India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 28 Oct 2011 21:35

Not only that, but it goes to show what a complete chicken-sh!t of a leader we have for Prime Minister.

If Indira Gandhi was at the helm, she would have gone to war without a moment's hesitation. Even the late PVN would have gone to war in a second. I have lost utter complete faith in PM Singh's ability to protect the nation at all. He is a sheep leading the band of tigers(or shall I say, in the most exasperated tone, meek lambs or donkeys)

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 28 Oct 2011 22:58

>>If Indira Gandhi was at the helm, she would have gone to war without a moment's hesitation. Even the late PVN would have gone to war in a second.

Debatable boss, debatable ...

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Oct 2011 04:00

http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/405696 ... s?rid=-100
GOP advances bill to help China, India tech gradsBut is the 'Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act' really fair?

WASHINGTON - A key House committee this week approved a Republican-sponsored high-skill immigration bill intended to help advanced degree holders in India and China get green cards to work in the U.S.
The bill, advanced by the House Judiciary Committee, eliminates per-country limits without changing the overall cap. The limits have created long wait times for applicants in countries where the demand for green cards is high. The bill needs action by the full House and Senate before it can reach President Obama's desk.
The federal government sets a cap of 140,000 employment-based green cards a year, with no more than 7% from any single country. Because demand is highest for advanced degree holders from India and China, the per-country cap has meant delays for residents of those two nations of at least four years for a green card. By contrast, people from most other countries with advanced degrees have little wait.
The per-country caps will be eliminated if the bill, the "Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act" (H.R. 3012), becomes law. But what may be called fair by some, isn't seen as such by others.
In a letter for committee leaders, the Korean-American Scientists and Engineers Association said the law would create a two-year wait for Koreans who get science, technology, engineering or math (STEM) degrees from universities in the U.S. It urged the committee "not to force engineers from Korea to wait [an] additional two years in their immigration process to get green cards."The legislation was introduced by U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), and was backed by the committee chair, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas).
"This legislation makes sense," Smith said in a statement Thursday. "Why should American employers who seek green cards for skilled foreign workers have to wait longer just because the workers are from India or China?"Ron Hira, a public policy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York, said that by relaxing the per-country limits, Congress is placing a priority on EB-2, or advanced degree-holder, green card applicants. "This especially helps those workers from India and China waiting in line," he said."This tilts the employment-based green card preferences towards higher-skilled workers, which is a good thing," said Hira of H.R. 3012. "There is of course, much more work that needs to be done. Hopefully, Congress will next turn to helping American high-tech workers by closing the obvious and enormous loopholes in the H-1B, L-1, B-1, and J-1 guest worker programs."

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 29 Oct 2011 05:45

Prem wrote:WASHINGTON - A key House committee this week approved a Republican-sponsored high-skill immigration bill intended to help advanced degree holders in India and China get green cards to work in the U.S.

paid for by the university education mafia.

they need a steady stream of people entering university and paying an arm + leg.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Oct 2011 05:46

Pak feared India would go to war post-26/11: Rice

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 29 Oct 2011 09:52

Neshant wrote:paid for by the university education mafia.

Business is backing it too. House currently takes orders from business, not from universities.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 30 Oct 2011 05:17

Post-Parliament attack, India deployed N-missiles on border: Rice

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Oct 2011 05:39

abhishek_sharma wrote:Post-Parliament attack, India deployed N-missiles on border: Rice

n border: Rice
Share |
FontLarger | Smaller
#
# Print
Agencies Tags : Parliament attack, India n missile, Pak border, Condoleezza Rice book Posted: Sat Oct 29 2011, 13:55 hrs Washington:
Condoleezza Rice
While CIA was informing White House that India was on its way to war, the Pentagon was concluding that it was not the case: Rice (AP)

India had deployed nuclear-capable missiles on its western border and refused to budge under US pressure to hold any talks with Pakistan after the 2001 attack on its Parliament by terrorists from across the border, says former top American diplomat Condoleezza Rice.

And what added to the tension in the White House's Situation Room in December 2001 was the sharp differences between the Pentagon and CIA about the ground realities in South Asia, she writes in her memoir 'No Higher Honor' that is set to hit the stands next week.

While CIA was informing the White House that India was on its way to war, the Pentagon was concluding that it was not the case, Rice, who then was National Security Adviser to President George W Bush, said.

In fact, Rice writes that CIA was speaking the language of Pakistan, which wanted the entire world to believe, in particular the US, that India was ready to attack them.

"The CIA believed that armed conflict was unavoidable because India had already decided to 'punish' Pakistan. That is likely the view that Islamabad held and wanted us to hold too.

"The fact is that after years of isolation from India, a country that had viewed the United States with suspicion for decades, the CIA was heavily reliant on Pakistani sources in 2001," Rice says in her book.

