The dirty bastards!

**Andres** · 08-07-2007, 13:15

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Nope .

Just out of curiosity: why not?

**Tribesman** · 08-07-2007, 19:17

Just out of curiosity: why not?

oh lots of reasons , lots and lots of reasons really .
I can think of a recent example on this forum where it was basicly only Panzer saying that someone who had helped with the "mission" should be given special treatment .
But to respond to your question with a question . If you choose to back the losing side why does it make you deserving of special treatment ?

**Duke of Gloucester** · 08-07-2007, 19:59

I don't think anyone is arguing a moral superiority for these people, Tribes. The argument is that if someone puts themselves in danger by helping you, especially when the help is solicited, then you have a moral responsibility to act to keep them safe. Neither is anyone (on this thread) saying that there aren't other people who deserve help. Seems to me that it is difficult to disagree with this but if you relish the challenge go ahead.

**Samurai Waki** · 08-07-2007, 20:08

I know for a fact that we evacuated over 20,000 Vietnamese from Saigon, because the vast majority settled in the Bitterroot Mountains area of Montana between Hamilton and Missoula. And by and large most of the families (especially the older generations) have stuck around, the younger going elsewhere to make their fortunes. Where I'm living now, not five miles down the road a pretty massive enclave of Hmong (something like 15,000 of them) live there and they were transported from what I can ascertain not that long ago. So someone in office at one point in time bit the bullet of responsibility. Now it is simply impossible to remove an entire culture and replant them somewhere else. However, having that said, most of these people were simply civilians, not vital in our role during war or peace time, the Iraqi interpretors OTOH are or were, so it would be rather irresponsible to wash our hands of them...

**Andres** · 08-07-2007, 20:31

Originally Posted by Tribesman

oh lots of reasons , lots and lots of reasons really .
I can think of a recent example on this forum where it was basicly only Panzer saying that someone who had helped with the "mission" should be given special treatment .
But to respond to your question with a question . If you choose to back the losing side why does it make you deserving of special treatment ?

I'm leaning to the 'special treatment'-side. If someone puts his life at risk for your country and afterwards comes in danger because he helped your country, shouldn't your country return the favour by helping that person? I feel the answer is yes.

I was just wondering why you think that the particular country should not help that particular person

**Tribesman** · 08-07-2007, 21:24

I'm leaning to the 'special treatment'-side. If someone puts his life at risk for your country and afterwards comes in danger because he helped your country, shouldn't your country return the favour by helping that person? I feel the answer is yes.

I was just wondering why you think that the particular country should not help that particular person

Should the US have given refuge to Saddam ? he helped them with their mission against Iran didn't he , did he deserve special treatment ? Perhaps a luxury prison suite like certain Central American dictators get .
Hmmm.....Central America , terrorists and death squads ..special treatment yes or no ?
SE Asia ....irregular guerilas in an undeclared illegal war... special treatment ?

Ah but this is interpreters isn't it , interpreters are good

after all you cannot do much of an interrogation without them ...what about the interrogators then ? special treatment yes or no ?
There can be no special treatment just because "they helped you" it has to be on a case by case basis as with all immigration issues .

Now for some fun ...there were some numbers posted the other day about people helping with the mission , 349,000 apparently.

will they be at risk once the coilition leaves ?
Can they get special treatment ?
Can their families ?
OK forget about the ISF......
What about Abdul the reliable floor sweeper at the mess hall ?
He works for the coilition , he will be at risk .
Can he come too ? he is special

**Papewaio** · 08-07-2007, 23:56

I see what you are saying, its a matter of numbers. If 10% of the population helped you out (including the families) then can you be expected to take that 10% as immigrants?

**InsaneApache** · 08-08-2007, 00:57

You can't protect everyone. The 'floorsweeper' was hardly going to go on missions with the patrols. We should protect those that did.

Nice arguement Tribes and a clever twist to the post, in this case, irrelevent.

**Tribesman** · 08-08-2007, 01:28

I see what you are saying, its a matter of numbers.

Its more than just a matter of numbers Pape , what makes someone special just because they work for the occupying forces ?
They chose the job , they knew the risk , no one forced them into it .

Nice arguement Tribes and a clever twist to the post, in this case, irrelevent.

Ah but relevant to the subject Apache .
Can you think of a conflict closer to home where sweeping the floor at an army base put you at serious risk ?
Anyway don't diminish the role of the humble floorsweeper , its an essential job that someone has to do

Look at it this way...for a government a serviceman in reality is a disposable asset , is not a foriegn serviceman/contractor equally or more disposable .