India-China News and Discussion

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 22 Sep 2009 21:49

tejas wrote:I am actually from Andhra and don't understand Hindi.

How many members are from Andhra in BRF ?

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 22 Sep 2009 21:56

I am also from Andhra and understand Hindi (and Bengali as well as a smattering of Nepali and Tamil) very well.

Appreciate the similarity in our sentiment is all.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Sep 2009 21:58

Hari Seldon wrote:
I buy nothing British and will never step foot in that country.

Me too

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 22 Sep 2009 22:15

Americans are Pakified British onlee

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Sep 2009 01:34

Ah! pity we have to run this dhaga on China by bashing the British and their Pakifications - all in English!

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 23 Sep 2009 02:13

brihaspati wrote:Ah! pity we have to run this dhaga on China by bashing the British and their Pakifications - all in English!

Though not for China thread but here are some of thoughts on the British both positive and negative:

(a) They have blood of 6 million Bengalis on their hands. The numbers of death were even more than Holocaust and billions of dollars are for Holocaust victims but not even a penny for the famine of 1943.
(b) British perfidy during Kashmir conflict to get in good books of Gulf states
(c) Khalistani movement was largely their brainchild.
(d) ISI was their brainchild.
(e) Jallianwala bagh, which some day someone may replicate in Hyde Park
(f) Subhash Chandra Bose mystery where most probably he was sold to Russia in connivance with Nehru.

But there are lot of positives as well:
(a) India with its 17 major languages would never have been united, but for British language and governance system, as it was impossible for all 500+ Kings to agree on one system and one language.
(b) The civil service system as Merit before British was not the main criteria, and caste/religion/region had the upper hand. Of course some Kingdoms were exception.
(c) English Language as Telugus, Tamils, Malayalis, Marathis, Kannadigas, Bengalis and Punjabis could speak with the Gangetic plains India in a common language.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Sep 2009 02:20

Karna_A wrote: (a) India with its 17 major languages would never have been united, but for British language and governance system, as it was impossible for all 500+ Kings to agree on one system and one language.

500+ kings happened because of British occupation. War between the various regions/princes was helped by the colonial powers.
Other wise many of these contiguous areas would have merged to create larger kingdomes.

At least three large kingdom/empires would have been formed from 1700-1890. THey would be in the same stage/development as the Russian empire in 1900.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 23 Sep 2009 02:38

Most of these "Kingdoms" were little more than Jaagirdaars who collected tax for the brits. The brits supported them by providing military cover, and calling them Kings.
They even had a hierarchical system built for the various kings and kingdoms wrt the number of guns that would be used in Gun-salute of each king.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Sep 2009 02:54

The British interrupted the reconquista that was going on. It was Islamic disruption that broke up linguistic commonality - evident in the primary north-south divide. It was disruption of unity that broke up language and religion. Not diversity in language and religion that broke up unity.

This gives a key to understanding the Chinese need to divide India into small pieces - just as the British felt. They realize that political and military disruption leads to linguistic and faith diversity. This is why they do not allow it on their own soil. Both the British and the Chinese have been bloody in suppressing secession. When they are not ashamed in calling for divisions of India, we should not be ashamed of calling for partition of UK and China - into many small peices. Citing all the linguistic and "religious" diversity.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 23 Sep 2009 03:12

Before crediting the British for giving unity, we need to look how the vast Maratha kingdom could flourish with so many languages? Until the British had to liquidate this empire by wars, it functioned with multiple languages.

The Sikh kingdom, though smaller & less diverse, also worked with multiple languages. It could attract military talent from places as far away as gangetic planes, central India & also in minute quantities from Europe & US.

