India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 12 May 2011 02:06

Nandu wrote:If Raj was Indian, would this still be a "South Asian" story or just an Indian story?

Wait till Rajat Gupta is given up by 'Raj' in return for a few years off. Then it becomes an Indian story and the 'Indian Mafia at McKinsey' story.

FWIW, most Americans think 'Raj' is Indian.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 12 May 2011 02:08

@Acharya ^^^: "There is a hurry in the US camp on MMRCA since developments are happening in Pakistan and what they do in India and what happens with India has a bearing on US Pakistan relations going forward. This needs to be understood very clearly and there could be some pot holes here."

Sorry, but I did not understand what you are alluding to. Could you elaborate? Thanks

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 May 2011 02:15

Cosmo_R wrote:
Sorry, but I did not understand what you are alluding to. Could you elaborate? Thanks

Look at this way. Their past 50 years relationship in the region has been a zero sum game with IndiaPakistan and PRC as a pivot for the larger asian landmass.
The relationship with India was more of a geo political region (geo graphic entity) than as a nation of people. Pakistan relationship was a cold war plus geo political region play to deny other players in the region.

After 911 and war for 10 years they need to change their relationship in the region and they need cooperation from all the countries. Earlier policy of IndiaPakistan is expensive for them and they need to reduce their cost in the region.
Pakistan behavior change is difficult and India card is a major card from their point of view.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 12 May 2011 02:37

@Acharya^^^: "...and India card is a major card from their point of view."

I get all that. I'm aware that Perkovich, Rohrbacher et al are changing their tune. What I don't get is what you think they think is the 'India Card' and to what end?

If you are referring to India being the new 'pivot' for the 'larger Asian landmass', Philip Zelikow said that openly in 2007:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... 81243.aspx

Is that what you're alluding to?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 May 2011 02:46

Cosmo_R wrote:
If you are referring to India being the new 'pivot' for the 'larger Asian landmass', Philip Zelikow said that openly in 2007:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... 81243.aspx

Is that what you're alluding to?

Talking and taking action on the ground and changes on the ground are two different things. India card is about Pakistan mostly. It is not about asian landmass. If you go to the thread on Asian stability and read the last 50 pages it becomes clear on that.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 12 May 2011 04:18

Acharya wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:
If you are referring to India being the new 'pivot' for the 'larger Asian landmass', Philip Zelikow said that openly in 2007:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... 81243.aspx

Is that what you're alluding to?
Talking and taking action on the ground and changes on the ground are two different things. India card is about Pakistan mostly. It is not about asian landmass. If you go to the thread on Asian stability and read the last 50 pages it becomes clear on that.

What is your view of the MMRCA deal WRT to the above?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 May 2011 13:31

Why ask me. I dont know anything.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 12 May 2011 20:48

India's Southern Promises - A region that is more vibrant economically, and also more appreciative of relations with the U.S.

Yet there is a dynamism in Chennai that should attract American (and other foreign) companies. The real growth, I'm told, is in the small and medium enterprise sector. American SMEs can find willing Indian partners, and be assured of an Anglo-inspired system of law to protect their rights, unlike in China

Over the next decade, perhaps Washington should focus on this part of the country, creating business opportunities (Chennai's consulate already handles more work visas than others in India) and fostering cultural ties with the local communities, instead of concentrating solely on New Delhi's recent rejection of U.S. entrants for a major fighter plane contract and the scuttling of the heralded civilian nuclear deal. Moreover, staff of the U.S. Consulate tell me, people in the south have much more positive images of America than their countrymen do in the north.

Touring Fort St. George, first headquarters of the East India Company, I run into a French couple. He is helping build Michelin's €1 billion ($1.43 billion) tire plant in Chennai, which will be their hub for Asia. Nearly 400 years after the British first arrived to trade in Madras, the opportunities of the Indian south remain bountiful.

