

The people we're leaving behind - sheri
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/04/interpreters-left-behind-in-afghanistan.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

======
gmays
I was a Marine military advisor in both Iraq and Afghanistan (1 year each) and
lived and worked with local forces and interpreters. They endured the same
hardships and dangers we did. When we needed supplies, they went out in town
and bought them for us without any complaints. These guys weren't 'house cat'
interpreters in Kabul or Baghdad, these guys were out with us in the shittiest
parts of southern Helmand province. Some can’t even go back home.

These guys accepted more risk for our country than many Americans would and
they did it proudly. Sure, some did it for money. But these guys love America
as much as we do because they know what it stands for--something that's
difficult to see sipping Starbucks, waiting for the new iPhone to come out.
We’re incredibly fortunate, but we forget that sometimes. They've earned the
right to be citizens, which is more than many of us can say because we were
just lucky enough to be born here.

Are they all great? No, but I’m not talking about those guys. I’m talking
about the ones that are phenomenal and they deserve better. For our
interpreters, we screened and recommended the ones we thought were qualified.
The process should be thorough, but not as cumbersome and slow as it is now,
particularly for those who are vouched for by senior ranking officers. In my
heart I believe we owe it to them for their sacrifices. If they didn't do
their job, there'd be fewer of us coming home. The green-on-blue threat in
Afghanistan is real. You guys talking about money are missing the point.

------
hobbes78
This goes back to Iraq? To my knowledge, this has been happening at least
since Vietnam... <http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=6009>

~~~
pekk
And the US has tons of Vietnamese in it, partly as a result of that

~~~
a3n
And some of those (don't know the percentage) got here as refugees; they had
to go the dangerous way, rather than the official way. My ship in the Navy
picked up a boatload of refugees, then sank their boat as a navigation hazard.
We took them to the Phillipines, don't know where they went after that.

------
revelation
The information missing here is that they were paid 10 times the average
Afghani wage, knowing fully well what danger they were getting into. They were
very well compensated for that danger.

It's not only the US; ex-workers for the German Bundeswehr have the exact same
"problem":

[http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/afghan-
employees-o...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/afghan-employees-of-
german-military-face-threats-from-taliban-a-894494.html)

(Ironically, this article conjures the impression that other NATO countries,
including the US, willingly accept these people)

~~~
binarycrusader
So instead of $35 a month, they're paying them $350 a month? They'll be rich
the rest of their lives! But seriously, that's not the point of the article.

It shouldn't matter how much or how little the US Government is paying them,
the point is that if the US was willing to trust them in sensitive situations,
they should also trust them to enough to grant them a Visa.

It also doesn't matter if the US is alone in exercising poor judgment; that
doesn't make it right.

Some of these people helped the US/others with the belief that their country
would be a better place after they left. Not worse.

~~~
revelation
Quoting raw dollar values is completely meaningless if you do not also
consider the price index in the country where that money will be spent (hence
why I quoted the factor to average pay).

We pay soldiers hazard pay, and I don't think it's 10 times the base pay.

I don't understand the implication between "hiring people in a foreing
country" and "giving them unlimited visas into your country". Does not
compute.

Well, then they should have hedged their bet.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"We pay soldiers hazard pay, and I don't think it's 10 times the base
> pay."_

Right, and we pay soldiers extra to be in hazardous situations - yet when push
comes to shove we're still responsible for getting them out.

We don't leave people to die because we paid them and they knew the risks. We
don't leave firefighters in burning buildings and we don't leave miners
underground, either.

> _"Well, then they should have hedged their bet."_

I am not sure what mentality would inspire someone to look at a person facing
torture, abuse, and _eventual beheading_ , and say "welp, shoulda hedged your
bets".

~~~
revelation
It only sounds that way because the original proposition is ridiculous. You
become a traitor to your country for monetary gain and expect the invading
force to change the peoples' sentiment? That has never worked, as far as I can
tell.

Instead, these people take the money and use it to relocate to a nicer place.
If the country is still falling apart after the invasion, even more so.

~~~
dia80
I would rather take the view that if you were brave enough to oppose the
Taliban you are a patriot considering what the Taliban want for your country.

------
xradionut
File this under: No good deed goes unpunished.

