India's Sharm-el- Sheikh Harakiri...

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 18 Jul 2009 10:57

Satya_anveshi

You misunderstand me.

I also do not hate ManMohan.

But I think he is cleverer by half.

He has crafted his image so well! That is a skill that many must learn.

He screws up an issue and then throws his 'humble' attitude for the public and befools many! Did you see the Lok Sabha TV when Advani was hectoring him. He gave such a sad look as one would not feel that he was 'dumba' ready to be sacrificed!

Totally charming I must say.

When he took over the second time and sorted out the Ministers and even that uncotrollable unguided missile, Mamata Bannerjee and that rush for 100 targets, I thought efficiency has come to India!

But alas! What a fall!

Balochistan is India's engineered rebellion!

And people say the GOI and R&AW are moribund!

Our own PM admits that we have a finger in the pie and soon someone will say that the Uighur unrest is also India's baby and we will sign on the dotted line!

What a gas!

Whoever has Okayed the Joint Statement either had too much of alcohal or was watching a Laurel and Hardy film or I Love Lucy on TV too be much bothered to check what was being agreed upon!

And the PM said "Yes, Mr Bureaucrat"!

Duangkomon · Post by **Duangkomon** » 18 Jul 2009 11:08

If Indira fell for ZAB's charm and ABV fell for Musharaffs bluster then it must be Gilani's down syndrome that moved MMS. This time it took an extra chromosome inside Gilani to force a climb down from MMS.

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Jul 2009 11:10

The Chief Minister of Bihar erred by not having this letter to our errumm…….. “Dear” Prime Minister drafted by a Pakistani to avoid the display of pugnacious belligerence

:

Cong eyebrow over CM letter to PM

TNN 18 July 2009, 06:45am IST

…………........... ‘The CM chose to address the PM as `Dear' which is generally done when one is writing to a person his age. Singh is senior to Nitish both in terms of age and post and the CM should have been particular about his language," state Congress' working president Samir Kumar Singh said and added the language of the letter betrayed the CM's arrogant attitude. ………….........

TOI

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 18 Jul 2009 11:11

Duangkomon wrote:If Indira fell for ZAB's charm and ABV fell for Musharaffs bluster then it must be Gilani's down syndrome that moved MMS. This time it took an extra chromosome inside Gilani to force a climb down from MMS.

Indira fell after defeating ZAB. ABV almost fell, but didnt fall. These were the cases where they didnt b*tchslap Pakis.

Rajmata and MMS are the truly the sole duo and only in this case they b*tchslapped India itself.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 18 Jul 2009 11:17

SSridhar wrote: SM Krishna even defeats a Barkha Dutt. I do not know if we ever had a worse Foreign Minister. Everyone is taking SS Menon & MKN to task and rightly so. But, we forgot about SM Krishna. He was in Egypt and one wonders what kind of advice he could have given based on his attitude revealed by the above interview.

SSridhar, Krishna has been made as EAM so that the PMO can directly control the foreign policy. Pranab was a hard-nosed realist. However, Krishna is new to foreign policy, and he follows the PMO agenda. He is a fulbright scholar, so he gets good review by the press, and the PMO has a pliant EAM, everyone is happy.

I had posted an article earlier from Telegraph where it was mentioned that the US was trying to get the end-user verification agreement signed by external affairs ministry by going through the PMO and ignoring the defence ministry all together, as Antony wasn't in favor of it.

MMS in UPA 2.0 has set his people in key ministries ( Anand sharma in commerce, Krishna and Tharoor in FM etc) so that he can direct policy involving India and the world. For a supposedly non-political PM, he is getting things done his way while taking Sonia and Rahul into confidence. Well, he learnt from the chanakya of modern times, PVN and has proven that he has absorbed the knowledge well. Now if only he had also learnt about geopolitics and diplomacy from PVN!!

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 18 Jul 2009 11:23

RayC ji,

I concur with your thinking and share your frustration. I was just expressing stronger feelings about this man ( can't hate him enough

).

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 18 Jul 2009 11:23

Dear is but a salutation.

Should it be 'Respected'? Or should it be 'Your Exalted Highness! Someone should tell me since maybe I am in a mood to fire off a letter to our dear PM.

Am I do add 'Your obedient servant' at the end as it was done in the days of the Raj?

If I were to write to Sonia Gandhi, would it be 'Madam'? The Congress blokes call her so on the TV debates. I don't like the word for good reasons.

I thought the Congress has instructed all Royals to drop their titles.

Is it to ensure that there is some de jure would like to be Razia Sultana, but doesn't have the gumtion to come out who is allergic to anyone, by birth, is a genuine Royal?