If there is a strong core of the nation, the language used by that core can be the lingua franca of the country. That is what happened with Mughals who ruled using Farsi over an empire as big as the British. This is what happened with the Sikhs & Marathas. Language is an issue when the core/center is weak & non-existent.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 23 Sep 2009 04:59

This is simply racist crap. Britain exited India 60 years ago. Islamic invasions had already weakened and emancipated India and it's potential by the time the Brits came and made easy money here. What i find offensive here is people dissing people and not doctrine. Once you start that you cannot stop. It carries forward to color, race, language and every difference one can imagine. BR IMHO has to put a stop to people dissing peoples. Doctrines yes. But people are the same everywhere. It's the doctrines that their Govts or dictators follow that matter to us. I like Pathak pickles and i think it's British. I won't stop buying that. I speak English and i think i am more aware than knee jerk anti-Brits here that it's derived from Sanskrit. That when the Brits left India barely 10000 people could speak in English. English was promoted as a tech tool. To get India on the fast track. My dad who was amongst the first batches in IIT tells me it (English)made it easier to absorb tech. Instead of having libraries with translations in multiple Indian languages it was easier to have bright people assemble learn a simple language and get technologically educated in the language understood by most developed nations. India did the right thing then. India proved people can grow speaking 5 languages comfortably. When i travel people are amazed when i say average Indians can speak 3 languages of different scripts comfortably. I can speak/ understand 5. Most here many more. Sorry for the rant. Lets stop dissing Brits. And we have some really cool Brit posters here who are solidly behind the India idea. Hatred is never an emotion of value.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 23 Sep 2009 05:17

The Maratha Kingdom was a loose federation something like Soviet Union is today. But it was also the one of the worst periods in Indian history due to the Pindaris:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pindari
All the differernt rulers like Mughals/Sikh were ethnic based and a King could only come from the same ethnic background. So all these rulers tended to mistreat minorities.

There can never one native language in India say Hindi since Tamil/Telugu/Malayalam is too rich a language/culture to be seconded. Phonetically Bengali is perhaps the most advanced of Indic languages.
The strong core to India cannot be language unlike China, but it could only be Indian values.

surinder wrote:Before crediting the British for giving unity, we need to look how the vast Maratha kingdom could flourish with so many languages? Until the British had to liquidate this empire by wars, it functioned with multiple languages.

The Sikh kingdom, though smaller & less diverse, also worked with multiple languages. It could attract military talent from places as far away as gangetic planes, central India & also in minute quantities from Europe & US.

If there is a strong core of the nation, the language used by that core can be the lingua franca of the country. That is what happened with Mughals who ruled using Farsi over an empire as big as the British. This is what happened with the Sikhs & Marathas. Language is an issue when the core/center is weak & non-existent.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 23 Sep 2009 05:25

The strong core to India cannot be language unlike China, but it could only be Indian values.

This has to be repeated again and again here. It's value systems aka Doctrine that form consensus. Language, color, caste, is immaterial and of transient value as far as unity goes. We have to promote similar value systems in our neighbourhood too. Our conflicts are arising primarily because China in our neighbourhood is actively promoting different value systems to ours. When we see that we should see red. We are not doing so. Our Govt believes in some magical way we can exist with different value systems all around us. Sorry we cannot. We can exist with different people, colors, races, languages, but we cannot co exist with people of different value systems. Not possible.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 23 Sep 2009 05:35

Hand-in-Hand drill with China loses touch

A senior defence ministry official here said one of the reasons for not holding the drill this year was the austerity drive of the Centre. “It costs a lot of money to requisition an Indian Air Force aircraft and fly the soldiers to Kunming with all their equipment and sustain them,” he said.

sunnyP · Post by **sunnyP** » 23 Sep 2009 05:54

Seems a bit strange that you hold such strong anti-British sentiments due to the harm they have caused India in the past yet you have no problem living in the USA, a country who through their support of Pakistan since 1947 has caused India far more damage than the UK during this period. How about a boycott of the USA too?

tejas wrote:Ramana garu, if I thought it would make one iota of a difference I would gladly write to the editor. However it will not. After China-Pakistan, I despise the UQ more than any other country on this planet. I cannot recall in the history of intelligent life on this planet, another instance when so few people were responsible for so much misery across the globe.

