Ghurkas deserve whatever anyone else receives, but deserving is not receiving.
I would give my right arm for them to receive full benefits.
2007-11-10 12:40:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Yulik MahBaht 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
There is an active campaign to bring the Gurkha pension requirements up to the same level as ordinary British Soldiers.
They have NOT and will NEVER be classed as a Mercenary Force, but as loyal British soldiers.
One time the military pensions were delivered to their door by a representative of the M.O.D. and the British Army, cut-backs inflicted by the British Labour Government has seen old men in their 90's having to walk for 3 days to the Pension Collection point to get their pension, then face a 3 day hike back to their homes.
They did not see combat in the Falklands arriving at the very end of the conflict, but I hear they did get a kick out of guarding the P.O.W.'s who had been told if they saw a Gurkha smiling at them it meant they were being considered for the cook-pot, being a happy people they smile a lot hence a lot of very quiet Argentinian prisoners :-P
2007-11-10 23:01:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by conranger1 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The Royal Ghurka Rifles is a British Army Regiment.
They receive support from the British government, but
compared to other allied units, they lack the latest in military equipment, uniforms, and supplies.
2007-11-10 11:38:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Gurkhas are a great fighting force, but like all soldiers that serve in the British Army, the M.O.D considers them to be expendable. Hence poor supplies of equipment, hospital treatment, and poor injury compensation for all.
2007-11-10 11:17:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
The Gurkha's receive some financial aid but essentially they are treated as a Mercenary force .
2007-11-10 11:08:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
All armies do that. They are treated as on job and paid for rest of duration of their service. In India, it's like this. It may be different elsewhere but all compensate.
2007-11-10 17:25:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by sandeep m 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
"ought to college pupil get carry of financial help?" in the event that they could no longer have the money for college in any different case, sure. "if so then why shouldn't the ill no longer get carry of financial assistance?" they might desire to, or a minimum of they might desire to have get admission to to a device of low-priced scientific coverage. "Why ought to pot be unlawful yet weapons are criminal and designed to kill human beings?" those are 2 completely separate themes. no count number if marijuana ought to be criminal has no longer something to do with the the final option to undergo palms. "ought to those with the main money get extra desirable scientific care while in comparison with the guy with little money?" No, yet we would desire to consistently no longer begrudge human beings for being rich, the two. "ought to money administration what we do with our lives?" money is merely a medium of replace. You supply it to human beings in replace for issues they want, so as that they are able to get issues they want. Having money unavoidably potential having get admission to to the flaws you like, it rather is the character of any medium of replace. you may desire to do away with money and use a barter device as a replace, yet that doesn't replace the inherent capacity of tradable products and centers.
2016-10-02 01:35:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