To believe, I thought they would deliver!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 11:24

ravi_ku wrote:Indira fell after defeating ZAB.

Absolutely true. But, with Pakistan, it is is not enough to just thrust the knife but also twist and turn it inside.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 11:25

RaviBG, thanks.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 18 Jul 2009 11:27

SSridhar wrote:
ravi_ku wrote:Indira fell after defeating ZAB.
Absolutely true. But, with Pakistan, it is is not enough to just thrust the knife but also twist and turn it inside.

Absolutely true. Indira and ABV didnt thrust the knife into Pakistan.

This rajmata and her servent thrust it into India itself.

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Jul 2009 11:31

Experts seethe over Balochi blunder

18 Jul 2009, 0552 hrs IST, ET Bureau

NEW DELHI: The Indo-Pak joint statement’s silence over LeT, the main jihadi troublemaker, as well as the reference to Pakistan’s unfounded charge about Indian involvement in Balochistan are angering security experts.

According to experts, the Indian side bought hook, line and sinker Pakistan’s claim that there was ‘anti-terror consensus’ in the country even as Pakistan was yet to take even the baby step to rein in terror groups based on its soil ……………….

ET

Earlier, hat-tip S.Sridhar, Congress Party spokesperson Manish Tewari on the perplexing inclusion of Balochistan in the Sharm el Sheikh joint declaration:

………………………………………. Asked about Joint statement mentioning Baluchistan issue on which Pakistan had in the past accused India of fomenting trouble, Tewari said, "If Pakistan's Prime Minister wanted to put some information about Baluchistan in it, India has no objection because we do not interfere in any country's internal affairs and are also ready to talk, if anybody wants." …………………………..

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 18 Jul 2009 11:35

This is brazen. The text of the document says something and he claims the opposite in the Parliament.
Why should there be ambiguity in a matter of such importance. India has succumbed to pressures and it creates the fear that India will do the same on climate change, euva etc.

Some people on the forum are saying that Pakistan is in bad shape so it does not matter. The question is: has it given up terror against India because it is in bad shape. If it has not, why should India give them concessions. Just because a big country wants us to. Does it suit India's interests. If it does, how come it is causing disquiet among professionals who are in charge of security of the country.

In any case, people of India have voted these guys to power. So they have the mandate to do these kind of things.

To the Congress spokesperson, if you do not agree with Pakistan's charge on Indian invlovement in Baluchistan, then why should you have it in the joint statement. If that is the case , why did the Indian side not put anything on Pakistani terrorism in Kashmir and rest of the country. This is really bizarre. No amount of spinning can hide the damage that has been done. And for what?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... 791225.cms

Even Congress leaders are saying there are contradictions.

"It does not mean any dilution of our stand. It only strengthens our stand," Singh said in Rajya Sabha. The assertion, however, failed to satisfy either Congress or the Opposition. "There are clear contradictions between what was released from Sharm el-Sheikh and what we heard in the two Houses," said a senior Congress leader just after the PM made his statement in Parliament.

Wonder what MMS is up to? What kind of capitulation is expected this week when Hillary Clinton is in India. Next week, Holbrooke will be in India. Futher concessions ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Jul 2009 12:02

N^3, it was just like you depicted.

Maybe MMS decided that India has legitimate overt interests in Balochistan and beyond.

And lastly BRaman must be having a fit that he cant join the whining here nor report on nationalist forum. Real liquid oxygen situation. ref. Ajit's Liquid O2 story.

SSridhar things are not as bad as they look.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 18 Jul 2009 12:07

Manish Tiwari for you.

Rahul Gandhi’s spin meisters in the Congress are clearly losing it in.
If last weekend they tried to spin away Rahul Gandhi’s ignorance as innocence, his middle age notwithstanding, this weekend they just accentuated why Rahul Gandhi is the Congress’ achilees heel.
Trying to match word for word with Gujarat Chief Minister and BJP leader Narendra Modi, Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari made a fool of himself with this retort (for those disputing the transcript here is the video)

Congress national spokesperson Manish Tiwari hitting out after Modi’s jab at Rahul said, “It’s true that Narendra Modi is from ocean but he is a ‘piranha‘

Manish Tiwari’s smart-ass retort would have carried its zing but for a simple problem - the piranha are fresh water fish and not ocean fish. The fishmarket verbal brawl is the least of the Congress’ problem.

The bigger problem for the Congress is that for someone who claims to have studied “Development Economics”, Rahul Gandhi with his juvenile rhetoric on “Corporate Culture” seems to match Mayawati’s intellect.

One is yet to hear anything intellectually substantial from Rahul Gandhi and his inability to get even basic facts right in his election affidavit raise serious questions on his competence and sense of responsibility.