I buy nothing British and will never step foot in that country. The EIF clause of the shitty bitty was promulgated by our Chinese blothers and none other than the UQ. They can't stand the thought of SDREs having their own nukes while both their nukes and SLBMs are made in the USA. While people on this forum were cheering, I was fuming when the IAF bought the Hawk from Bae. Anyway sorry for the off topic rant.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 23 Sep 2009 07:15

Seems a bit strange that you hold such strong anti-British sentiments due to the harm they have caused India in the past yet you have no problem living in the USA, a country who through their support of Pakistan since 1947 has caused India far more damage than the UK during this period. How about a boycott of the USA too?

Good point and while at it, why not give up the yingliss language and shirts-trousers as well? Why not fight against the entire world because someone somewhere must've hurt yindia someplace, no?

Every analogy has its limits. Stretching them way beyond and claiming profound insight or hypocrisy-detection is cheap talk, IMHO.

The problem with UQstan is not (just) that they've caused untold misery in our country, beggared us essentially - but that they have never, ever apologized or expressed regret for atrocities committed in the name of their crown.
Never.
Miliband is on record apologizing to PRC for the opium wars and for the McMahon line, Blair apologized to the US congress for the 1812 war in which DC was sacked and the white house burnt down, but never to India.
None.
Jabki their queen and her hubby had the blue blooded grace to question the number of dead in jallianwala on location from Punjab during their 1997 visit (consequently the queen's scheduled parliament address was cancelled)

And then they pretend to be jolly-good-chappies, all friend-friend onlee.

I mean, hadh hota hai yaar.....

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 23 Sep 2009 11:11

US is a land of milk and honey.

UK is fish and chips and now Chicken Tikka Masala!

Some difference?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 23 Sep 2009 11:33

As I said in my post I am living in the US as my parents emigrated here (when I was an infant). Due to certain domestic complications I now cannot leave the US and hope to see my kids at the same time. Is that a liitle less odd now?

As for relative damage, impoverishing India ( I've seen estimates in the trillions of dollars in economic theft), leaving behind the poison pill of Pakistan at independence and talking Nehru into taking Kashmir to the UNSC where the British talked the US into supporting a ceasefire--- please don't compare the US to the UQ.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Sep 2009 12:42

Karna_A wrote:
brihaspati wrote:Ah! pity we have to run this dhaga on China by bashing the British and their Pakifications - all in English!
But there are lot of positives as well:
(a) India with its 17 major languages would never have been united, but for British language and governance system, as it was impossible for all 500+ Kings to agree on one system and one language.
(b) The civil service system as Merit before British was not the main criteria, and caste/religion/region had the upper hand. Of course some Kingdoms were exception.
(c) English Language as Telugus, Tamils, Malayalis, Marathis, Kannadigas, Bengalis and Punjabis could speak with the Gangetic plains India in a common language.

The issue is not English, the issue is that people fall for the above psy-ops and actually believe that English was something that British gave us and thus helped us unite.

As Harbans pointed out English was almost chosen so that India could piggy back on the existing knowledge in the dominant western world, since the Brits etc had destroyed our own and left us far behind.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 23 Sep 2009 13:24

English is the international link language and it allows a whole lot of people of India to emigrate and gets jobs beyond the Indian frontiers. It relieves the burden on the Indian govt to provide employment. Is that a bad thing?

Vernacular is taught to all, except the migratory Central govt employees wards, who because of the instability in their lives, take Hindi as the second language since that is common all over India and a link language in India, except maybe the South.

Yet, none forgets their own language, even if not the literature!

So, what is the issue?

How many Hindi speaking people know a third language? Should they also not identify with the entity of India that is forced on those who are not Hindi speaking?

Yesterday, I saw a programme extolling the virtues of Premchand. Fine. But do the Premchand fans know a fig about the richness of Bengali or South Indian literature?