{Tenet and Col Powell lost the War on terror long ago!}

During the eight years of the Bush administration, Rice served as both the National Security Adviser and Secretary of State. "Looking at the same events unfolding on the ground, the Pentagon and the CIA gave very different assessments of the likelihood of war," she said.

"The Defence Department, relying largely on reporting and analysis from the Defence Intelligence Agency, viewed preparations as steps similar to those that any military (including our own) would take given the circumstances. In the Pentagon's view, a build-up was not necessarily evidence of a formal decision to launch an attack," Rice writes.

Rice said the President and the National Security Council (NSC) Principals were frustrated with the ups and downs of the assessment over the next three days. "The Defence Department and the CIA remained very far apart," she said.

As there was no let-up in the tension between the two neighbours, Rice said the US and Britain joined hands and organised a series of high-profile visits to the two countries with the view that there would be no war as long as some important dignitary was in the region.

"Colin (Powell, the then Secretary of State) and Jack Straw, the British Foreign Minister, organised a brilliant diplomatic campaign that could be summed up as dispatching as many foreign visitors to Pakistan and India as possible.

"We reasoned that the two wouldn't go to war with high-ranking foreigners in the region. Every time they accepted a visit, we breathed a sigh of relief. We needed to buy time," Rice writes, recollecting the events of those days.

But the situation continued to deteriorate, she said, adding that by December 23 there were reports of troop movements as well as a disturbing one that India was preparing to move short-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to the Indian-Pakistani border.

{Think about this one. How credible is it for India to move short range BMs and invading troops? Total Kalidasa option!}

"We reviewed the list of dignitaries who had been deployed to the region, searching for possible intermediaries through whom we could send messages to the adversaries, and agreed to reconvene the next day," Rice said.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 30 Oct 2011 09:36

^^^ Gondola Risotto just exemplifying the stupidity of the American polity. Err...or did her ghost writer from Yawn do it?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Oct 2011 18:06

Their sustained inability to analyse and interpret us accurately is the most curious thing of all... It's not that they don't have the experience or the knowledge... Seems just a matter of ability or something. Hard to parse.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 Oct 2011 18:39

Just curious guys, but what exactly is your gripe with Rice's analysis? Note I am no fan of the stupid, self-consumed white-dominated US elite, and their minions like Rice & Powell, but what exactly is the gripe with her narrative on India & TSP to claim that she does not understand India?

Is it not the case, VajpayeeJi or MMSJi, Mush or Kiyani, TSP conducts a horrific terrorist attack (parliament or Mumbai), India bleeds and cries, guys like me on BR seethe with impotent rage as India huffs and puffs threatening to attack TSP, TSP laughs its arse off and says bring it on, India then relies on US and its western lackeys like UK to make TSP issue some bogus statement like Mush did post parliament to soothe India, India backs off, the whites laud India's "restraint" and the spirit of Mumbai, a WKK-inspired piss process is launched, and we are back to square one. What part of this narrative is not correct?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Oct 2011 20:45

Not sure if you are asking me, but I don't have a gripe. And Rice is not analysing, she is giving us a participant's view of what happened. I'm curious about exactly what I said ... the US seems unable to analyse us accurately. And Rice pointing out the discrepancy in the views of the DoD and CIA affirms that (both are wrong ultimately). And their notion that if they keep visiting we won't attack just because they are visiting - a nice and healthy sense of self-importance, no doubt.

I don't share your white/non-white perspectives on the US.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 Oct 2011 22:58

JE Menon wrote:Not sure if you are asking me, but I don't have a gripe. And Rice is not analysing, she is giving us a participant's view of what happened. I'm curious about exactly what I said ... the US seems unable to analyse us accurately. And Rice pointing out the discrepancy in the views of the DoD and CIA affirms that (both are wrong ultimately). And their notion that if they keep visiting we won't attack just because they are visiting - a nice and healthy sense of self-importance, no doubt.

I don't share your white/non-white perspectives on the US.

I was asking in general. I am not trying to be an argumentative SDRE, but why is their notion wrong? Is it not a fact that after India mobilized and threatned to act post parliament attack, India did welcome Jack Straw, Rumsfeld etc? If India really wanted to attack, why did it not, and why did India welcome these condescending western pukes? Rice claims that Brijesh misra did call her and ask for US to issue some statement so NDA can pull back. Does that not mean that as long as US is willing to "engage", India was not going to attack?

