We Can't Turn Them Away

[ORAC]

Harry's Place: "We Can't Turn Them Away" (http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/archives/2007/07/22/we_cant_turn_them_away.php)

Since British troops occupied Southern Iraq in the spring of 2003, thousands of Iraqi citizens have worked for the British Army, the Coalition Provisional Authority ()South) and for contractors serving UK forces. There is now considerable evidence that their lives, and the lives of their families, are at risk: some former workers for the British have been murdered, and many others have fled to neighbouring countries or gone into hiding in Basra. The British Government, for whom they were ultimately working, has not offered them the right of asylum in the UK. This is morally unacceptable. It is also unnecessary, since we are well able to accommodate several thousand Iraqi refugees, most of whom already speak English and all of whom have already worked for our country.

The most detailed recent report, by Jonathan Miller of Channel Four news, notes the murder of 17 translators in one single incident in Basra. It cites the cases of hundreds of others who have fled to a refugee existence in nearby Middle Eastern countries or are in hiding in Iraq. The British Government response has come from the Home Office, which has suggested that Iraqis put at risk by their work for British troops 'register with the UN refugee agency'. Other reports provide supporting detail: Iraqis are being targeted for murder because they have worked for British forces.

Marie Colvin's report for the Times of April 8 speaks of desperate former workers for the British Army being turned away from the British embassy in Syria by staff who had orders not to admit any Iraqis. These brave men and women have testimonials written by British officers

If you feel that this is unacceptable and that Britain should prevent Iraqis from being murdered for the 'crime' of working for British troops, could you please write to your MP and ask him or her to press the Government for action. You can use the excellent website 'Write to Them' or post a letter yourself.

Please be courteous when writing to your MP. It would be a good idea to read the reports above, and cite relevant facts. We would suggest that your letter could contain the following points:

- It is morally unacceptable that Britain should abandon people who are at risk because they worked for British soldiers and diplomats.

- This country will be shamed if any more Iraqis are murdered for the 'crime' of having supported UK forces.

- Iraqis who worked for British forces should not be told to leave Iraq and throw themselves on the mercy of United Nations relief agencies in Arab countries: these agencies are already being overwhelmed by the outflow of Iraqi refugees, and Iraqi refugees who have worked for British diplomats or troops may well be targeted by local jihadists.

- There is plentiful evidence that armed groups in Iraq kill the families of those they consider 'enemies': for this reason we must extend the right of asylum to the families of those who worked for us.

- It is entirely practical for this country's troops in Iraq, and its embassies in neighbouring countries, to take in Iraqis who have worked for us and fly them to the UK. Indeed, there is already considerable anger among British servicemen that Iraqis are being abandoned in this way.

- This country is large enough and rich enough to accommodate several thousand Iraqi refugees. Denmark has already given asylum to all 200 Iraqis who worked for its smaller occupying force (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6908792.stm).

- It does not matter what your MP's views (or what your views) are on the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. People who risked their lives for this country's soldiers are now being abandoned by the British Government. Their lives can and must be saved by their being granted the right of asylum in this country.

- This policy should be implemented regardless of whether British soldiers stay in Iraq or are soon withdrawn. But it must be introduced soon: applications for asylum cannot be processed in a lengthy fashion, as the security situation in Basra is deteriorating rapidly, and delay is likely to lead to further killings of Iraqis who worked for British troops.

[ZH875]

I think the line This country will be shamed if any more Iraqis are murdered for the 'crime' of having supported UK forces.

should be changed to read This country will be shamed if any more UK forces are murdered for the 'crime' of having supported Iraqis.

[Sunray Minor]

ORAC,

For once I agree with you. Sweden has led the way in this issue. Even the US looks set to provide support. Will the UK?

[Melchett01]

And we put them where exactly? Don't think it will stop at those who have 'assisted' UK forces.

Having grown up in an area with a high proportion of immingrants, I can guarantee that every single member of the extended family will be making their way over to the UK despite having done nothing to assist UK forces. The UK is already creaking under the weight of illegal immigrants, if you want to add Iraqis to the mix, then you will need to do something about the 1000s coming into the UK every year for no other reason than scrounging.

