that other British army that did all them other awful things

your questions are why i wouldn't support this campaign. I don't like the idea of continuing the imperialist traditions of recruiting colonial regiments to fight in dirty little wars. or dirty big ones. but I think the gurkhas are a visible target, they are recruited separately, into a specific unit, not spread throughout the armed forces like the commonwealth soldiers. cutting off the money that ghurkah recruitment takes into nepal won't help a nepal that has become dependent on this. cutting off recruitnemt has to be done first by fixing the problems that make joining the army seem like the best (or only realistic) option.

and yes, the mulsims fighting for britain. I think it's depending on who you want to make a point to. there is an older generation who are scared of muslim immigration in a way they haven't been scared of previous immigrant arrivals, I think because the only time they hear about muslims, it's about 'bad stuff'. telling them about the 'good stuff' from their point of view is a useful antidote to press generated fear.

I suppose it's dependent on whether you feel the priority is challenging the racist myths, or the imperialist myths. i'd tend to agree with going for the racist myths first as the easier target.

 

[tim]

For the purposes of international law the UN Convention definition takes precedence.

Possibly, but this isn't place isn't a law court.

 

[tim]

and yes, the mulsims fighting for britain. I think it's depending on who you want to make a point to. there is an older generation who are scared of muslim immigration in a way they haven't been scared of previous immigrant arrivals, I think because the only time they hear about muslims, it's about 'bad stuff'. telling them about the 'good stuff' from their point of view is a useful antidote to press generated fear.

A rather patronising approach to the "older generation", and also one that seems to that seems to ignore the fact that there can be very few generations who grew up when there wasn't some racist scare mongering going on.

Also can "but they used to kill for Blighty" be considered reassuring to the elderly, or "good stuff"?

 

[Limerick Red]

your questions are why i wouldn't support this campaign. I don't like the idea of continuing the imperialist traditions of recruiting colonial regiments to fight in dirty little wars. or dirty big ones. but I think the gurkhas are a visible target, they are recruited separately, into a specific unit, not spread throughout the armed forces like the commonwealth soldiers. cutting off the money that ghurkah recruitment takes into nepal won't help a nepal that has become dependent on this. cutting off recruitnemt has to be done first by fixing the problems that make joining the army seem like the best (or only realistic) option.

and yes, the mulsims fighting for britain. I think it's depending on who you want to make a point to. there is an older generation who are scared of muslim immigration in a way they haven't been scared of previous immigrant arrivals, I think because the only time they hear about muslims, it's about 'bad stuff'. telling them about the 'good stuff' from their point of view is a useful antidote to press generated fear.

I suppose it's dependent on whether you feel the priority is challenging the racist myths, or the imperialist myths. i'd tend to agree with going for the racist myths first as the easier target.

Racism is a product of imperialism, that's why anti racist campaigns are so bloody liberal and watery, the problem is imperialism. Racist myths are an easier target if you want to go down the road of "Muslims fought in World War Two too" , "immigrants built this country" "the irish built the railroads" "polish lads will do the job better for half the price" this doesn't answer the question of why people can't earn a living in their own country, the answer to that is ....imperialism

 

[seventh bullet]

Racism is a product of imperialism, that's why anti racist campaigns are so bloody liberal and watery, the problem is imperialism. Racist myths are an easier target if you want to go down the road of "Muslims fought in World War Two too" , "immigrants built this country" "the irish built the railroads" "polish lads will do the job better for half the price" this doesn't answer the question of why people can't earn a living in their own country, the answer to that is ....imperialism

I also dislike the classist bifurcation middle class liberals love re economic exploitation, with the homogeneous essentialised immigrant versus 'chav.' Lefties are culprits of that, too.

 

[Bakunin]

Possibly, but this isn't place isn't a law court.

If you want your campaign to be credible, then it has to be accurate and fact-based. Otherwise your campaign will simply be picked to pieces through fact-checking by your opposition.

 

[quiquaquo]

read bakunin's posts in this thread for your answer

That's just the UN pandering to Western nations and dressing up mercenaries for something legal and palatable. When the Taliban were the government of Afghanistan do you really think the same rules applied to their foreign fighters? Of course not... Then there's the IDF and their foreign volunteers/war criminals, another exception of course.

Double fucking standards all the fucking way.