I am surprised you don't agree with what is obvious to so many observers on white/non-white perspectives in US. Can a person of color, including SDREs, wear the shoes of Rice, Powell, FZ, BJ, NH etc if they don't put on a Euro centric mask (whether or not they believe in it). As an example, recall what Obama said in Cairo soon after he took office, he spoke from his heart, and see how quickly he had to reverse course and continue the torture of Muslim suspects, culminating in that squalid spectacle of him celebrating the slaughter of Qaddafi. Ditto his one or two statements on Israel, and how quickly his arse was slapped, and he had to gubo before NuttinYahoo. And need I remind you of the obsessance our own SDRE FZ has to pay to whatever the dominant US viewpoint is, lest he loose his elevated status? Someone posted an analysis of white intellectuals who think FZ is fake.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 30 Oct 2011 23:14

JE Menon wrote:Their sustained inability to analyse and interpret us accurately is the most curious thing of all... It's not that they don't have the experience or the knowledge... Seems just a matter of ability or something. Hard to parse.

This is a important question and let me put my views.
The american public for the last 30 years have been fed with the view of India Pakistan going to war, Blood enemy', Sparta vs Athens, historical enemies, partition wars etc.
This feeding on this hysteria took a big global image during Clinton times - 'Kargill', 'nuclear flash point' etc.

This is a game and both (US/Pak)of them gain from media coverage. Until 911.

By giving some of this same image in the book americans are giving the same familiar image and this is not about what the Indians are trying to really do. This is about talking to an audience which they are familiar with.
Same thing with Bill Clinton book.

Internal assessment of Indian govt and Indian world view are never discussed much in the public. Indian social issues and social order and 'caste' are discussed in the public media.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 31 Oct 2011 00:59

>>I was asking in general. I am not trying to be an argumentative SDRE, but why is their notion wrong?

Which notion? The one that if they kept visiting, we wouldn’t attack? If yes, then it is wrong because it is a gross misunderstanding of GoI to assume they would not attack because some senior officials are visiting – as it is to assume that GoI does not recognise the reason for these visits. Like I said, GoI will act at a time of its choosing, not of Pakistan’s or China’s or America’s or Lashkar e Taiba’s choosing.

>>Is it not a fact that after India mobilized and threatned to act post parliament attack, India did welcome Jack Straw, Rumsfeld etc?

Sure. It would have been difficult and useless to reject their visits. Those visits also served a purpose.

>>If India really wanted to attack, why did it not, and why did India welcome these condescending western pukes?

Maybe India did not really want to attack. We don’t know for a fact. We probably never will. We welcomed them because that is what normal civilised states do. Their attitude is irrelevant. Condescension is rarely displayed among top officials from these countries visiting India – and when it is, it rarely goes unnoticed and unrebuked.

>>Rice claims that Brijesh misra did call her and ask for US to issue some statement so NDA can pull back. Does that not mean that as long as US is willing to "engage", India was not going to attack?

This is what Rice claims. I will give her claims as much weight as what Mishra has to say on the subject. He has not spoken on it so far. But it could mean that if the US made the appropriate noises on our behalf and extracted some pledges from Pakistan, we would not attack. What is the problem with that? We are not going to jeopardise our growth and our prospects of improving the livelihood of millions just because the ISI decides to send over some suicidal morons to kill Indians. We will extract a price but it may not be public and therefore not quite as satisfying to mango abdul as obvious vengeance. That’s the name of the game though, unfortunately. We need to get used to it. This does not mean that Pak will not pay, and is not paying. Look where it is today – even over the past three years its downward spiral has been pretty spectacular.

>>I am surprised you don't agree with what is obvious to so many observers on white/non-white perspectives in US.

Who are these observers?

>>Can a person of color, including SDREs, wear the shoes of Rice, Powell, FZ, BJ, NH etc if they don't put on a Euro centric mask (whether or not they believe in it).

Sure, it’s a Eurocentric country (so far), but even now that’s not entirely true... remember the people you’ve mentioned are by no means “European” and yet occupying high positions in the US. But, like anywhere else, they have to tow the main line. Nothing surprising about that.

>>As an example, recall what Obama said in Cairo soon after he took office, he spoke from his heart, and see how quickly he had to reverse course and continue the torture of Muslim suspects, culminating in that squalid spectacle of him celebrating the slaughter of Qaddafi. Ditto his one or two statements on Israel, and how quickly his arse was slapped, and he had to gubo before NuttinYahoo. And need I remind you of the obsessance our own SDRE FZ has to pay to whatever the dominant US viewpoint is, lest he loose his elevated status? Someone posted an analysis of white intellectuals who think FZ is fake.

What has this got to do with us boss? Who gives a crap how Obama is celebrating Qadhafi’s death or what some white intellectuals think of FZ? These are Americans behaving in a certain way. I see no problem with them behaving however they want. Actually, I’m not sure I understand what your gripe with this is...

It is only to the extent that it impacts us I see a problem. And the problem, as it seems, from Condi’s book quoted above is that they seem unable to grasp their minds around India and Indians in general, let alone the specific people they deal with diplomatically or militarily...