Will Mr. Manish Tiwari explain if part of the grooming in Congress Culture of Young Leaders necessarily entails misstating facts in Election Affidavits ?
__________________________

Manisn Tiwari Accentuates Rahul Gandhi's Ignorance

“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.”

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 18 Jul 2009 12:07

Can we name this thread

Sharm Kar Sikh

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 12:15

csharma wrote:Some people on the forum are saying that Pakistan is in bad shape so it does not matter. The question is: has it given up terror against India because it is in bad shape.

It does not matter whether Pakistan is in a bad shape or it has given up terror. India cannot commit harakiri by conceding, even if by implication only, that it is equally a sponsor of terror just like Pakistan. In spite of its massive and widespread support for terrorism, Pakistan quite successfully maintained 'plausible deniability' for as long as 55 years until 9/11 happened and here we are meekly allowing Pakistan to hang us without a shred of evidence ? Give me a break when Pakistan claims, as proof, that some Balochis have accepted receiving help from India. If we have to go by such 'proof' we have to hang every Pakistani several times over. If, as MMS claims and I agree with him, we have nothing to hide, why did we allow Gilani to include a reference to Balochistan at all ? Are we enacting one of those melodramatic old Indian movies where the hero/heroine will silently suffer and allow others to abuse him/her for no fault of his/her just because of his/her love ?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 18 Jul 2009 12:16

ramana wrote:N^3, it was just like you depicted.

Maybe MMS decided that India has legitimate overt interests in Balochistan and beyond.

And lastly BRaman must be having a fit that he cant join the whining here nor report on nationalist forum. Real liquid oxygen situation. ref. Ajit's Liquid O2 story.

SSridhar things are not as bad as they look.

It is bad as it looks.

Pakistan only gives 'moral support' to terrorists [freedom fighters as per them] who they shove in with regularity!

And we agree that we furnish the Balochistan insurgency!

Legitimise our overt opeations? Are there such operations? If so, why make covert into overt? To scare the Pakistanis that worse is to come?

Maybe.

But then prove it!

Don't sit around like a moppet sucking around peaceably!

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 18 Jul 2009 12:20

SSridhar wrote:
It does not matter whether Pakistan is in a bad shape or it has given up terror. India cannot commit harakiri by conceding, even if by implication only, that it is equally a sponsor of terror just like Pakistan. In spite of its massive and widespread support for terrorism, Pakistan quite successfully maintained 'plausible deniability' for as long as 55 years until 9/11 happened and here we are meekly allowing Pakistan to hang us without a shred of evidence ? Give me a break when Pakistan claims, as proof, that some Balochis have accepted receiving help from India. If we have to go by such 'proof' we have to hang every Pakistani several times over. If, as MMS claims and I agree with him, we have nothing to hide, why did we allow Gilani to include a reference to Balochistan at all ? Are we enacting one of those melodramatic old Indian movies where the hero/heroine will silently suffer and allow others to abuse him/her for no fault of his/her just because of his/her love ?

Exactly. Now Hillary Clinton is providing support to MMS by saying that Pakistan will take action against terrorists in the next few days.

Does India have to say we support terrorists too so that Pakistan can action against known terrorists? What kind of ridiculous thing is this. Why did he not add a reference to Indian perceptions of threats in Northeast.

It seems like when India was not an "emerging power" it seemed to have more autonomy. What is the use of ATV, Agni if the leadership behaves likes this.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 12:28

RayC wrote:To scare the Pakistanis that worse is to come?

Maybe.

But then prove it!

Absolutely RayC. We have suffered worst terroristattacks from Pakistan and even if we are doing something in Balochistan, our retribution is minuscule. What more should we suffer before we debate and decide that we should inflict worse on Pakistan ? May be a nuke attack ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Jul 2009 12:28

I had posted this earlier but was lost in the din
nightwatch 15 July 2009

Unidentfied diplomatic sources disclosed that Pakistan’s Prime Minister Gilani was prepared to go on a counter attack by providing India for the first time solid evidence of Indian contacts with the Taliban. Gilani is expected to hand over the evidence to Prime Minister Singh, the sources said. The Pakistan government has also gathered proofs of Indian involvement in the Baluchistan insurgency.

If Gilani makes those proffers of evidence, he will insult Prime Minister Singh and thereby ensure the talks make no progress for a long time. Not even Musharraf engaged in one-upmanship tactics of that sort with the Indians. Stay tuned.

Yest MMS did not walk away. One should realize here is a US guy writing in advance what TSP would do in S-el-S a wrold away.

There was an expected behavior from India that didn't happen. The opposite happened. Think about it.

