Rudradev wrote: I responded to your intellectually dishonest attempt to sweep Sharm-el-Shaikh under the carpet by asserting that remembering when the national interest has been "sold out", in full public view, constitutes a "time warp".
The thread has traveled quite a bit since your post. I thought I would not respond and let sleeping dogs lie. However, on second thoughts I feel I should exercise my right to reply.
Afterall in two posts in a row you’ve made crude personal attacks on me, calling me first a shill
(perhaps in the payroll of the Maino-Manmohan cabal?) and then saying I’m intellectually dishonest
It’s a bit rich that you quote what you call “Congress Web Warrior Manual Directive” of resorting to ad-hominen
attacks when facts don’t add up to your convenience
. Pot calling the kettle black? Or is this the frustration of an ex-Congress Web Warrior?
While I really don’t care what you think, it would be good if you look at yourself in the mirror more often. I’ll explain why later.
First the fact (for a change):
My views on SES?
It’s there in the quote which you used:
amit wrote: SES was a fiasco, I think that point has been proven quite comprehensively. Having said that, however, I don't think it serves any purpose of bringing it out like a Rabbit from a Hat every time a discussion on India's foreign policy takes place. That also suggest a kind of time wrap.
Yes I do think SES was a major foreign policy blunder on the part of the PM and the then Foreign Secretary. However, to be frank I’m not too sure about the Maino-Manmohan cabal’s hand in all this. I’m sure you’re more well-informed.
You ignored my comment on what I thought about SES and then took the later part of my statement and launched into a diatribe without pausing to look at the context
The whole discussion started when a poster (I’m not using the names of the posters as it serves no purpose, you can go and have a look if you are curious) said this about Nirupama Rao’s inteview:
Too meek a statment. Almost begging TSP.
To this I responded that we have a curious situation whereby we make fun of intemperate and bombastic statements made by Paki leaders and officials. Yet when our officials use sophisticated diplomatise to convey a strong message we think they are making meek statements.
Another poster (who would be surprised to know that I have immense respect for what he posts) joined in the discussion on whether Nirupama Rao’s statements were adequate or too meek.
While the discussion dingdonged this poster brought in SES (quite out of context I thought).
It was at this point I made that comment which you quoted because we were discussion a rather straightforward issue: Did the new Foreign Sec give a good, strong interview about Pakistan or not.
SES is part of a larger Indian Foreign Policy failure, however I fail to see how that should be used to judge the interview to CNN-IBN.
Now the really interesting part is, this is what you have to say about the interview:
Rudradev wrote:As to Nirupama Rao, I did not address that part of your query because I have immense respect for her, deriving from years of following her statements as a senior IFS officer (not affiliated to any political party as far as I know). She said what she had to say despite of Karan Thapar's leading questions, designed to extract the maximum degree of masala. I think she made her point clearly enough. I have nothing to add to that.
We all know what your POV is on SES. I see that despite that you think the Foreign Sec gave a good interview and “made her point clearly enough”.
I do not notice anything in your statement, which resembles: “Too meek a statment. Almost begging TSP”.
So can I take it that despite the SES fiasco, Nirupama Rao gave a good interview to CNN-IBN and made her points clearly?
If that is what you think, now can you tell me how different that is from what I’ve been trying to say?
I’m sorry to say but I think you jumped the gun and launched into an ad-hominen attack without even trying to understand what was being discussed.
This is not the first time that you’ve used adjectives like intellectually dishonest
against fellow BRFites who have a different POV other than yours. It is for the Admins to decide if that’s proper or not.
However, the way I see it I think you need to look into the mirror more often, if nothing else the image you see might make you more circumspect and less judgmental of others.Please See
Again you’re wrong. I did not ask Archan to delete the particular post you quote. In fact I would have been very unhappy if that happened (unless your posts were similarly deleted).
I asked him to delete my angry rejoined to your stupid shill
comment. And you know why? That’s because this is the TSP thread and lot of Paklurks come here.
I’m sure they are having a hearty laugh see how we are getting our chaddis in a twist over something as straightforward as what to make of the Foreign Sec’s interview to CNN-IBN.