The British has destroyed nothing. It is those who high inferiority complex and the inadequacy of their literature who feel threatened!!

It is this Hindi chauvinists who have encouraged the English language elite! The wards of those in the Central services and that is huge lot, most regretfully had to choose Hindi as the second language since there was no option to learn their own language! So, let us not lament about English and the British!!

It is the Hindi wallahs who have cause the rot! It is time to search for the naughty elves within and not blame others!

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Sep 2009 13:44

RayC wrote:It is the Hindi wallahs who have cause the rot! It is time to search for the naughty elves within and not blame others!

No RayC that is not correct at all, this is OT for the thread so I will just say that I have had this discussion with some south Indian language speakers as before where they make the same claim and go on to say that it is all because of discrimination to them that the entire north gangs up against them because after all whats the big difference between Hindi and Punjabi and Bengali and Gujrati after all.

The whole thing is a conspiracy to keep their special language down.

The damage that the British have done is precisely this, the fact that all Indians (repeat ALL INDIANS) consider themselves a special intrests group that other Indians are out to get and have lost the prior pre-British era of common Indian link languages and ALL learned Indians being aware of more than one link language.

Certainly English is a good language to learn and no one is saying its not, but when Indians need to chasten an Indian link language and other Indians in order to support English and show such marked reluctance to a Indian link language as opposed to firangi language (yes its a firangi language, sorry) we know that the damage is done.

With all due respect your post to me is just another symptom of exactly the same problem that I see with English and with the lack of Indian linguistic unity which was damaged by the Invasion.

------------------

Yes I know the counter argument is that English is the new Indian language, I dont buy it though

PS> I will appreciate if you will continue this discussion in Nukkad or some other thread (not here) and just post a link here so we can got there.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 23 Sep 2009 14:07

Sanku wrote:
RayC wrote:It is the Hindi wallahs who have cause the rot! It is time to search for the naughty elves within and not blame others!
No RayC that is not correct at all, this is OT for the thread so I will just say that I have had this discussion with some south Indian language speakers as before where they make the same claim and go on to say that it is all because of discrimination to them that the entire north gangs up against them because after all whats the big difference between Hindi and Punjabi and Bengali and Gujrati after all.

The whole thing is a conspiracy to keep their special language down.

The damage that the British have done is precisely this, the fact that all Indians (repeat ALL INDIANS) consider themselves a special intrests group that other Indians are out to get and have lost the prior pre-British era of common Indian link languages and ALL learned Indians being aware of more than one link language.

Certainly English is a good language to learn and no one is saying its not, but when Indians need to chasten an Indian link language and other Indians in order to support English and show such marked reluctance to a Indian link language as opposed to firangi language (yes its a firangi language, sorry) we know that the damage is done.

With all due respect your post to me is just another symptom of exactly the same problem that I see with English and with the lack of Indian linguistic unity which was damaged by the Invasion.

------------------

Yes I know the counter argument is that English is the new Indian language, I dont buy it though

PS> I will appreciate if you will continue this discussion in Nukkad or some other thread (not here) and just post a link here so we can got there.

Sanku,

With all due regards to you and those who propagate Hindi, I will only say that this is irritating in South India and it is more irritating to them than to us in Bengal.

In Bengal. From time immemorial, we have had Biharis and UP chaps working as labour and so we are more amenable to Hindi or should we say Bihari! My mother would always say, Batti Butayo! Hardly Hindi, but sure, Bihari!

Pray, why should we speak Hindi? Do the majority of India speak Hindi? Check the dialects, nothing in common and then the Hindu Punjabis stated that they speak Hindi, when they actually speak Panjabi. Big Fudge!

What’s the big difference between Hindi and Punjabi and Bengali and Gujrati after all. :?

It is so evident that you don’t understand languages. There is just one small difference – they don’t understand each other! Of course, one thing is common – it makes a big circus!!