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Jul 2009 12:31

arun wrote: The Communists support the Congress.

CPI leader D Raja and CPI MP Gurudas Dasgupta:

Joint statement will help India win intl support: CPI

New Delhi, Jul 17 (PTI) The government today got support from an unexpected quarter on the Indo-Pak issue with CPI saying the joint statement will help India win international support. ……………...........

PTI

Just the CPI it seems. The CPM has taken a contrary position.

Sitaram Yechury leader of the CPM:

Posted: Sat, Jul 18 2009. 12:27 AM IST

UPA under political fire for Pakistan dialogue move …………………

“Such contradictory positions give rise to apprehensions that these are being made under pressure from the US. It does not augur well for India,” …………………

Live Mint

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 12:38

ramana wrote:Maybe MMS decided that India has legitimate overt interests in Balochistan and beyond. . . .
SSridhar things are not as bad as they look.

Ramana, I want to believe you. But, I am unable to.

After the Khan of Qalat expressed his desire to join the Indian dominion which India refused to accept because it stood by its declaration that one Dominion must not have an enclave within another, we have never politically lent any support to Balochistan as it suffered enormously at the hands of successive Pakistani regimes. We kept radio silence on this issue because it was an internal matter of Pakistan. Therefore, how will anyone believe us now when we claim some interest in Balochistan ? Suddenly, we allow Pakistan to accuse of fomenting terror there and that too in a joint statement ? Shouldn't we have asked Pakistan to engage us in some discussion before we allow such a reference, if at all ? I have never heard of Pakistan raking up Balochistan in any bilateral meeting before. The very first mention of Balochistan and we allow a finger to be pointed at us ?

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 18 Jul 2009 12:40

MMS and his "team" have committed what is essentially a traitorous act. They have committed high treason against India. MMS has the mind of a shopkeeper / trader and is unfit to rule.

A ruler acquires legitimacy only by one and one charactersitic alone: an understanding of military and strategic matters. The rest of the "qualities" are all hogwash and irrelevant. The ruler may claim to be a poet (Vajpayee), singer, bard, historian (Discovery of India), economist or full-bright scholar, but these things don't count one bit.

MMS being a "good economist" is absolutely irrelevant for the chair that he is sitting on. He lacks an understanding of military and strategic matters (like Nehru) and is therefore not a legitimate ruler. In earlier days, there was a process of natural selection in which competitors with an understanding of military matters and strategic insight would make short work of such rulers (capture and kill them and take over their kingdom).

But in modern days, such inept rulers with no understanding of strategic matters are shielded and protected by the system of bureacrats and a professional standing army. As a result, they keep hanging around for years and gradually through their hare-brained and strategically disastrous decisions keep chipping away at the foundation of the state until the system is no longer able to protect them from the consequences of their decisions and the entire state eventually collapses or gets invaded. (This is what happened with Nehru.)

MMS is one such "ruler" who is hanging around but his every action harms the country strategically and is greeted by horrified howls from the citizens who have better understanding of dangers facing the country than him. In a nutshell, MMS is not a legitimate ruler if you set aside the modern, West-inspired system of democracy where asses can elect a mule to rule over them. In the traditional system of kings and kingdoms that existed since thousands of years, MMS won't have lasted a month on the job and would have been captured or killed by a rival.

The worst thing is that even in the modern deomocratic sense, MMS is not a legitimate ruler either, having never won any election. He is India's shame and represents no one but the Americans.

In India's short post-independence history, I can only count two legitimate rulers -- Vallabh Bhai Patel and Indira Gandhi, and to some extent Vajpayee because he pushed back Pakistanis from Kargil. The rest -- Nehru, Morarji Desai, IK Gujral, etc. were all pretenders trying to get the job only for its power and glamour. They deserve no respect.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 18 Jul 2009 12:42

When we proclaim continuously from the roof tops, day in and day out, that we will meet the porkis more than half way, they know that we are negotiating from a position of weakness. Why more than halfway??
What is the wrong that we have done?? All our @#$%^ dealings with the porkis since independance has been as though we have been in the wrong when the world knows otherwise. Why are we pussyfooting around?? Is it because we have had only !@#% pussies who have led us and continue to lead us to this very day?

Why did this senile man give statements every day that we were prepared to do so. Has he no idea of diplomacy?? Is he our PM or the porkis PM. Baluchistan????. Why did he not include kabul and let , jaish and isi operating in India?

Why the fcuck speak to gilani in panjabi, is it to cut out the remaining Indians in the room out of the conversation???