Plus, whilst there are many that have served the UK well and honourably, equally there are many that have not and have played both sides of the fence and who have probably been invovled, implicitly or explicitly, in the deaths of over 150 UK service personnel. Can you 100% guarantee that it won't be these that try and gain access to the UK and its facilities? I can see the Security Service desk heads groaning at just the thought of the Jaish al Mahdi and various other rogue elements setting up a Leicester or East London Company.

We are in Iraq to get the country back on its feet and make it a place for Iraqis to live in. If all we are going to do is let our troops die and then invite hoards of Iraqis into the UK, that would suggest that we have failed and the whole venture has been a waste of time, money and more importantly British lives. If Basrah is an unsafe sh1thole, then it is about time the Iraqis took some responsibility for themselves and sorted it out.

Sorry, but the Ghurkas have a fair case which I support to the hilt. Iraqis of dubious character, forget it, the security implications are just too great. Let the silent partners in the coalition of the willing actually do something for once and take them if it's that bad.

[OOpsIdiditagain]

Here here Melchette01:D:D

[Jobza Guddun]

Word that rhymes with ollocks springs to mind quite frankly. Where will we put all these people, not to mention the numerous "sleepers" that are likely to be inserted here as "refugees". We have enough problems of our own.

[Talking Radalt]

The British Government, for whom they were ultimately working, has not offered them the right of asylum in the UK. This is morally unacceptable
No, no, no. :=

[craigJ]

I can understand the argument that you've put forward ORAC. These people should be kept safe, however granting them permanent asylum in the UK shouldn’t be the answer.

The people in question are probably well educated and skilled. I believe such people are key to the 'reconstruction' of Iraq... If all the educated and skilled workers etc. left the country, what would be left? (As happened in East Germany after WW2)

Yes, they need to be protected, but allowing them to permanently emigrate should be considered a major problem in terms of Iraq's future. They need to be given some incentive to stay :ugh:.

[microlight AV8R]

:hmm: Not a nice choice & I can see both sides of the arguement.
However, this has reminded me of how we (or should I say ...you, our armed forces) liberated Kosovo. Then they all wanted to come here!! the idea is that people should make something of their own country, we can't take everybody. :ugh:

[Talking Radalt]

Watch Panorama?

Yep! If only rooms in the Mess were that spacious and modern! :E

[MrBernoulli]

Godd grief ORAC, what were you thinking?

I shall be writing to my MP, courteously, telling him to make sure that these folk of which you speak do not come to the UK.

[An Teallach]

And if we leave them to the death squads I'm sure we'll have collaborators queueing up to work for the Brits in our next counter insurgency operation.

Just another example of Bliar and Bush not having a clue what they were going to do with the country once it was conquered.

[MReyn24050]

I totally agree with Melchett01.
Where exactly are these people going to live ORAC? The government are still talking about building thousands of new houses to accomodate the people we have here today, they are suggesting these houses will need to be built on flood plains even after the disaster faced by thousands of people this last month. The people of the UK are getting fed up with helping the world when they are in trouble, charity begins at home it is time we helped ourselves. The recent floods have shown just how much we need to spend money on the infrastructure to prevent future disasters. If the Government were to agree to give thousands of Iraqis permanent residence here I think you will find that will be the straw that will break the camel's back. Enough is enough,we were not asked if we wished to go into Irag, it has cost us dearly already. What next ORAC pull out of Afghanistan and invite all who oppose the Taliban to join us in the UK? Get real ORAC.

[ORAC]

I am truly disappointed at the xenophobia exhibited in some of the above posts. The UK immigration figures show about 150,000 people move here every year. The handful we are talking about would make no additional impression on that number whatsoever.

These are people who are working and dying for us. The murder/death rate amongst interpreters is far far higher than amongst the soldiers they translate for. Infiltrators? Unproved aspertions and calumnous considering the job they do. For more reason to fear how grown terrorists or those infiltrated from other sources.

As has been stated, if we do nothing, what chance do we have of finding allies amongst the locals in any future U.N. or national overseas operations.

But, finally, what of honour and trust. To walk away and leave these people would be as despicable as the betrayal of the Cossacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betrayal_of_the_Cossacks) in 1945.

Perfidious Albion indeed. :suspect:

[An Teallach]

We're only talking about people who were on the British payroll and their immediate families, not an invasion by the whole Assyrian Empire!

[mlc]

Immigration figures only include 'head of household'. They do not count dependants. So each 'immigrant' could be bringing any number of kids in.