 

[Bakunin]

That's just the UN pandering to Western nations and dressing up mercenaries for something legal and palatable. When the Taliban were the government of Afghanistan do you really think the same rules applied to their foreign fighters? Of course not... Then there's the IDF and their foreign volunteers/war criminals, another exception of course.

Double fucking standards all the fucking way.

For your information, the International Red Cross stripped mercenaries of legal status as prisoners of war back in the 1970's after the Angola debacle. Which means, once identified as mercenaries according to the UN definition, they effectively have no legal protection whatsoever. Which means their captors can effectively do whatever they like with them.

 

[LDC]

Not strictly true Bakunin afaik, they have legal protection as anyone would in the country they're being prosecuted in. They just don't have the extra legal protection that soldiers would in a war.

LDC

Edited to add: Unless you're Muslim and arrested by the US, in which case they'll sort something special out for you where Bakunin is right - you have no legal protection and you're fucked.

 

[Idris2002]

Actually, the mercenaries caught in Angola were executed after (IIRC) a swift court martial.

 

[LDC]

Some were, some were imprisoned and some were released/exchanged, but the fact they saw a court means there was a legal process (however flawed) which is my point. It also doesn't mean that it might not be ignored in certain circumstances, I was just correcting the statement that they're unprotected by law completely which suggests that anyone can subject them to anything with no consequences.

And as an aside this is another nail in the coffin for the argument that the Ghurkas and FFL are mercenaries, as both are given legal protection on the same footing as other parts of the UK and French armies respectively.

Anyway, it's a serious thread tangent!

LDC

 

[Bakunin]

Actually, the mercenaries caught in Angola were executed after (IIRC) a swift court martial.

Four were executed after a show trial condemned by legal observers. They were also harshly treated while prisoners in an effort to secure confessions used against them at said show trial. Not that many people are likely to have missed the likes of the self-appointed 'Colonel Callan' anyway.

Some were, some were imprisoned and some were released/exchanged, but the fact they saw a court means there was a legal process (however flawed) which is my point. It also doesn't mean that it might not be ignored in certain circumstances, I was just correcting the statement that they're unprotected by law completely which suggests that anyone can subject them to anything with no consequences.

And as an aside this is another nail in the coffin for the argument that the Ghurkas and FFL are mercenaries, as both are given legal protection on the same footing as other parts of the UK and French armies respectively.

Anyway, it's a serious thread tangent!

LDC

True. In practice, though, that often means captured mercenaries are simply executed out of hand, their captors having opted to skip the legal niceties.

 

[likesfish]

That's just the UN pandering to Western nations and dressing up mercenaries for something legal and palatable. When the Taliban were the government of Afghanistan do you really think the same rules applied to their foreign fighters? Of course not... Then there's the IDF and their foreign volunteers/war criminals, another exception of course.

Double fucking standards all the fucking way.

somebody hasn't done their law of armed conflict course this year have they?

 

[quiquaquo]

somebody hasn't done their law of armed conflict course this year have they?

You're still brainwashed.

Btw: did you ever kill or injure anyone during your military service?

 

[Bakunin]

You're still brainwashed.

Btw: did you ever kill or injure anyone during your military service?

That's none of your business. To many soldiers that happens to be a taboo subject owing to sadistic voyeurs and/or the terminally ignorant and judgmental.

 

[Spymaster]

You're still brainwashed.

Btw: did you ever kill or injure anyone during your military service?

What the fuck has that got to do with you?

Why would anyone supply that information to some fucking nobody on the internet?

Don't answer, likesfish.

 

[likesfish]

You're still brainwashed.

Btw: did you ever kill or injure anyone during your military service?

Why you looking to hire a hitman.

Best answer to that question I ever heard was " no but I'm about too"

 

[quiquaquo]

No excuses, you all volunteered to be trained killers as enforced conscription ended in with the last call up in 1960.

 

[DotCommunist]

economic conscription is still a thing though, look how they recruit heavily amongst the working classes

 

[LDC]

No excuses, you all volunteered to be trained killers as enforced conscription ended in with the last call up in 1960.

No excuses for what? Are all your political positions made with such moral clarity?

 

[likesfish]

so helping the kurds in northern turkey was evil imperialism?
Or trying to help in former Yugoslavia ?
or bimberling about the falklands that was obviously evil imperialism even though the bennies have been there longer than the state of Argentina has existed; and Spanish speaking Italian colonists are brave wadical anti western anti colonists rather than wannabe facists