The lesson here is that Americans will benefit most if they focus where they are wanted. In the long run, that will create a more stable Indo-American relationship that could lead to true partnership.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 12 May 2011 21:28

^^^
so the subtle idea is that the South is enlightened and wants America to be part of their culture, but the North is a bunch of illiterates who don't. the natural progression of this idea is that, since India behaving like the North, it means that the South can't express its views and opinions. this is basically a subtle way of "North suppressing the South." in the olden days it was Aryans suppressing Dravidians. but now they realize that they've milked AIT for all its worth. now they have to create another mythical North-South difference.......

it is psy-ops at its best.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 12 May 2011 21:38

^^^
Another way of looking at is from the monetary aspect. They pump in money where they think they can make more money. As simple as that. One of the accusation against some MNC and private banks is that they do not go into villages and areas where there is not much bang for their money. It is in these areas that SBI, IB etc help develop the country and people. Similarly, furriners go where it is easy for them. They are not in the business of developing another country, let alone India. It is up to us to utitlize their expertize and money to develop as we see fit.

ps: I knew the north-south divide thingie will be brought up, hence I thought of posting this in nukkad; but then since it talked about business relations between the two countries posted here.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 12 May 2011 23:39

^^^ Devesh Ji, Chennai is doing great in Mfg. and there is no doubt about it Just like Bangalore was doing fantastic in IT uptil now.
Why bring up North-South divide..Not every article is psy-ops nor every foreigner out to enslave India a la East India company.

Not all is rosy, of course. Many of India's graduates are functionally illiterate, though perhaps less so in the south. This part of the country is plagued by the same poor infrastructure as the rest. Poverty here is similarly appalling, not only in Chennai's slums, but throughout the city, where makeshift lean-to's butt up against the walls of the Madras High Court. Corruption is also a factor here: The daughter of the state's chief minister is currently under indictment for bribe-taking in a national telecom scandal, a charge she denies. Graft has become an issue in the ongoing elections in the state, the results of which will be out Friday

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 May 2011 02:04

Vikas ji,

there is a genuine North South divide, yes. but that is up to us to take care of. i was pointing out that the article was bringing up the North South divide. the author claims that he was "informed" that North doesn't like US as much as South. and he then says that US should "build cultural ties." what are these cultural ties?

there is a lot of stuff like that in that article. we should take it with a pinch of salt. it is the perception, real or fabricated, of a foreigner who is looking through the prism of expanding his country's business/financial ties with India. we don't need to borrow those perceptions, and certainly not subscribe to those views.

the conclusion of the article is especially insidious. it is not even subtle. basically, "new delhi" is inimical to America but South is not so. there is a distinct tone, as if New Delhi's wishes are different from South India or at least Chennai......this is propaganda imvho.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 13 May 2011 06:51

VikasRaina wrote:^^^ Devesh Ji, Chennai is doing great in Mfg. and there is no doubt about it Just like Bangalore was doing fantastic in IT uptil now.
Why bring up North-South divide..Not every article is psy-ops nor every foreigner out to enslave India a la East India company

There is no such thing as a "rich south", "poor north" axiom...Some of the richest states in per capita income terms are Delhi/NCR, Maharastra, Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana...The article is a bit of a glassy-eyed attempt to create a story...

But yes, there is no real attempt at anything conspiratorial either..Unfortunately people who believe "US is out to destroy India, no debates" (without ever a shred of empirics) cannot but find a conspiracy in every corner...

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 13 May 2011 06:58

India’s strategic planners aren’t thinking

Fareed bhai weighs in on the MRCA downselect ... makes very specious arguments about how India needs the US as an interlocutor for its relationship with Pakistan and also needs US to balance China. Good to see a lot of comments tearing his arguments to shreds ...

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 13 May 2011 08:01

AnimeshP wrote:India’s strategic planners aren’t thinking

Fareed bhai weighs in on the MRCA downselect ... makes very specious arguments about how India needs the US as an interlocutor for its relationship with Pakistan and also needs US to balance China. Good to see a lot of comments tearing his arguments to shreds ...

This knee jerk condescending tripe, "how can India spurn a US offer" from Fareed tells you 2 things: 1) What an establishment moutpiece he is, and 2) If it were chic to do so, he would have done it, and that is to look at this from India's POV, India's travails with US policies etc.

Note for all his harsh rhetoric on TSP, he also spurts out the Zbigniew, Fair nonsense about how US ditched TSP after Afghan war, Pressler amendment etc. And he can afford to do that because as I said, there are heavyweight whites like Zbig who articulate that.

What this means is there are not too many among US elite who entertain a strong, independent India with whom they can make real accomodations and form a meaningful strategic partnership. And don't count on dorks like Fareed bhai to rock the boat. He is pretty kushy serving as an establishment mouthpiece hob-knobing with the elites and collecting his millions.