[An Teallach]

So each 'immigrant' could be bringing any number of kids in.

Oh, how absolutely frightful! :rolleyes:

[mlc]

Not a comment, just a demonstration of lies, damned lies and statistics.

(I'm assuming you're offering them a room!)

[An Teallach]

This is a thread about doing the decent thing for the few Iraqis who were directly on the British Payroll and may well not have much of a contribution to make to the future Iraq when the inevitable 'Saigon' moment happens this year or next. Corpses tend not to contribute much to the economy (unless you are an undertaker).

It is not a thread about immigration. If you want to talk about immigration in general, go to JB and fulminate on your barely-concealed racism there.

[Jackonicko]

What a pity we can't deport the 4,000 or so British Muslims (and their dependents) who have demonstrated where their loyalties lie by going off to the training camps in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

That would free up some housing stock for these, people, to whom we clearly owe a debt of gratitude, and who have clearly done more for us than those British Asians who refused to condemn 7/7 and who applaud the deaths of UK servicemen in Afghanistan and Iraq - and their are an uncomfortably large number of the latter.

[Sunray Minor]

Crikey Melchett,

Put them where exactly? For a few thousand Iraqi's the UK has more than enough room! Somehow I think our problems pale in comparison to the problems these Iraqis are facing: they work for the British and therefore seen as traitors and receive death threats...and you are more concerned about the fact that you may have to have Iraqis living down the road?

Would you advocate them never being able to live with their family? Even if that family was similarly threatened?

I find it hilarious that we can spend billions on destroying Iraq, but as soon as a little room has to be made in the UK for the people we have uprooted then howls of indignation errupt. Nimby-ism.

As for the UK "creaking under the weight of ilegal immigrants", what strain exactly are they putting us under? Iraq's neighbours are soaking up the outflow of refugees from Iraq much more than we are and they aren't the perpetrators of this.

We are in Iraq to get the country back on its feet and make it a place for Iraqis to live in. If all we are going to do is let our troops die and then invite hoards of Iraqis into the UK, that would suggest that we have failed and the whole venture has been a waste of time, money and more importantly British lives. If Basrah is an unsafe sh1thole, then it is about time the Iraqis took some responsibility for themselves and sorted it out.

That statement makes me want it puke, in all it's ignorance, self righteousness and naivety. :ugh:

Sorry, but the Ghurkas have a fair case which I support to the hilt. Iraqis of dubious character, forget it, the security implications are just too great. Let the silent partners in the coalition of the willing actually do something for once and take them if it's that bad.

In case you had missed it, there is no coalition of the willing, so stop asking everyone else to do something for you. And since when have Iraqis who have put their lives on the line to support British troops and are no longer welcome in their own country scroungers of dubious character?

ORAC, I'm even more deeply shocked I seem to be in agreement with you.

[Melchett01]

....and you are more concerned about the fact that you may have to have Iraqis living down the road?


Well if you want them, lets have your address and we'll send them to live next door to you. What's that, cries of what will it do to the neighbourhood??? Yes I thought so. But, if you insist, please prove to me that the Iraqis we let into the country have absolutely no connections to any of the militia organisations that have been involved in murdering British forces. Can't do it? Again, didn't think so. Your attitude is the one that demonstrates a staggeringly frightening naivety concerning the overall security situation and the threat posed to Britain by Islamic extremists determined to put as many British people in body bags as possible. If you want to invite them in, prove beyond all doubt that they weren't involved in last weeks IDF attacks that sent 4 of our own home in body bags; prove that they weren't involved in downing the Lynx in Basrah or the slaughter of the RMPs at Al MAK. Prove that they aren't involved in smuggling weapons and bombs into Iraq and won't bring that knowledge with them to the UK. Again, no? Didn't think so.