Every porki in the room was well versed in panjabi. Our malayalee NSA, foreign sec and rhodes scholar FM were left scratching somethings unmentionable while this panju pappi jappi love fest was underway.
porkis are to be dealt with by the Indian state and not just panjus only like mms and gujral or !@#%^ kuldip nayyar. All these kandle kissing #$%& have already sold us down the river.

geelani said you are my younger brother, give me concessions and lo lo and behold, with mms's private generosity, concessions were immediately granted. Which family do these two belong to??? Certainly not any Indian family. Thank god thet geelani did not ask for the keys to our Reserve Bank!

Is this man conducting his own business concerning inherited property? or the business of a billion Indians?

Kick the @#$%%^%$#$ porkis in the balls, that is the only language that they speak and understand. No other language. International beggars!

Look what happened in russia and look how they reacted, that was the one rare case where we spoke the lingua franca of the muslims.

Deal from a position of strength and confidence. Accommodation, if any can always be made later and keeping our national interest supreme. If some of our own minorities are unhappy. so be it.
We are not responsible for the happiness of every porki with a grouse nor do we have to accomodate the $%^&*.

*** Deleted ***

musharraf in an interview with gas bag karan thappad claimed that let and jaish was unhappy with the treatment of IM and even that was an issue that had to be resolved. The b*****d tells us to listen to the porki army and by force disregard the legitimate concerns of our own army in siachin. karan thappad seemed most willing to do so, just like his own daddy disregarded the concerns of the Indian Army during the chinese aggression.

By and by I am sure that we will find it in our over generous hearts to accommodate even this bull shit with alacrity.

Finally, geelani is a just stupid dope and he has easily led mms by his nose. Just imagine the situation if the porkis actually sent some smart guy to deal with mms!!

The kangress would pass a law immediately making it mandatory for all Indians to be circumcised and pay jizzia so as not to offend the porkis.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 18 Jul 2009 12:43

SSridhar wrote:I have never heard of Pakistan raking up Balochistan in any bilateral meeting before. The very first mention of Balochistan and we allow a finger to be pointed at us ?

AS per Pakistan reports the army will be entering Balohistan soon.

Is it similar to 1971 ?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 18 Jul 2009 12:53

sanjaychoudhry wrote:MMS and his "team" have committed what is essentially a traitorous act. They have committed high treason against India. MMS has the mind of a shopkeeper / trader and is unfit to rule.

A ruler acquires legitimacy only by one and one charactersitic alone: an understanding of military and strategic matters. The rest of the "qualities" are all hogwash and irrelevant. The ruler may claim to be a poet (Vajpayee), singer, bard, historian (Discovery of India), economist or full-bright scholar, but these things don't count one bit.

MMS being a "good economist" is absolutely irrelevant for the chair that he is sitting on. He lacks an understanding of military and strategic matters (like Nehru) and is therefore not a legitimate ruler. In earlier days, there was a process of natural selection in which competitors with an understanding of military matters and strategic insight would make short work of such rulers (capture and kill them and take over their kingdom).

But in modern days, such inept rulers with no understanding of strategic matters are shielded and protected by the system of bureacrats and a professional standing army. As a result, they keep hanging around for years and gradually through their hare-brained and strategically disastrous decisions keep chipping away at the foundation of the state until the system is no longer able to protect them from the consequences of their decisions and the entire state eventually collapses or gets invaded. (This is what happened with Nehru.)

MMS is one such "ruler" who is hanging around but his every action harms the country strategically and is greeted by horrified howls from the citizens who have better understanding of dangers facing the country than him. In a nutshell, MMS is not a legitimate ruler if you set aside the modern, West-inspired system of democracy where asses can elect a mule to rule over them. In the traditional system of kings and kingdoms that existed since thousands of years, MMS won't have lasted a month on the job and would have been captured or killed by a rival.

The worst thing is that even in the modern deomocratic sense, MMS is not a legitimate ruler either, having never won any election. He is India's shame and represents no one but the Americans.

mms is an unimaginative babu. Was, is and always will be.

Somebody literally made him PM and he rapes the country.

If it were not for Narasimha Rao, mms would not even have a house to stay in.

How I miss the most chanakya of all Indians.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 18 Jul 2009 13:06

Despite what I have been saying since aeons ago, some people still give MMS some sense of respectability by calling him 'naive', 'an economist who has no grasp of strategic matters' bla bla. I told you long time ago, MMS has no nationalist bone in his body. No wonder he is the west's darling. From his ideological vantage point, it is not about the primacy and securing of the interets of India and Hindu civilization; but some west-dictated South Asian brotherhood mumbo jumbo. His contempt for Hindu nationalism is well-known in the manner in which he grotesquely implicates RSS for the anti-Sikh pogroms in 1984. No, this man is not naive, he knew exactly what he was doing when he sold India down the Indus river at Sharm-el-Sheikh.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 18 Jul 2009 13:11

'Politicans are not stupids" Gerad
very true, the question in debate is "Is MMS a politician?" No by any standard, a nominated, a hoisted, seat warmer baboo, who seldom uses his upstairs but more on the knees.

