Idiot slagging off the British Army

#1
I wouldn't normally advocate a forum war (although I do proudly wear my campaign medals from at least one), but there's a little twerp claiming loudly that the British Army uses the Gurkhas as cannon fodder, that they are sent into battle in front of white troops and that we hide behind them, that we are to blame for the suicides of those that fail selection, along with the pension issues. This is egregious lying, and he needs to be set straight. This kind of thing really grips my sh1t.

The guy's a Spam, late-30s/early 40s, and claims to have been the Quake II CTF world champion 3 years in a row when the game was at its peak. He's also the idiot that has claimed a lot of firearms related BS, such as that section fire never takes place at 600m with assault rifles anywhere in the world (despite it being in PAM2), that at 600m you'd have to aim off a lot (he seems to never have heard of adjustable sights & thinks you'd have to point at the sky to make a .223 travel 600m), that self-loading wpns are less powerful than non-self-loaders, and that the piddly little M1 carbine is an assault rifle. He also claimed that the US has never used any foreign-born troops for anything (but did eventually accept that there's 41,000 non-citizens serving at the moment and that you can serve as a non-citizen) and shrugged off suggestions about the Bay of Pigs, i.e. the US using a large group of Cubans for a little invasion & then leaving them to rot. He also thinks that he speaks for how all Americans think of the British use of Gurkhas.

Anyway, here's the offending post itself... Please feel free to come into the thread and add your two-pennorth (any British Gurkha officers would be particularly welcome):

http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=251

IRONMAN said:
reiver said:
Again, I reiterate, no we don't know what Americans think of it. We know what YOU think of it, unless you claim to speak for all of America now?
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.
SECTION, 600, ENEMY IN THE OPEN, DELIBERATE, FIRE
 
#3
Just had a look and im just not going to waste an ounce of effort on this imbecile... prhaps we should direct him to Al jazzer's ..he could help to write the propaganda for the muslim fanatics... or prehaps we colud invite him into the NAFFI?????????????????? Now that would be some fun....
 
#5
small-soldier said:
Just had a look and im just not going to waste an ounce of effort on this imbecile... prhaps we should direct him to Al jazzer's ..he could help to write the propaganda for the muslim fanatics... or prehaps we colud invite him into the NAFFI?????????????????? Now that would be some fun....
We've tried to invite him to 2 threads, one to deal with section fire at 600m (which he still maintains that no army does, despite it being in PAM2) - thread in Inf, and another to deal with the M1 carbine, which he maintains is an assault rifle (that one's in Mil. History & Militaria cos it's not of general interest). He won't come in, although I believe the 1 person who voted "yes" to the M1 carbine poll is him (someone made him the username C_o_D).

There's no chance he'll turn up for this party, so the only way to deal with him is to take the fight to him.
 
#7
small-soldier said:
very well... whats the plan ? mindless , childish abuse or intellectual assault?
Intellectual assault, but be prepared for the following:

Moving the goalposts - you will be informed that you said something which you did not, or that what you said means something different, particularly if this concerns the knub of the argument.
Your sources will be childishly ignored - remember that his opinion is more valid than your sources.
Freudian projection - he will accuse you of doing things that he himself is doing, e.g. having no sources whatsoever, sanitising posts, not having proved anything.
Selective reading
Being called "kiddo"
The Voice of America - remember that he speaks for all americans in terms of their opinions about things.

If this fails, then start the mindless, childish abuse (you might be driven to it).
 
#12
Is it just me or, for most of the turgid drivvle he's used the cut and paste facility on his computer for, is the real truth behind his gripe is that we employ soldiers from a number of nations who all brave the fight as comrade in arms and fall as a result of enemy action. Whereas the Amercians more often than not fall as a result of their own action?

'Dang Sarge and I thought the company advancing away from us was some kind of ROOSKIe trick they all dressed in them yankee outfits and all Sarge' [cue sound of cloying patriotic singing, guys throwing rugby balls wrapped in 10 lbs of plastic, fervent flag waving noteworthy of a Goebbell's film etc etc etc]

Or am I missing the point of this thread .....
 
#13
No your nearly there... i hate to be small minded but i get a picture of a small red neck hick who has realised the horrors that his white robed pals have been up to down on the town square with a burning crucifix. So he's sat in a dimly lit motel room with f-all to do but cut/paste and make up shite whilst gabbling to himself and whistling the national anthem before (and this is wishful thinking) blowing his brains out with his pa's 12 gauge........or is it M1 carbine???
 
#14
Now he's claiming that he was arguing /against/ people who said that we used the gurkhas as cannon fodder, whereas it was he who made the contention in the 1st place!

IRONMAN said:
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.
Does he think that we are as dim as he is?
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#15
I have to say, life is far too short to spend it arguing with a cretin like that. Just make him cry and walk away.
 
#16
Have to agree with our aged member here..... life is too short (especially for him with not long left) :D

Walk away sneering w@nker under yoru breath, then spend the rest of your life trying to bed members of his family male and female and send him the pictures each time you give them the ceremonial facial
 
#17
My granny always used to say, "Don't wrestle with pigs, you both get dirty and the pig quite likes it!"

Mind you, it would have been a brave pig to wrestle with my granny. Shame she's dead and gone or Ironman could have had a real fight on his hands.
 
#18
abacus said:
My granny always used to say, "Don't wrestle with pigs, you both get dirty and the pig quite likes it!"

Mind you, it would have been a brave pig to wrestle with my granny. Shame she's dead and gone or Ironman could have had a real fight on his hands.
I like the sound of your granny, do any of the 8mm movies made in Denmark still exist? 8O
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#20
Man, you sure can pick a fight.... I'm never going drinking with you....

As long as you're sure Mr Flaky ain't winding you up for the reaction....
 

Similar threads

Top