Quote:
We are in Iraq to get the country back on its feet and make it a place for Iraqis to live in. If all we are going to do is let our troops die and then invite hoards of Iraqis into the UK, that would suggest that we have failed and the whole venture has been a waste of time, money and more importantly British lives. If Basrah is an unsafe sh1thole, then it is about time the Iraqis took some responsibility for themselves and sorted it out.
That statement makes me want it puke, in all it's ignorance, self righteousness and naivety

As for ignorance and naivety - I don't think so. I have been directly involved in operations in Iraq before TELIC even started in 2003. I have enough time in Iraq under my belt to seriously consider buying a house in country rather than in the UK and I have seen friend killed in ac shootdowns and blown apart by mortar rounds which meant we couldn't even fill their coffins. Don't even think about lecturing me on ignorance and naivety concerning Iraqi issues. When you even come close to matching that level of experience then you might have a leg to stand on, until that point don't even think about it. If you don't like it, then I suggest you go get a bucket and puke all you like - that is the reality of the situation, to invite 1000s of Iraqis over here now would be nothing more than an admission we have failed. Plus, with an entire army division, one of the better ones at that, in place in Basrah I see no reason why they should not sort it out themselves.

I could go on, but quite frankly I can't be bothered, I would just be wasting my time trying to get one of Tony's beloved force for good brigade to realise the implications of this. You need to wake up and realise what is really going on - it has bugger all similarilty to what the politicians, press and generals are portraying.

You accuse me of ignorance and naivety, but your attitudes are dangerous and will lead to British people dying on British streets. Maybe not tomorrow or next week, but the risks are quite frankly too great. If you can't see that then maybe people with your attitudes should be taken off the streets as a security risk in your own right. I think you will find you are much happier on a Stop The War or Liberal Democrat forum than you are here; you won't find much in the way of support for your position here.

[Sunray Minor]

What's that, cries of what will it do to the neighbourhood???

Quite the opposite. I'm more than happy for them to live next door to me. Send them over. They can join the ethnic mixing pot of my neighbourhood that thankfully seems to benefit from an absence of bigots like yourself.

Your hospitality to those fighting for your country seems to be a lot less than mine, which is ironic since I have never agreed with this whole Iraq invasion in the first place.

Worth considering, the intelligence that our forces are so dependent on comes from interrogations that must be done by Iraqis, as well as these same Iraqis being on patrol with our forces providing translation services and logistical support. These same Iraqi's are putting their money where their mouths are, putting their asses on the line and making a far greater contribution to Iraq than I suspect you ever have, yet from the comfort of Middle England your biggest concern seems to be the bother accommodating them will cause to your neighbourhood. Get with the real world Melchett.

Those Iraqis working for us are the bread and butter of any success there but when their tour is over they have to live with the consequences, good or bad. If you want Iraqi's to put their asses on the line, it may be beneficial that your middle class suburban utopia yeilds a little of its milky whiteness to these very people. Or is that just too much to bear?

You seem to have created a mentality that all Iraqi's are guilty of militia involvement until proven innocent. Far from me harbouring any naivety to Islamic extremism you seem to hold paranoia and hysteria.

These employees of our forces are receiving death threats from militias and in one recent case a mini-bus of translators was ambushed and they were executed.....is that enough evidence for you? Or were they also guilty of murdering British troops?

[Melchett01]

Sunray,

I'm not even going to bother with this any more. Your view is a minority view, both within the military and the British public at large. You are entitled to it, but it is 180 degrees out of kilter with opinion and the realities of the security and intelligence situation.

Your job description on your profile says it all.

[ORAC]

Melchett01, I hope you are wrong about public opinion.

Just so as people can know who we are talking about..

The Independent, Nov 2006: Interpreters used by British Army 'hunted down' by Iraqi death (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20061117/ai_n16863338)

Iraqi interpreters working with the British Army in Basra are being systematically hunted down and killed. At least 21 have been kidnapped and shot in the head over the past three weeks, their bodies dumped in different parts of the city. Another three are still missing. In a single mass killing, 17 interpreters were killed.......

[Sunray Minor]

That would be a good idea Melchett, if anything to prevent further foot in mouth disease.

Ironic that you feel the security risk of these workers bars their entry to the UK....meanwhile Danish forces operating in the same region and from the same base don't see it that way, pulling out an Iraqi (and their family) for every two Danish troops brought home. I hope you realise Denmark is even smaller than the UK.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4983678.html

[stickmonkeytamer]

Watch out for this lot!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6290302.stm

"the MILF is currently engaged in peace talks with the government" - fantastic name! Just imagine if your job title was "the chief negotiator for the MILF"...:ok:

SMT

[ZH875]

I hope you realise Denmark is even smaller than the UK.
With a population of around 5.5 million, which is around 11 times smaller than the UK. Is Denmark 11 times smaller than the UK by habited land area?.