Hoe so?

If he were to be a politician

He would be a MP by now
He would be leading the party in the campaigns.
He would have displaced Rajamata or sent the family to alps.
He would be eloquently present his case to the nation.
He would not flip flop at the drop of some third rate foggy bottom baboos from duplicity.
He has accepted in essence that India is the cause of trouble in the internal affairs of TSP, while TSP got away saying only "Non State actors" in all terror.

so our singh is like this only, pissing in the wind that drifts into nations posterity as Hillay billary boards the plane to nai delli

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 18 Jul 2009 13:22

Prem Kumar wrote:Maybe its time to start an Indian edition of the thread Bakistan: Emirate of New-clear Inquilabi States-Bojitiv Newj starring MMS and SM Krishna, with a focus on GUBO'ing. Channelizing our frustrations via humor would help prevent ulcers amongst many a BRF jingo.

AoA onlee,
I suggest a thread on Brown-nosing Dhimmitude Sekoolaarism Minority-appeasement and the adventures of WKKs like MMS, SMK, et.al
Also new & unseen(NSFW) footage of dis-kiss-ssion between MMS & groper...

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 18 Jul 2009 14:20

After Mumbai attacks: we will take action unless Pakistan brings those responsible to justice. After elections climbdown: no talk until pakistan takes action. SCO summit in Yekaterinburg climbdown (talks start): I am pleased to meet you, but I have a limited mandate to tell you that the Pakistani territory cannot be used for acts of terror against India Now climbdown: talks delinked from action on terror. What's next?

Apparently, Unkil has told MMS to start talking to Pakistan and MMS is trying to gradually step down so as to prevent general public anger (that is until there is another attack and then the whole game will repeat as usual along with public anger). Nothing will happen and Unkil will keep yanking GoI chain unless Indian foreign policy becomes assertive as opposed to the current state of denial/passive foreign policy.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 18 Jul 2009 14:33

Last edited by SSridhar on 18 Jul 2009, 07:41, edited 3 times in total.
chetak, minorities are as much Indian as anybody else. they can and should play a role in India's policies. Indian policies should be taken with India's interests in mind, not to 'appease' particular sections of societies irrespective of their minority/ma

SSridhar,

While I accept your editing of my post. I will stick to my point.

Indian interests are to be dealt with by the Indian State only.

Narrow, parochial and communal interests are not to be brought into the picture.

This narrow, parochial and communal approach has often prevented us from asserting our legitimate national rights and resulted in bartering away of our strong negiotiating positions because the opposite party has knowingly incited some minority or special interest group in India. It has colored our dealing with the gulf countries also. Why are we the only country to have the haj subsidy? Even their holy book expressly forbids it.

This manipulation has been done by the chinese through the Indian commies, iran through the shias, gulf countries shia or sunni, and the porkis through their paid agents from various madrassahs. The vatican raised its head aggressively when reservations for "christian" scheduled castes matter was being bandied about.

The instances of meaningless compromises are too well known and too numerous to mention. When this is the known case why do we fall prey to such manipulations over and over again? Its because our cultural memory is very short and the world knows it well.

This simply means that the opposite party has found a leverage to damage and undermine you and you have been knowingly backed into a much weaker position. It would be legitimate to disregard all such influences and maintain the supreme primacy of national interest. As do all other countries in the world. With the sole exception of India which uses its own dharma to shoot itself in the foot everytime.

Not only this but India seems to take exceptional pride in its principles. Wake up and smell the cofee.
In any given situation, principles are for everybody or nobody. One country cannot tie down both its own hands because of principles and the other has no scruples in raping you.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 18 Jul 2009 14:38

There were always negative opinions about MMS here on BRF. Till this Sharm-al-Sheikh Harakiri, I have never really doubted the intellect of those, who implement our Foreign Policy, and I have never really criticized MMS or Sonia Gandhi. My trust is gone.

I am now afraid, that our leadership is too afraid, or too stupid to stand up for Indian interests. A coup is necessary.

And the only coup possible, is if another person in the Congress takes up the reigns. I wouldn't mind someone like Pranab Mukherjee, or PC Chidambaram, or A.K. Antony even, but my choice would be Kamal Nath. However Sonia Gandhi would never allow a strong minded Lok Sabha MP take over as PM. As such the only possibility is if Rahul Gandhi takes over the reigns.