Thank you for your advice, I don’t visit Nukkad. Not my cup of tea. Too puerile! If you would have heeded your own advice of Nukkad, you would posted your post there and not have me giving you the rejoinder.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Sep 2009 14:45

RayC wrote:
What’s the big difference between Hindi and Punjabi and Bengali and Gujrati after all. :?

It is so evident that you don’t understand languages. There is just one small difference – they don’t understand each other! Of course, one thing is common – it makes a big circus!!

But RayC, I didn't say that, I am saying that others did, who think they have the special language and all others are out to get them.

and go on to say that it is all because of discrimination to them that the entire north gangs up against them because after all whats the big difference between Hindi and Punjabi and Bengali and Gujrati after all.

Thank you for your advice, I don’t visit Nukkad. Not my cup of tea. Too puerile! If you would have heeded your own advice of Nukkad, you would posted your post there and not have me giving you the rejoinder.

A request is not a rejoinder, why the aggressive defensiveness, I did not post it in Nukkad or any thread because I was extending you the courtesy of taking this discussion to which ever thread you think is right not forcing you.

at the same time not take it too OT.

Anyway, I stand by my statement
The damage that the British have done is precisely this, the fact that all Indians (repeat ALL INDIANS) consider themselves a special interests group that other Indians are out to get and have lost the prior pre-British era of common Indian link languages and ALL learned Indians being aware of more than one link language.

I hope with time people come to see of their own free minds the need for a INDIAN link language.

I hope that with time people also understand that how a basic language based division are a phenomena started after Islamic invasion led to breakdown of interaction and Indian continuum and the process accelerated after the advent of British and was crystallized by language based states.

As to on what basis should the link language be chosen, I think that's a interesting discussion in its own right but not very complicated either, if the matter was contemplated rationally the

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 23 Sep 2009 14:47

Karna_A wrote:The Maratha Kingdom was a loose federation something like Soviet Union is today. But it was also the one of the worst periods in Indian history due to the Pindaris:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pindari
All the differernt rulers like Mughals/Sikh were ethnic based and a King could only come from the same ethnic background. So all these rulers tended to mistreat minorities.

Marathas became a loose federation after second Anglo-Maratha war in 1802 in truest sense. The last hope of the empire Mahadaji Shinde and Nana Phadnavis died by 1800. The last Peshwa, Bajirao-2 was the most incompetent of all. Hence, all the factions disowned the suzerainty of Peshwas.

From 1645 to 1802, for all practical purposes, Maratha empire was centrally ruled by King from Satara. The factions of Pune, Nagpur, Baroda, Indore, Gwalior, Dhar paid tribute and accepted the authority of the chhatrapati.

The Pindaris were never the mainstay of Indian army. The rose to prominence after second anglo-maratha battle. From 1707 to 1802, Indic civilization rose and recovered to great extent, owing to efforts of Marathas and later Sikhs. British had to win India from Marathas, and not Mughals, please remember that. Hence, stop calling one of the glorious pages of Indian history as worst periods and score a self-goal.

Acharya wrote:At least three large kingdom/empires would have been formed from 1700-1890. THey would be in the same stage/development as the Russian empire in 1900.

Which is the third one?

Brihaspati wrote:The British interrupted the reconquista that was going on. It was Islamic disruption that broke up linguistic commonality - evident in the primary north-south divide. It was disruption of unity that broke up language and religion. Not diversity in language and religion that broke up unity.They realize that political and military disruption leads to linguistic and faith diversity.

Surinder wrote:If there is a strong core of the nation, the language used by that core can be the lingua franca of the country. That is what happened with Mughals who ruled using Farsi over an empire as big as the British. This is what happened with the Sikhs & Marathas. Language is an issue when the core/center is weak & non-existent.

Great quotes IMHO, both Brihaspati ji and Surinder ji... Thank you.. Will save these in my HDD...

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 23 Sep 2009 17:34

I'm sorry to interrupt the Brit bashing and historical discourse here but I'm kinda confused about the relevance of this discussion to the thread topic ??