As Rajeev Malhotra laments in his book, "breaking India", there are just not enough successful NRIs who articulate India's nationalistic view, in stark contrast to oversees Chinese. We'll have to wait for another generation.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 13 May 2011 08:03

devesh wrote:^^^
so the subtle idea is that the South is enlightened and wants America to be part of their culture, but the North is a bunch of illiterates who don't. the natural progression of this idea is that, since India behaving like the North, it means that the South can't express its views and opinions. this is basically a subtle way of "North suppressing the South." in the olden days it was Aryans suppressing Dravidians. but now they realize that they've milked AIT for all its worth. now they have to create another mythical North-South difference.......

it is psy-ops at its best.

Indeed, being from the south myself, I am suspiscous of such kind of talk, and a ploy by US to exploit & exaggarate North South differences. And I would especially watch for 5th columnis from South India who will collabotate in this charade. That bloody disgusting puke M.S.Bhadrakumar types come to mind even though he himself has this compulsive anti-US instincts. But US could mould the likes of chutiyas like him to become a useful idiot to spout out their propaganda.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 13 May 2011 08:19

CRamS wrote:This knee jerk condescending tripe, "how can India spurn a US offer" from Fareed tells you 2 things: 1) What an establishment moutpiece he is, and 2) If it were chic to do so, he would have done it, and that is to look at this from India's POV, India's travails with US policies etc

Thats very very unfair to Fareed Z IMO...Just because he holds a particular opinion on a specific issue does not make him "anti Indian"...He is one of the consistent articulators of the India line in the US media...His closeness to the US establishment actually enhances the influence he has...It doesnt mean that all his views need to be congruent with a specific POV, bu broadly he is a perfect example of useful influence in Washington...As for being "anti India", read his "Post American World", or look through the trends in his op-ed pieces...

People like Fareed Z (and his brother too!) are precisely the sort of constitutency that India has (and will need to have) as we expand our global footprint..Let not one opinion colour that reality..

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 13 May 2011 08:24

To be precise, Fareed Z holds out as a INC mouthpiece in the US. His angst is due to him being cut out of local decision making over this deal. This means the decision on the MMRCA deal was a casualty of a INC faction fight.

Anindya · Post by **Anindya** » 13 May 2011 08:47

As Rajeev Malhotra laments in his book, "breaking India", there are just not enough successful NRIs who articulate India's nationalistic view, in stark contrast to oversees Chinese. We'll have to wait for another generation.

Actually, the problem may be more of access to channel rather than availability of people. We'd got together a list of quite a few writers and successful NRIs a few years ago for the purpose of writing articles - but distribution of articles and access to channel was a complete killer roadblock.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 13 May 2011 09:23

somnath,

Please, its not particular POV he articulates, but his almost Pavlovian response: how can you spurn US offer is what got my goat. I've seen him do this anoher time during a SAJA dork event in NYC (thoo, I can't believe in my naievety of yesteryear, I could be so stupid as to associate myself with those traitors), he was a star speaker, and on Indo-US relations all he could say is "India has now got US attention, now it must make use of it". Is there any substance in that? Just knee jerk preaching from the pedestal as an honorary white brown-skinned bahadur.

I've never seen him articulate why it is India has distrust of US. I challenge him to come forward and tell it like it is because he knows it: US using TSP to contain India and hence all this dance about whether to get tough on TSP or not despite being a snake pit of terror, nuke proliferation, double dealing etc.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 May 2011 09:34

Rajeev Malhotra is right. A successful NRI uses his success to preach to India. Thats his mark of achievement.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 13 May 2011 09:48

Anindya wrote: Actually, the problem may be more of access to channel rather than availability of people. We'd got together a list of quite a few writers and successful NRIs a few years ago for the purpose of writing articles - but distribution of articles and access to channel was a complete killer roadblock.

Good point, I don't want to beat up on well meaning folks. But I wonder if the discourse in India at least can be shaped by such folks. Right now, I only see Arnab Goswami speak up, but poor guy, he is a bit immature and just doesn't have that intellectual punch. Of course, we need the likes of him, don't get me wrong, but he is a good foot soldier along the likes of say Shawn Hannity, Sarah Palin, etc in US; what is needed are the Karl Roves, Bill Bennets, Charles Krauthhammers etc of India to shape the intellectual, ideological underpinnings of India's palce in the world.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 May 2011 09:49

somnath wrote:
CRamS wrote:This knee jerk condescending tripe, "how can India spurn a US offer" from Fareed tells you 2 things: 1) What an establishment moutpiece he is, and 2) If it were chic to do so, he would have done it, and that is to look at this from India's POV, India's travails with US policies etc
Thats very very unfair to Fareed Z IMO...Just because he holds a particular opinion on a specific issue does not make him "anti Indian"...He is one of the consistent articulators of the India line in the US media...His closeness to the US establishment actually enhances the influence he has...It doesnt mean that all his views need to be congruent with a specific POV, bu broadly he is a perfect example of useful influence in Washington...As for being "anti India", read his "Post American World", or look through the trends in his op-ed pieces...

