We can't turn them away

[Defender of the universe]

I feel sure that is what the Iraqi interpreters would prefer too. If we complete the job of restoring peace in Iraq then there will be no grounds for these people to claim asylum, but we should be prepared to answer questions about what our responsibilities will be if we should ultimately fail.

We, the British public be it armed Forces or civillian have no responsibilities to these people. They wanted rid of Sadam Hussein...... Armed Forces did that for them.
They wanted their own Government............. British Government helped to install this.
So tell me Why should we feel that we owe them anything?
We never asked to go to war in Iraq........ we were forced into it.

I see no reason as to why my or anybody elses taxes should increase just to accomodate these people. They knew what they were letting themselves in for.
I never told blair to go into Iraq . He chose to do it so why should I a British tax payer suffer financially or any other way

 

[True Blue Jack]

We, the British public be it armed Forces or civillian have no responsibilities to these people. They wanted rid of Sadam Hussein...... Armed Forces did that for them.
They wanted their own Government............. British Government helped to install this.
So tell me Why should we feel that we owe them anything?
We never asked to go to war in Iraq........ we were forced into it.

I see no reason as to why my or anybody elses taxes should increase just to accomodate these people. They knew what they were letting themselves in for.
I never told blair to go into Iraq . He chose to do it so why should I a British tax payer suffer financially or any other way

DOTU, this is a particularly puerile argument, even from you. I have never voted Labour so does that mean I can refuse to go to the sandpit? Can I take up foxhunting because I didn't vote for the Govt that forced through the legislation banning it? Of course not, that's what democracy is all about.

Reading through this thread most of the posters don't think we should grant asylum to these Iraqis and their families. I happen to think the issue is not so black & white, but that's just me.

Given the location within Iraq these interpreters are certainly Shia so they were probably very happy to see Saddam removed from power but let's not kid ourselves; regime change was the goal of our elected representatives. I do not know what motivated these people to work for/with us but I suspect the promise of 6 months' easy money followed by a peaceful unoppressed life might have had something to do with it. We have not yet delivered what we promised. If we do succeed then there will be no problem, but if we cut-and-run - as many in the UK believe we should - then we must be prepared to accept the consequences of that action.

 

[busby1971]

These men/women made a choice to interpretate for the British Forces, I think Des Brown on the radio the other days put it quite correctly.

Each individual accepted on a case by case basis, I made a point earlier that they do not have to come all the way to the UK to find safety, there are countries closer to Iraq that could provide them with a safe haven.​

The number of people involved is peanuts compared to amount of people granted asylum here each year, and the much higher total if you include those that just come and stay illegally.

Those that are worthy and have a justified claim should be allowed to come here, those who do not should go elsewhere