PM Manmohan Singh, MEA SM Krishna, NSA M K Narayanan, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shanker Menon, they all have to go. We need a new Foreign Policy team, i.e. is not stupid, and not scared.

Manmohan Singh should know that there will be a legacy in his name - the financial reforms of 1991, the Indo-US Nuclear Deal, the economic growth in 2004-2009. He has nothing more to contribute to this nation. If he stays on, he may even sully his contributions till now.

SM Krishna should know, that the nation apologizes to him for disturbing his retirement. Sorry, wouldn't happen again.

MK Narayanan should know, that all know that it is a hard job. You tried!

Shiv Shanker Menon will soon start his retirement. Happy retirement and happy reading. Don't forget to visit your kids in America.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 18 Jul 2009 15:05

CRamS wrote:Despite what I have been saying since aeons ago, some people still give MMS some sense of respectability by calling him 'naive', 'an economist who has no grasp of strategic matters' bla bla. I told you long time ago, MMS has no nationalist bone in his body. No wonder he is the west's darling. From his ideological vantage point, it is not about the primacy and securing of the interets of India and Hindu civilization; but some west-dictated South Asian brotherhood mumbo jumbo. His contempt for Hindu nationalism is well-known in the manner in which he grotesquely implicates RSS for the anti-Sikh pogroms in 1984. No, this man is not naive, he knew exactly what he was doing when he sold India down the Indus river at Sharm-el-Sheikh.

Astute observation. Don't like to make caste generalizations, but the fellow doesn't have the robustness that might come from a Jat background. Grew up in an India colonized by the Brits, as a Dhimmi in a Muslim majority area. His mental make-up was further emasculated by his education in Britain. A mental eunuch, if you will. The emasculation has sunk very deep into his veins.

tripathi · Post by **tripathi** » 18 Jul 2009 15:08

the current govt/political apathy towards right response to terrorism originates from the apathy of indian public ie terrorism doesnt matter until my house is safe.Once Sardar Bhagat singh said--"baharon ko sunane ke liye dhamake ki zaroorat hoti hai" (to make deaf hear, u need loud explosion).....so indian public which is deaf now needs 10000 cordinated mumbai attacks across the length and breadth of india on a single day at the same time and everything has to be beamed 24/7 to the world news media.

--sorry for whine

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 18 Jul 2009 15:28

Indian PM under pressure after Pakistan meeting

NEW DELHI — A rare meeting between the Indian and Pakistani premiers this week ended with a pledge to cooperate on terrorism that has triggered anger and consternation back in New Delhi.

Sections of the Indian media, opposition parties and numerous analysts joined ranks to slam what they saw as major concessions made by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to his Pakistani counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani on the sidelines of the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Egypt.

The focus of attention was a joint statement from the two leaders stipulating that action on terrorism "should not be linked" to peace talks between the nuclear-armed South Asian rivals.

Critics interpreted this as a U-turn from India's previous insistence that peace talks could only resume after Islamabad brought to justice those responsible for last year's Mumbai attacks that claimed 166 lives.

"Advantage Pakistan" was the headline verdict of the Times of India, while the tabloid Mail Today thundered "PM sells out to Pak".

India has blamed the assault on India's financial capital on Pakistan-based militants and suggested they were aided by official Pakistani agencies.

On his return from the NAM summit, Singh was given a torrid time in parliament on Friday, with opposition leader L.K. Advani insisting the prime minister had "capitulated".

Singh argued that the joint statement contained no dilution of India's position and promised there would be no resumption of any "meaningful dialogue" until Pakistan fulfilled a commitment to bring the Mumbai attackers to justice and to crack down on militant training camps.

Advani responded by leading a walkout of opposition MPs.

Most observers were equally unimpressed.

India's former envoy to Pakistan, G. Parthsarthy, said Singh had "wrapped himself up in a contradiction" by appearing to de-link the peace talks from terrorism and then backing off.

"We made a diplomatic faux pas and we should admit that," Parthsarthy said.

Former foreign secretary Lalit Mansingh was also critical of the "apparent contradictions" between the joint statement and Singh's subsequent remarks.

"Both the prime ministers (Singh and Gilani) have differing interpretations, which is embarrassing" he said.

Kanwal Sibal, another former foreign secretary, was even more scathing, insisting that the "ill-conceived and badly drafted" joint statement had compromised India's position and made "unnecessary and damaging concessions" to Pakistan.

India and Pakistan launched a peace process in 2004 to resolve all outstanding issues of conflict, including a territorial dispute over the divided Himalayan territory of Kashmir.

India suspended the dialogue after the Mumbai terror strikes which saw Singh's government come under intense domestic pressure to take retaliatory action.