Melchett01 seems to have the general public's view.

Just think, if we bring in 'just the family' of the Iraqi's, is that the extended family, the bloke around the corner who shops in the Iraqi blokes dads shop, or just the bloke and everyone else who goes to his mosque?.

Personally, I don't think the Iraqi's work for the UK government, I think they work for whoever will pay them money, no matter who that is!.

[Re-Heat]

I am utterly disgusted by the situation, and utterly disgusted by the views on this board against helping these individuals.

I see little difference between the situation here and those of the Gurkha regiment, particularly as a result of the situation inflicted by Rumsfeld's pi$$ poor planning.

I was going to post more, but am at a loss.

[Re-Heat]

Just think, if we bring in 'just the family' of the Iraqi's, is that the extended family, the bloke around the corner who shops in the Iraqi blokes dads shop, or just the bloke and everyone else who goes to his mosque?.
Brilliant - our GDP rises by 20 persons-worth or so. How do you reckon we are otherwise going to fund those unfunded public-sector pensions...

[Re-Heat]

I take it that Melchett's response (before he deleted it, it was just this alone: :ugh:) means he is prepared to reduce his pension by reducing immigration.

There is an economic argument for immigration
There is an moral argument for aiding certain professionals in this case
Professionals are fleeing Iraq (2.2m at last count - source: Economist) - why not use their services

All arguments against that I have read above are quite frankly NIMBYish, quasi-racist and close to the BNP's views.

[Flip Flop Flyer]

ZH875

Denmark is roughly 35.000 sqm (not including Greenland and the Faroe Islands). The United Kingdom is roughly 245.000 sqm.

After pressure starting from the Danish troops, then the media and general population, the DK government finally decided to do what is right and evacuate the translators and their families - in total around 200 people. They are not, however, granted immediate asylum. Like everybody else, they'll have to go through the process. The general feeling, however, is that they will indeed be granted asylum. Please note, the number of 200 includes immediate families.

The whole story unfolded when one of the translators was found murdered, having been subjected to the most hideous of torture by his captures. This sparked the Danish troops to appeal, via the chain of command, for the government to save these people. Amongst the Danish troops, the translators were considered to be part of the team, and the feeling was they should be treated as such.


Danish immigration laws does allow refugees to apply for family re-unification, but the law is very cleverly written. If family re-unification is granted, then it will be decided to which country the unified family has primary relation. If they find the primary relation is their country of origin, then ir's a one-way ticket back to that nation. Has worked wonders in cutting down un-needed family re-unification (i.e. uncles, aunts, 4th cousins and so forth). The law does state, however, that the immediate family (parents and children - not grand parents) will be given asylum.

These laws has persuaded the vast majority of economical refugees to seek asylum in places other than Denmark. Some call us racists, I say we're realists. From some of the above replies, Britain seems to be heading for a state of institutional xenophobia. Your utterly feckless immigration laws have undoutedly had an impact, but please don't make the error of painting all potential immigrants with the same brush. Saving your Iraqi translators, and their immediate families, is the right and honourable thing to do. Has the British Armed Forces lost it's humanity and honour?

[Melchett01]

Re-heat,

Thank you for your obviously well informed open source media arguments. Whilst I respect the Economist as being one of the more reliable journalistic institutions, did they state how much these professionals would take out of the economy in the form of welfare payments and assistance for their huge extended families? Probably a damn site more than the 20-pax contribution towards the country's GDP you were suggesting.

However, it is interesting to note that the majority of people clamouring to let these Iraqis into the UK are from outside the military community putting their lives on the line on a regular basis in Iraq. Most likely making their arguments from the comfort of a warm office or comfy chair and totally ignorant of what is actually happening on the ground in Iraq. Spend 6 months on the ground and we'll see by just how much your opinion changes.

And of course, because these people are "professionals", they are obviously beyond reproach and would never do anything to harm the UK or its people would they? Now just remind me, who was it that drove a burning Jeep into Glasgow Airport - oh yes, a professional doctor from Baghdad.

Arm chair generals - you gotta love them.

[WorkingHard]

Orac said "The UK immigration figures show about 150,000 people move here every year"
I fear you are very wrong sir, if for no other reason than the DSS issued 750,000 new national insurance numbers to immigrants last year alone. This is the DSS own figures by the way and accounts for only those seeking work here. How many more are here and not seeking work? I am all for reasoned debate on such matters but let us please have the facts if we are going to debate the issue.