Now coming back to the topic,
Why the China threat story sells in India

It’s the season of China-bashing in India. In bad old socialist days, the ruling party in India was quick to conjure up the “foreign hand” to distract public attention from a host of domestic crises. Now, it’s the turn of market-driven media to manufacture “external threats” to spike their TRP ratings.

But blaming the “testosterone-driven” media for sexing up the spectre of China threat, as top officials and the army chief have done, is only part of the story. It’s easy to scoff at “conspiracy theorists,” but paranoia is sometimes an act of good citizenship. Instead of discrediting the media, it’s important to understand why the China threat story sells in the overheated media marketplace in India.

Interesting read ...

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Sep 2009 19:31

“testosterone-driven” media for sexing up the spectre of China threat

Hah, at the beginning - wasn't it Burkha Apa and Co., sexing it up - thats a grave aspersion to the female gender dominated NDTV!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Sep 2009 19:33

A key figure behind the "charter of 2008" human rights declaration in China was arrested this year. Can we have some discussion on these chartists, and their position now, both inside China and outside?

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 23 Sep 2009 19:42

Sanku wrote:As Harbans pointed out English was almost chosen so that India could piggy back on the existing knowledge in the dominant western world, since the Brits etc had destroyed our own and left us far behind.

Chosen by who? Lord Bentick? Thomas Babington McCaulay?

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 23 Sep 2009 19:49

Hari Seldon wrote: Good point and while at it, why not give up the yingliss language and shirts-trousers as well? Why not fight against the entire world because someone somewhere must've hurt yindia someplace, no?

This line of argumentation extends the arguments to make ridiculous conclusions and show in the process that the original itself was flawed. Tejas states that he has taken a stance against the British pilferage of India. Instead of praising someone for taking a personal stand and acting on their beliefs, we see a tendency to ridicule that stance and and action. The method is to unreasonably stretch the logic to situations it is not meant to show contempt for this stance. Tejas clearly states that his boycott of UK goods & servies is aimed at British wealth-making. How does giving up USA or pants & shirts is relevant to Tejas's aim is not explained (unless they are made by UK, in which case Tejas has already stated his aim to avoid).

Yours truly takes the same stance against goods produced in TSP. About PRC I am unable to do anything since practically everything is made there.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Sep 2009 19:56

friends..apologies for pushing the debate the way I did. But it would still be great to discuss on "distorted history" or "Indian interests". Or if you have plans about the linguistic and other angles mentioned here, for the future of India, I would be delighted to join you on the strat leader/scenarios thread.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 23 Sep 2009 19:57

surinder saab,

seems as if you've totally missed my sublime sarcasm and twisted my point...

.

I am one with Tejas on his sentiment and was taking an exception to Sri Sri sunnyP's forceful argument that tejas should take boycott US and not UQ..... it is that false and flawed line of reasoning that moi attacked onlee.

/Have a nice day

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 23 Sep 2009 20:02

Hari,
My apologies. I misunderstood your stance. Sorry about that.

Added later: I went and reread your post, and sure as hell I missed it entirely. Not enough coffee I guess.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Sep 2009 20:21

RayC wrote:English is the international link language and it allows a whole lot of people of India to emigrate and gets jobs beyond the Indian frontiers. It relieves the burden on the Indian govt to provide employment. Is that a bad thing?

How did English become the international link language. Due to British trading system on the back of colonized India English became a worldwide language.

If the french had defeated English in the 1750s then French would have been the largest spoken link language in the world.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 23 Sep 2009 20:26

Surinder birader, I too boycott all thing TSP and am left throwing up my hands in frustration when it comes to made in China. My last comment on this off topic issue.

Cheers.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Sep 2009 20:29

Boycotting of Chinese goods are a good part and I support it. But the situation can get quite complicated.What of British capital that is invested in india and which is producing goods in India and Indians consume it or export and earn from it - but the British are making profits anyway! Chinese products or components are becoming integrated in larger components so becoming impossible to eliminate. Moreover many things are not exported by India for Indians to use abroad or for others to use.