People like Fareed Z (and his brother too!) are precisely the sort of constitutency that India has (and will need to have) as we expand our global footprint..Let not one opinion colour that reality..

Fareed Zakaria is the one "Indian" guy in US media who has most consistently argued that India needs to get "smarter" and be more "pragmatic" on Kashmir. every time he brings up Paki terrorism, the usual reprieve is added in, "of course, we all know India needs to be more pragmatic too. nobody is denying that."

and even on other issues, Zakaria is a typical elitist with the suit/boot mentality. he is also deeply involved with CFR, and even Trilateral. he is a US mouthpiece. there is nothing Indian about him other than his skin color and birth place. we shouldn't fooled by the Zakaria types. the US establishment usually has these "diversity" candidates to present an illusion of multilateral involvement. in reality, most of these "diverse" people happen to be born and brought up Americans or immigrants who are happy to cut away from their home cultures. the more they grow in the ranks, the deeper the urge to cutoff becomes. it's an inferiority complex. and Zakaria no different.

if this is the kind of guy that India wants as its "brand ambassador," then we are in deep trouble. he is not even an Indian in the first place. you have to acknowledge that you are Indian. he doesn't do that and has no intentions of doing that. he is an American mouthpiece.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 13 May 2011 10:01

One of the most profound things Zakariah evers aid was this,. During NDA rule, he said, BJP reflects the native India, not the western oriented gentleman (WoG) that he and Congress wallahs are. He went to on to diss his Muslim roots too. In short, he never looses an opportunity to say, I am like "you", I am not like "them". If thats his personal predilection, I have no issues with that, but lets not get carried away by his preaching to India.

But I will give him credit for focusing on LeT on his show and writings. And of course, he has been doing that ever since its become OK to talk about LeT terrorism against India, but not before that.

Enough of him, but he does serve a useful purpose in having a brown Indian face on US TV. It at least de-mystifies, and de-intoxicates the presence of us SDREs. So, I'll take his usefulness for whatever its worth.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 13 May 2011 10:09

devesh wrote:the author claims that he was "informed" that North doesn't like US as much as South. and he then says that US should "build cultural ties." what are these cultural ties?

What else? EJ culture.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 May 2011 10:19

Enough of him, but he does serve a useful purpose in having a brown Indian face on US TV. It at least de-mystifies, and de-intoxicates the presence of us SDREs. So, I'll take his usefulness for whatever its worth.

CRamS bhai, Sanjay Gupta is a much better person for that. he serves that purpose in far better way. for all I know, SG might be a typical DIE settled or born and brought up in America. but he doesn't talk politics and confines himself to Medical stuff (he is a doctor).

Gupta is a much better means of "demystifying" India.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 13 May 2011 10:24

On one hand we want to be independent and not America's poodle and on the other hand we want Indian nationalistic PoV articulated in US upper echelons. But When the reverse happens and someone tries to peddle American PoV on Chennai, we are up in arms calling the article insidious and EJ inspired. What is that we want ? America dealing with world as per our PoV?

Isn't it always that initial FoB's need to show MUTU attitude to be accepted and it is only second or third generation that learns to stand up and counted. Lets not forget that Chinese were in USA while Lal-Kila was still being ruled by Zafar-II. You can not just preach whatever you feel like and not be out casted. End of the day he or other Indians are still outsiders in mainstream US.
If F-Z has to remain a credible voice on US media, he needs to soften his blow. At least he is inside the tent and Thank-God he is no SV.

what is needed are the Karl Roves

Seriously, Folks like Karl Roves? Do we really need divisive figures like Roves ?