[An Teallach]

So, Melchett. Would you be happy to leave the Iraqi interpreter who had worked the streets of Basra with your platoon for 6 months to the death squads?

What does that say about your loyalty to your team?

[Re-Heat]

However, it is interesting to note that the majority of people clamouring to let these Iraqis into the UK are from outside the military community putting their lives on the line on a regular basis in Iraq.
I have friends there, virtually all my UAS year-group have been there, I know of people killed there, and I am painfully aware of the situation on the ground. My opinion would differ not a jot if I were in Basra: it is your views that appear fickle if they have changed having experienced "reality".

Economists are unequivocal as to the benefits of immigration even disregarding Eastern Europeans; a quick search of past articles both in the aforementioned publication and on the internet (ignoring biased left and right standpoints) is consistent: selected quotes below.

In response to your reference to the Glasgow bombers - before you rush to judgement, and knowing full well that extremists come from all backgrounds, races and creeds, do you actually know an British Iraqi family before you post such tripe.

It is a common misconception that immigrants travel thousands of miles paying hundreds of pounds in costs of travel to sit on their ass at our costs. Unfortunately it is largely our very own chav underclass that forms the vast majority if incapacity claimants.

Spain has benefited in many ways. Social-security receipts have increased, postponing a pensions crisis. Migrants have stoked demand, helping annual GDP growth reach 3.7%. They have even turned around the country's declining birth rate.

Britain: Since the election in May 1997, working-age employment has risen by 2.1m. Yet almost all this increase can be attributed to a rising population, in large measure because of higher immigration.

The National Institute of Economic and Social Research, a think-tank, estimates that new immigrants have boosted output by more than 1% since 2004 (and by over 3% since 1997). But as other EU countries open their labour markets, the flow to Britain may dwindle.

[Re-Heat]

I fear you are very wrong sir, if for no other reason than the DSS issued 750,000 new national insurance numbers to immigrants last year alone. This is the DSS own figures by the way and accounts for only those seeking work here. How many more are here and not seeking work? I am all for reasoned debate on such matters but let us please have the facts if we are going to debate the issue.
True - 750,000 numbers issued.
Error in the above - NI numbers are required for benefits, therefore, no further numbers are here, not seeking work AND are a burden on the DWP.
Huge omission in the above - DWP note that a substantion proportion of the above (particularly Eastern Europeans) return to their homelands each year as well, hugely reducing net effect.

[Sunray Minor]

Melchett,

Firstly, we are not all from outside of the military community by a long shot! And for those that are, their viewpoints are no less valid. If you think the work of translators is not respected, perhaps read the link I provided which poignantly notes a Danish crews translator providing ammunition to their gunner when engaged. I for one wouldn't spend 6 months on the ground without native translators!

As for the the drain on state coffers asylum seekers cause, I suspect your views are more tainted more by the Daily Mail than they are by reality. Asylum costs us three fifths of nothing. If you have an economical argument, better you took it up with the hedge fund managers paying no tax, the born and bred English costing us a fortune in prison or the drunken white yobs wasting police time and causing property damage every weekend.

Your attitude to these people is utterly paranoid.

[Melchett01]

I think you will find the main tenet of my original argument has more to do with concern over security issues than economic issues. It is yourself and Re-heat that are heavily playing the economic argument. And nor am I questioning the validity of having local translators for use by troops on the ground. That many of them are locals who happen to speak English doing the job for money rather than the fact that they love Auntie Liz and everything UK Plc stands for rather than being professionally qualified translators and interpretors is another matter entirely (our 'terp in the Balkans was one such example of this).

However, if you cannot see that Iraq is not conventional warfare, that we are fighting a counter-insurgency operation where the enemy doesn't make themselves readily apparent then you are missing the whole point of my argument.

If you can 100% guarantee that the people you want to bring into the UK have played no part in the deaths of or attacks on UK or coalition forces and that neither they nor any member of their extended families who will inveitably follow in tow have links to these militias, then crack on. However, you can't. And I for one am not prepared to put the safety and security of the average man in the British street at risk to salve the consciences of a few liberals who object to this whole (ghastly and ill advised) intervention. And I am not prepared to apologise for standing up and stating that I believe the security of the UK and its people must come before the security of locals in Basrah.

