this country is messed up

Sankari · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:04

bitslice said:
Sorry but their job is still defending this country, if someone wants to stand up and be shot at so we can carry on with our cushy lives, then that deserves respect from everyone who in some way benefits from that act.

One small problem here: the UK hasn't fought a defensive war since WWII (unless you could the Falklands, which was a little skirmish in an overseas colony that had nothing to do with defending the UK). Every British soldier since that time has fought an offensive war.

None of them can claim to be defending the UK 'so we can carry on with our cushy lives.' Not one.

Tosno · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:05

Evangelion said:
Not sure if trolling or just plain stupid.

My point is that this guy knew the rules before he married his wife. Now all of a sudden he's complaining as if this is some great surprise and a terrible outrage against his personal quest for happiness.

Not sure if trolling or just plain stupid.

Sankari · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:06

Tosno said:
Not sure if trolling or just plain stupid.

What's stupid about it? Rules are rules, you bleeding heart liberals need to get over it.

bitslice · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:15

Evangelion said:
One small problem here: the UK hasn't fought a defensive war since WWII (unless you could the Falklands, which was a little skirmish in an overseas colony that had nothing to do with defending the UK). Every British soldier since that time has fought an offensive war.

None of them can claim to be defending the UK 'so we can carry on with our cushy lives.' Not one.

I didn't claim otherwise, although you forgot Bosnia and multiple other little peacekeeping OPs.
And British territory overseas is still "the UK".

What you appear to be saying is we should only be grateful for them if we are actually attacked, but otherwise we should be free to call them terrorists in uniform like N17

The Police generally do naff all for me and some of them look a bit iffy sometimes, but when required they arrest people that I do not want to bump into, so same thing applies.

Mynight · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:16

Technically defending oneself can be attacking first at a perceived threat.

ThePirateHulk · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:51

bitslice said:
And British territory overseas is still "the UK".

No it isn't. Even the Isle of Man is not part of the UK.

bitslice · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:57

ThePirateHulk said:
No it isn't. Even the Isle of Man is not part of the UK.

Did you miss the "British territory overseas" bit?

ThePirateHulk · 6 Jan 2016 at 02:57

bitslice said:
Did you miss the "British territory overseas" bit?

British Territory Overseas is not the same as being in the UK.

Amp34 · 6 Jan 2016 at 03:00

So basically we are all in agreement that immigration laws in the UK need to be relaxed?

Mynight · 6 Jan 2016 at 03:01

Amp34 said:
So basically we are all in agreement that immigration laws in the UK need to be relaxed?

Cosimo · 6 Jan 2016 at 07:07

Rules are rules, he's no special case so tough luck.

Tosno · 6 Jan 2016 at 10:38

Evangelion said:
What's stupid about it? Rules are rules, you bleeding heart liberals need to get over it.

First time I been called a liberal

Amp34 said:
So basically we are all in agreement that immigration laws in the UK need to be relaxed?

Indeed, it shouldn't be harder for a British citizen to have a family in Britain than it is for a foreigner. The rules are very relaxed else where, 300,000 are entering every year officially.

NexusK · 6 Jan 2016 at 10:45

pepsilol said:
"When I finally got through to someone and told them I was a combat veteran they said ‘I couldn’t care less.’”

Sorta like celebrities using the "don't you know who i am?" line to get things they shouldn't.

campbell · 6 Jan 2016 at 12:07

I've read about this before, its actually pretty sad.

From what I can remember the Government's decision was put through the court of appeals and nothing changed.

Me personally I think if your from the UK, are working and settled then there should be no reason to use income for refusal.

wordy · 6 Jan 2016 at 12:23

Evangelion said:
Not sure if trolling or just plain stupid.

My point is that this guy knew the rules before he married his wife. Now all of a sudden he's complaining as if this is some great surprise and a terrible outrage against his personal quest for happiness.

So people shouldn't complain about rules that are stupid & inflexible?

You used to when you lived here. Infact I distinctly remember you complaining & someone telling you, as a foreigner to leave if you didn't like it & your response was along the lines of.... 'I am a UK taxpayer so I'm going to complain as much as I want to, thank you very much.'

Kamerad · 6 Jan 2016 at 12:29

From the Armed forces covenant:

The armed forces covenant sets out the relationship between the nation, the government and the armed forces. It recognises that the whole nation has a moral obligation to members of the armed forces and their families, and it establishes how they should expect to be treated.

The covenant’s 2 principles are that:

1. The armed forces community should not face disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services

2. Special consideration is appropriate in some cases, especially for those who have given most such as the injured and the bereaved

The covenant exists to redress the disadvantages that the armed forces community may face in comparison to other citizens, and to recognise sacrifices made.

So maybe some leeway should be allowed in this case. This man wanted to live with his wife is hardly a detriment to our society and is th tyoe of immigration we should be seeking. A case by case basis should be used in these situations.

The majority of OcUK have a dislike for Soldiers though, serve your country? It doesn't matter you can go to hell.

Source

[TW]Fox · 6 Jan 2016 at 12:31

campbell said:
Me personally I think if your from the UK, are working and settled then there should be no reason to use income for refusal.

Who supports the new arrival if you are on a low income then?

The idea is that you can bring your spouse to the UK if you have sufficient funds to ensure that they won't be a burden on the state. This is perfectly sensible and rational.

The issue is the ridiculous situation whereby the same rules cannot be applied to EU citizens. THAT is the problem, not the sensible spousal visa rules.

Tosno · 6 Jan 2016 at 12:50

[TW]Fox;29021875 said:
Who supports the new arrival if you are on a low income then?

The idea is that you can bring your spouse to the UK if you have sufficient funds to ensure that they won't be a burden on the state. This is perfectly sensible and rational.

The issue is the ridiculous situation whereby the same rules cannot be applied to EU citizens. THAT is the problem, not the sensible spousal visa rules.

Yet the government says you can support the new arrival if you are on disability benefits, but if you earn for example £18,000 and own your home 'NO FAMILY LIFE FOR YOU!' I really hope this ex soldier will seek help for his PTSD...

G-MAN2004 · 6 Jan 2016 at 13:20

forcing him to move permanently to the US to be with them

Oh boo hoo. I'd prefer that!

SPG · 6 Jan 2016 at 13:30

A2Z said:
10-15 days paid holiday a year versus my 50+, no thanks! USA is all about work work work money money work work. Unless you go over there on a 6 figure salary it won't be a lot of fun.

Couldnt agree more, America is broken beyond repair. Currently in a gated community (work for a month) and while its all pretty white fences, manicured lawns and walkways you leave the front gates and its mad max ville 80% are racist to ww2 levels and if you dont have the appearance of money forget it.