I had refused an unsolicited offer from UK to work at an uni there - because I felt as a son of someone who got expelled from school for throwing the kings's crown I could not take service under the crown. Most of my ancestors were in conflict with the crown one way or the other, and even my dad had scuttled offers to research and work there (probably part of a GOI secret services initiative that saw a lot of "radicals" exported to London in the 50's and 60's to return as docile jholawallahs).

I felt it my duty not to work under the crown. That does not prevent me from having English friends or accepting their food and friendship. But I represent India there and more recently the "Bharatyia" - and over the years they have learnt not to even open their mouths in insinuations or even jokes about anything Indian. They get back equal or more in measure! On my very first lunch when I first visited an Eng-uni I was asked "innocently" "oh you speak English so fluently. Did you learn it here?" pat was the reply "oh no I learnt it in India, I have actually been forced to forget and lose a large bit here" the persons' face darkened immediately.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 24 Sep 2009 12:54

brihaspati wrote: On my very first lunch when I first visited an Eng-uni I was asked "innocently" "oh you speak English so fluently. Did you learn it here?" pat was the reply "oh no I learnt it in India, I have actually been forced to forget and lose a large bit here" the persons' face darkened immediately.

I wonder where they learned how to count

Pathetic country by the way, their national debt is more than 100% of GDP and sooner or later it will disappear into EU thereby ending its current miserable existence as 51st state of USA - one less evil on this planet. The only thing that a British PM can do is kiss some Amrikan president's ass. The less I say about UK the better

China we can take care of - at least they will be around to take care of. The saddest part about UK is that that damn third-world country pretending to be a developed country would have commited hara-kiri before the time comes to pay them back all the due respects of colonization

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 24 Sep 2009 13:12

surinder wrote:
Sanku wrote:As Harbans pointed out English was almost chosen so that India could piggy back on the existing knowledge in the dominant western world, since the Brits etc had destroyed our own and left us far behind.
Chosen by who? Lord Bentick? Thomas Babington McCaulay?

No his children in independent India. You are joining issue with some one who agrees with you BTW

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 27 Sep 2009 18:37

Many Chinese still see India as their main enemy: Report

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Sep 2009 18:52

China reaches out on 60th anniversary

Not everyone in Beijing speaks in the silky language of the foreign ministry. Thursday’s parade is certain to provoke an outpouring of virulent nationalism. Curiously, the enemy most often spoken of is India. The censors permit alarmingly frank discussion on the internet of the merits of a war against India to secure the Tibetan plateau. “Help the Maoists take over power in India to pay them back for hosting the Dalai Lama,” said one contributor.

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 27 Sep 2009 20:18

Gerard wrote:China reaches out on 60th anniversary

From the above article

Nervous other powers are encouraging the Chinese to become “responsible stakeholders” in the international system that Mao once sought to overturn. “Nobody wants to repeat what happened when imperial Germany and Japan emerged on the world stage a century ago,” said a British diplomat with long experience of negotiating with the Chinese.

And, why does following the same strategy of appeasement (that Chamberlain did w.r.t. Germany circa 1937), would ensure the outcome is any different?

Speaking last week at the UN, the Chinese president committed to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, saying “all countries should strictly comply with non-proliferation obligations, refrain from double standards and tighten and improve export controls”.
Western diplomats find the new tone encouraging, coming from a country that gave the designs for its own atomic bomb to Pakistan in a cold-blooded move to weaken their joint rival, India.

And the forked tongue statement is accepted at its facevalue !

The censors permit alarmingly frank discussion on the internet of the merits of a war against India to secure the Tibetan plateau.

Why the obsession with India, what happened to the other usual suspects USA/Japan/S.Korea? Already thought of as subjugated? Gurus any opinions?