Uday Bhaskar, a New Delhi-based strategic analyst, suggested the furious reaction to the joint statement had been ill-founded and that it actually strengthened India's hand.

"I think we can say from the statement that Pakistan will go ahead with the investigations into the Mumbai attacks and not hold that against the demand that India and Pakistan first solve the Kashmir dispute," he said. {What BS.. where is the advantage for India in that? Our arguement all along was against 'Cashmere first' stand}

Pakistan has said that it will put the five accused of involvement in the Mumbai siege on trial soon, including the alleged mastermind Zakiduddin Lakhvi.

Bhaskar also argued that any conciliatory moves on Singh's part were aimed at empowering the civilian, democratic forces in Pakistan represented by Gilani.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who arrived in India late Friday for an official visit, said she had been "very impressed" by the Singh-Gilani meeting in Egypt and saw the joint pledge to cooperate in the fight against terrorism as a positive step forward.

"I really see events moving in a very positive direction," Clinton said in a pre-arrival interview with CNN-IBN television. "In part, because of the shared sacrifice, commitment and understanding that now exists about the threats terrorists pose to both countries."

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 16:08

chetak wrote:
Last edited by SSridhar on 18 Jul 2009, 07:41, edited 3 times in total.
chetak, minorities are as much Indian as anybody else. they can and should play a role in India's policies. Indian policies should be taken with India's interests in mind, not to 'appease' particular sections of societies irrespective of their minority/ma
SSridhar,

Indian interests are to be dealt with by the Indian State only.

Narrow, parochial and communal interests are not to be brought into the picture.

Chetak, nobody has any quarrel with the above statements. However, no one can say "minorities should not have a say in foreign policy". That doesn't fly especially in this forum.

I do not want further arguments on this issue.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 18 Jul 2009 16:20

SSridhar wrote:
chetak wrote: Last edited by SSridhar on 18 Jul 2009, 07:41, edited 3 times in total.
chetak, minorities are as much Indian as anybody else. they can and should play a role in India's policies. Indian policies should be taken with India's interests in mind, not to 'appease' particular sections of societies irrespective of their minority/ma

SSridhar,

Indian interests are to be dealt with by the Indian State only.

Narrow, parochial and communal interests are not to be brought into the picture.

Chetak, nobody has any quarrel with the above statements. However, no one can say "minorities should not have a say in foreign policy". That doesn't fly especially in this forum.

I do not want further arguments on this issue.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jul 2009 16:24

Many theories are floating around as to why this hara-kiri was committed.Here is one more in that long list

If the dossier is any indication of the way Pakistani authorities are going to proceed in the case, sources said, then the chargesheet would be quite substantive.

Pakistan has reportedly given details on each of the accused, which includes Zarar Shah, who has been identified as the person in-charge of the communications {So what ? Is that a great victory for Indian diplomacy that Zarar Shah has been so identified ? What's the message here ? India is offering weak excuses to hide the embarrassment} , and then there are details of proclaimed offenders like Kasab.

The LeT, has been referred to as a defunct organisation with no links to other outfits in Pakistan. It is in this context, that India did not want to be rigid in the conversation with Pakistan Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani at Sharm-el-Shaikh. The dossier is being seen as a step forward as a result, the formulation in the joint statement.

Pakistan claims LeT as a defunct organization and we accept it and even claim that as sufficient grounds not to be rigid in talks ? Man Mohan Singh's advisors are committing more hara-kiri with one imbecile statement after another.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 18 Jul 2009 16:49

How nice it would be if Hillary had never visited. I certainly hope we have as minimally few as possible high profile visits from DC to Dilli (and vice versa for that matter). Style trumps substance and such naataks are enacted to give some aura of suckcess to the visit leading to faux pas of the kind seen in besharm al shaikh.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 18 Jul 2009 17:00

Pranav wrote: Astute observation. Don't like to make caste generalizations, but the fellow doesn't have the robustness that might come from a Jat background. Grew up in an India colonized by the Brits, as a Dhimmi in a Muslim majority area. His mental make-up was further emasculated by his education in Britain. A mental eunuch, if you will. The emasculation has sunk very deep into his veins.

Despite not being a great fan of Manmohan, I do think India needs to maintain contacts with all stakeholders in Pakistan - we need contacts with the civilian government, with all political parties, with religious leaders, with all factions in the armed forces, with the provincial governments etc. India needs contacts with everybody and should try to back those elements that are amenable to reason. We need to guide the evolution of the entity known as Pakistan into a form that is more conducive for long-term peace and stability in South Asia.

No benefits should be given to the bad guys, but we do not gain anything by cutting off all contact.