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 May 2011 10:41

you make a very good point actually....but we don't need Zakaria to even talk about India. if he merrily goes his way completely ignoring India, that's fine with us. we simply take an issue with some forumers having a worshipfest for him where he is heralded as the "face of India" in US media and somebody that India "needs." i am taking issue with this deracinated mentality. we are simply pointing out that FZ is a mouthpiece of US establishment and putting him one some kind of a pedestal about how he is a great example of "rising" India, is a bunch of bull crap. it reminds me of Russell Peters (the Indian comedian in US; do a google on him and have fun!) making a joke about how Indians look at every other Indian guy on the street or on the TV as if it's the only other Indian guy

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 13 May 2011 11:41

^^I dont hold a brief for Fareed Z, and there is little merit in personalising a substantive discussion..But it is extrmeely unreasonable to expect every "Indian" to think along a specific thought process...Or even if they do, articluate in as many words (after all, going back to FZ, he is editor of Newsweek International - he cannot come across as the editor of Times Now

)..

The broader view of India as a "power" is not based on the construct of "anti-Pak", or anti anything..the larger strategic interests of India stand on their own - and frankly are much bigger than Pakistan...Therefore, the touchstone of "friendliness" that we look for, ie, a repeated harangue of Paki behaviour all the time, is actually counterproductive...WE spent countless years trying to get hte hyphenation out, but seems that some of our "nationalists" wnat to keep the hyphenation in!

On the speciifc issue of the MRCA deal, from a purely strategic perspective, FZ has a point, or at least half a point...If we selected either the F16 or the F18, capabilities-wise, it wouldnt have been greatly different from EF/Rafale...But it would have signalled further cementing of strategic ties between US and India..Where I think he misses the point though is by extrapolating this deal as the "be all and end all" of opportunities in that direction...Clearly, he doesnt see (or for this article, chose not to!) the C17 order that is getting cleared as we speak...And guess what? The C17 order does more for the domestic job market in the US than the F18 (or maybe even the F16) being chosen would have (simply because the Indian order will preserve the C17 lines, while there are existing orderbooks, very large ones in fact for F18)...So "strategically", India is giving more political cover with the C17 deal than it would have with an F18 deal...

Separately, it would be instructuve for everyone dissing FZ to read his "Post American world"...The confidence about India and India's prospects drip from almost every page of that book...Tinged with wistful regret for lost opportunities of the past...It is this India that is more relevant than an "international Mamta Bannerjee" shouting unfairness of US policies and Paki perfidies from every rooftop given half an opportunity...
Its a viewpoint really..And FZ is perhaps symptomatic of the same..

And yes, someone mentioned he is "elitist"...Well, more power to him - he (and btw, his whole family, starting form his late father) has done enough to belong to really "elite" clubs anywhere...Its people like these (and some more below these levels as well!) who project the best idea of India...

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 13 May 2011 19:46

devesh wrote: Fareed Zakaria is the one "Indian" guy in US media who has most consistently argued that India needs to get "smarter" and be more "pragmatic" on Kashmir. every time he brings up Paki terrorism, the usual reprieve is added in, "of course, we all know India needs to be more pragmatic too. nobody is denying that."

and even on other issues, Zakaria is a typical elitist with the suit/boot mentality. he is also deeply involved with CFR, and even Trilateral. he is a US mouthpiece. there is nothing Indian about him other than his skin color and birth place. we shouldn't fooled by the Zakaria types. the US establishment usually has these "diversity" candidates to present an illusion of multilateral involvement. in reality, most of these "diverse" people happen to be born and brought up Americans or immigrants who are happy to cut away from their home cultures. the more they grow in the ranks, the deeper the urge to cutoff becomes. it's an inferiority complex. and Zakaria no different.

if this is the kind of guy that India wants as its "brand ambassador," then we are in deep trouble. he is not even an Indian in the first place. you have to acknowledge that you are Indian. he doesn't do that and has no intentions of doing that. he is an American mouthpiece.

Well let's be clear about this. The point of America isn't to be a Trojan horse for the interests of every nation out their sending its immigrants to the US. That's what American assimilation is about.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 13 May 2011 19:49

UBanerjee wrote: Well let's be clear about this. The point of America isn't to be a Trojan horse for the interests of every nation out their sending its immigrants to the US. That's what American assimilation is about.

And it is okay to use ethnicity to be a trojan horse for the home country?