But as this whole argument rumbles on, I do find myself increasingly wondering why now? This phenomenon is not new, it has been going on quite openly and blatently since late 2003 / early 2004. And it has probably happened in every conflict we have fought in where we have engaged LECs to work for us. So why the sudden cries of outrage now? It will still be happening in 2008, 2009 and 2010. When we are not there, they will find some petty reason or personal, familial or tribal slight to kill each other over. Do you propose to continue to allow people being killed in inter-ethnic fighting the right to come to the UK just because you feel it is our moral duty to allow them to do so? Where do you draw the line? I would be interested to know, because this will set a precedent and a dangerous one that will see extremists arriving on the streets of Britain amongst their numbers.

If however, you are desperate to pull these people out of Iraq, why does the UK not pay for them to be re-settled elsewhere - not necessarily the UK - but out of harms way?

On a final note, I had a good look at the Blog you linked to. There was an interesting statement running along the top:

" Liberty, if it means anything is the right to tell people what they don't want to hear".

A very noble sentiment and one that goes to the heart of freedom of speach. Unless of course, you live in Britain in 2007, where if you dare to disagree with the prevailing wooly liberal theories and ideals, you are shouted down and vilified with a near totalitarian zeal as an outrageous lunatic fringe element. An interesting divergence of ideals and reality don't you think?

[mutleyfour]

Ok, I am now off the fence and sat squarely in your corner Melchett01.

Didnt want you to feel lonely...:)

[Sunray Minor]

That the interpreters (or otherwise) are doing the job for money is neither here nor there - in that sense they are no different from any other contractor or soldier. Given the desperate state of Iraq there is no shortage of those willing to take huge risks for money, which if anything strengthens the duty of care we should hold for them. I'm quite sure they would many days rather not turn up for work and would never have been under any illusion of free access to a life in the UK on our departure.

Considering we take refugees and immigrants from a myriad of nations, why is Iraq being singled out as a specific risk, and why those working directly for British forces? If you have ever read Home Office refugee paperwork you'd know that they rely almost exclusively on expert witnesses and educated judgements on a wealth of information for each refugee application - it simply isn't an exact science. Under your rationale we could take no refugees from Iraq whatsoever, despite Iraqi refugees being clearly as eligible as any other nation, despite our UN obligations (especially this being a war to uphold UN resolutions afterall) and despite Iraq's immediate neighbours (especially Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey and Lebanon) currently bearing the brunt of the refugee crisis (up to 100,000 fleeing every month and around from 2 million in total!).

Similarly, if the Swedish town of Sodertalje could last year take twice as many Iraqi refugees as the entire US took since the war began (700!), it is woeful for us to expect these Iraqi citizens to risk their lives in our service and face almost certain death on our departure.

If for some reason you are correct on public opinion, I suspect that very same public opinion will do a 180 once stories start emerging of these very people being lynched after our draw down. Of course, it would probably come as no surprise to the Iraqis themselves, the US and UK being the chief principals of the war in the first place, giving one final finger to the country as we cut our losses and leave.

[Re-Heat]

A very noble sentiment and one that goes to the heart of freedom of speach. Unless of course, you live in Britain in 2007, where if you dare to disagree with the prevailing wooly liberal theories and ideals, you are shouted down and vilified with a near totalitarian zeal as an outrageous lunatic fringe element. An interesting divergence of ideals and reality don't you think?
On the contrary - you are entitled to your opinions entirely, and I am entitled to my view of your opinions. We have both had a fair hearing here.

I disagree entirely with your "security" issue, however, I must further point out that is was not myself who raised the economic argument: this was raised prior to me joining this thread.

Needless to say, if the UK were to consider them a security threat, who else would you expect to take them?

I think that persuing your view presents a very dangerous black and white, right and wrong picture of the issue, which is inherently far more complex: along with the whole of the sorry mess of Iraq.

What is noble is presenting facts and holding educated opinions, not calling anyone who disagrees with you a "wooly liberal" - something that I quite adamently am not.

[Re-Heat]

Mutley, you tease, you don't even express you reasoning so that I can dissect it publically!!

[mutleyfour]

Luckily for me, my learned colleague Melchett01 is expressing my view for me.