Is that also the point of being American through assimilation? To be a total devious lowlife turncoat?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 13 May 2011 20:42

UBanerjee/Somnath:

I agree more than any other country, US's notion of assimilation is praiseworthy and commendable. And of course, FZ has taken his assimilation several notches higher by completely disowning his roots. And US's need to trumpet a little diversity here & there also helped him immensly (imagine the PR value US derives by having a brown-skinned guy with a Muslim name go gunh ho about US's rambo style self-obsessive foreign policy). And to re-iterate my position, at a personal level, I have no issue with that. he's done well for himself, and if he can sleep well at night after selling his soul, thats fine with me, who am I to question his predilections?

But what worries me is that the "globalized" dorks in India take his views as that of a demi God, and what we are saying is that he is an American establishment moutpiece and the gas he emanates regarding MRCA deal must be viewed in that light.

SomnathJi, I don't want to bash FZ mindlessly at a personal level. I have not read his book, my opinions of him re based on what I have seen and heard him say.

My last post on FZ. Bigger fish to fry. On India-US relations, I am waiting to see what transpires in that Chicago trial of TSPA/ISI Pakis responsible for 26/11.

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 13 May 2011 20:54

Just to refresh the memory of BRF'tes, Fareed's father was a hard-core Congressman, and a minister in many MH cabinets. Also, he (along with Azim Premji's father Hasham Premji) was one of a (very, very) few well-educated and well-off Muslims from Mumbai who rejected Jinnah's personal blandishments to migrate to Pakistan. Fareed's father was rich enough (I believe he was from old Hyderabadi aristocracy, who came to MH when Marathwada merged with the new Maharashtra State in 1960) to send both of his sons to the US for under-graduate education. He would have been a classic RAPE if his father had migrated to Pakistan!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 May 2011 21:18

What these jokers don't weigh is India has its own policies and practices. This MRCA is not an end game, but actually a start of a good relationship rather. Now, the khans know us better what we need, and those IAF parameters and their feedback will be the starting point. The khans are not going to sit and take it, rather work on the weaknesses, and come back with a powerful offer for JSF naval variant requirement for IN. The same jokers, will write it different then.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 13 May 2011 21:49

So much of Ho-halla, just for $10B and I thought that was lose change for GoTUS compared to the money sunk in swine house called Pakistan.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 May 2011 22:52

please note that it is not unkill who is complaining, but local/intl mutus who react to unkill's smile or action and start creating stories.

if unkill is really worried about this strategic partnership, perhaps he can discuss on the API source code for CISMOA specific exchanges, so that we can build indigenous or third party system, and drdo can build an adapter interface device for communicating with unkill devices. two birds in one strike option., where both unkill and we can benefit.

all it takes is move away from this mutu behavior, and start thinking for what needs to be done.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 14 May 2011 01:03

Sanku wrote:
UBanerjee wrote: Well let's be clear about this. The point of America isn't to be a Trojan horse for the interests of every nation out their sending its immigrants to the US. That's what American assimilation is about.
And it is okay to use ethnicity to be a trojan horse for the home country?

Is that also the point of being American through assimilation? To be a total devious lowlife turncoat?

I was not aware that FZ et al. had come to India to pretend to be Indian while advocating for American interests. There are enough of those in India already (and those advocating for Russian interests, and Chinese, and so on).

Although it seems some here were expecting him to pretend to be American while advocating for Indian interests.

It does get annoying when such people anoint themselves "representatives of Indian people". But note him for what he is (an American voice) and move on.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 14 May 2011 01:22

UBanerjee wrote: It does get annoying when such people anoint themselves "representatives of Indian people". But note him for what he is (an American voice) and move on.

Last post -- but you do understand that the part of the loving attention FZ and others get it to ensure that he is "noted for what he is" and people do not miss that he is as American as the the Mayflower settler as far as Indians are concerned.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 14 May 2011 02:30

VikasRaina wrote:So much of Ho-halla, just for $10B and I thought that was lose change for GoTUS compared to the money sunk in swine house called Pakistan.

Nope! Not just the money, it was to have the power to ground IAF's 25% fighter strength whenever they felt like it.

Kanishka · Post by **Kanishka** » 14 May 2011 03:06

Manish_Sharma wrote:
VikasRaina wrote:So much of Ho-halla, just for $10B and I thought that was lose change for GoTUS compared to the money sunk in swine house called Pakistan.
Nope! Not just the money, it was to have the power to ground IAF's 25% fighter strength whenever they felt like it.

I couldn't agree more!
US Arms export laws and deals, specifically this mcra offer, is/was designed for control and leverage, rather than for building any strategic relationship, which is of any significance to India.
Thank God, IAF rejected their offer.