[ORAC]

The Times: Abandoned - the 91 Iraqis who risked all (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article2211281.ece)

Times Editorial: (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article2211253.ece) Do the Right Thing
Britain must not abandon its bravest allies in Iraq

Interpreters working for the British Government and the British Army in Iraq risk their lives every day. Whether or not their duties put them in danger from bullets or roadside bombs, they are demonised and remorselessly hunted by extremist militias who accuse them of colluding with the enemy. Some have already been subjected to unspeakable torture and summary execution as a result, and the risk to interpreters and other Iraqi employees on British bases will only increase as the British role in Basra moves from one of active engagement to “overwatch”.

If anyone has a compelling case for asylum, these people do, and it is further strengthened by the British Government’s responsibility towards them as an employer. Yet the Home Office has made no contingency plans for them and issued no special advice to immigration officers. One interpreter who wrote a personal plea for help to Tony Blair was brushed off with a suggestion that he consult the UK’s entry clearance website. Downing Street and the Home Office must move fast to prevent the fate of Britain’s bravest Iraqi allies becoming a national scandal.

The 91 locally hired interpreters currently working for the British military in Iraq are strongly supported in their requests for a fair hearing from the immigration authorities by the soldiers who daily depend on them. It is not hard to see why. Some will have known as friends and colleagues the victims on whom we report today, among them Haidr al-Mtury, murdered with a bullet to the head after having holes drilled through his hands and knees and acid poured on his face; and Abu Kiffah, forced to telephone his wife on his mobile phone so that she could hear his final moments.

It is true that for another 63 interpreters hired from countries other than Iraq the outlook is marginally less terrifying. At the end of their contracts they can, in principle, go home to relative safety. But it would be callous folly to dismiss as exaggeration the claims from Iraqi interpreters that their lives are at stake. The Danish authorities have accepted this. All 22 interpreters used by its military contingent in Iraq were given the choice of evacuation to Denmark or a third country with their immediate families, or substantial cash compensation. Some 200 Iraqis were airlifted to Denmark last month as a result.

Spain offered its Iraqi employees asylum before withdrawing its troops from the country in 2004. Poland has said of its local employees that “we will not leave these people alone”. In the US, plans are in place to admit 7,000 Iraqi refugees from later this year, and Congress is to debate legislation that could admit another 60,000. The British response has been pitiful by comparison: in the absence of any special arrangements, Britain’s Iraqi interpreters must somehow reach British soil under their own steam if they want asylum, and then apply for it. Each case is then “judged on its merits”.

This may sound scrupulously fair on paper. In practice it requires those who have risked their lives for Britain’s mission in Iraq to apply to the British Embassy in Jordan for a visitor’s visa, knowing that nine in ten such applications have hitherto failed. If lucky, they must then take their chances with an asylum system that so far refuses to recognise their unique circumstances. The Home Office has a simple choice: to act honourably, as this small, brave group has in working for peace in Iraq, or to force them to the back of the asylum queue and hang its head in shame.

[PingDit]

On a Radio 2 interview earlier today, someone stated that to date, a total of 250 interpreters have been killed/murdered in Iraq. This obviously is not good. They've put their lives on the line for us, although some may say purely for financial gain. Why do they want to come to the UK? Possibly because they know of the benefits system here? We can help them in other ways. Their relocation in another part of Iraq or a neighbouring country would give them the climate, diet, possibly the language etc. that they're used to. Surely this would be the best option and there would be few complaints? After all, we relocate rapists and murderers here, complete with change of identity for their own protection!

[ZH875]

From Radio 2 news this morning, the number of people helping the British forces, is about 20,000, so if the figure keeps increasing at this rate (91 to 20,000 in a few weeks), then we might as well just move all Brits out of the UK to make way for any 'asylum' seeker that wants to come here.

IIRC the international rules on Asylum, is that you are to claim Asylum in the FIRST safe country outside your country of domicile. This does not make the UK the first correct choice for ANYONE from any of the African, Asian or Middle East countries.

We have run out of houses, we are running out of space - Can we keep on accepting EVERYBODY.

[gravity victim]

Posted over on ARRSE, where there is a strong overall view that these interpreters deserve rather better than to be abandoned to torture and death for trying to work on the right side:

An old Arab saying;

"It is better to have the British as your enemy than your friend. If you are their enemy they buy you; if you are their friend they sell you."