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 31 Oct 2011 02:28

JE Menon wrote: It is only to the extent that it impacts us I see a problem. And the problem, as it seems, from Condi’s book quoted above is that they seem unable to grasp their minds around India and Indians in general, let alone the specific people they deal with diplomatically or militarily...

If I may.
This could be the hypothesis. The unkil policy is heavily influenced by paki-like thoughts. Let me explain. The think- tank in Unkil land is heavily influenced by the erstwhile colonial masters, aka the brits. One of the posters used to call such influencers as atlanticists. The brits are through and through India baiters and have vested interest in painting India as being inconsequential. This is carried out with lot of hubris. The paki mentality being, the brits were the overlords over the SDRE Indians for 200 years. How can Indians be anything worthwhile to talk about. No different from being a paki, who dreamed of ruling over India for 700 years (or is it 1000 years

?). How can such slavish guys have gumption to have independent thought that could be superior than the overlords?

Unkil is a mere water carrier for these type of thoughts and hence hasn't developed sufficient independence and gumption to thought processes that does not provide flattering view of white man's burden. Something similar to parochial bias, where it suits the observer/s.
If one looks at it carefully, the brits are still at it and set the tone. As long as unkil doesn't truly divest itself from pre-conceived bias mainly fed and fortified by the perfidious albions, (which by the way is more agreeable to the population), unkil analyzers will have tough time in understanding india. The stereotype which has been repeatedly managed by their former colonizers continue to enthrall and awe.

Hence things about India will generally be sanctimonious clap trap, a mere footnote not worthy of consequence, (which by the way is not a bad thing for India - because it can be leveraged to India's advantage).

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 31 Oct 2011 03:37

JwalaMukhi,

You may be right of course. Clearly the Brits have a special line into Unkil's ear at least where India is concerned, or has had one at least until some few years ago...

Still, I can't imagine Unkil did not do a little bit of thinking on his own - I mean this is a country where you will, if you look carefully enough, find some research paper on the mating habits of crabs which like to bang guppies if they can get a hold of them... and they remain so clueless about India... I know India was never that prominent on their radar, but I also know that we were definitely not that insignficant... So the question remains...

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 31 Oct 2011 03:41

@JEM ^^^: IMVHO, various US admins post independence have not been able to figure out India/Indians because:

1. We are not a dependency. Even when we were relying on PL480, we had an independent foreign policy

2. We are not an enemy. India and the US as reinforced by the diaspora, have a huge amount in common. Just note how much of NYT is now India oriented (India Ink for example) same is true for WSJ (India Real Time). Indian movies now get reviewed in the NYT

3. We are not an ally to be coerced into missions like NATO members

This, coupled with the the Diaspora's disproportionate visibility (example: Rajat Gupta, a crown jewel in Corporate America's crown) is being prosecuted by Preet Bharara who will one day be AG of the US before he become Governor of NY state) and stupendous clout as consumers of information (note how many "most emailed" in the NYT are about India), confuses the bejeesuz of out doctrinaire think tankers.

When said think tankers unload on India, it's usually because they could not get some Indo-American to bankroll their next 'study'. It's a cry for help.

Brits et al have little to do with perceptions of India and in general are taken for granted as poodles who have no choice but to walk on a leash.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 31 Oct 2011 05:13

JE Menon wrote: Still, I can't imagine Unkil did not do a little bit of thinking on his own - I mean this is a country where you will, if you look carefully enough, find some research paper on the mating habits of crabs which like to bang guppies if they can get a hold of them... and they remain so clueless about India... I know India was never that prominent on their radar, but I also know that we were definitely not that insignficant... So the question remains...

JEMji, it could be: there is thinking alright, but the leap to acceptance of the outcome of the thought process requires tremendous energy to overcome the entrenched biases.
Maybe like for example, the people will not have any problem in accepting that in sports, team wearing black clothes get more penalized than the ones wearing white clothes. Obviously, there will be ready acceptance that such bias due to color exists and is borne by data. But try convincing the same about the color factor when humans are involved, the acceptance rate would dramatically reduce. There will be all kinds of excuses, while grudgingly it may be accepted. Moreover, the disclosure clause will be waved, as if mere disclosure will remove the bias.

Then there is hind sight bias. Where the result or outcome biases the perception of how the process might have occurred. The narrative of India has been drummed by brits for a long time. Only the change in that status of the result/outcome is forcing unkil to do some reevaluation.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 31 Oct 2011 05:38

I think American businesspeople will develop an understanding of the "new India" before the politicians, diplomats, and the academics do.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 31 Oct 2011 06:03

JE Menon wrote:
Still, I can't imagine Unkil did not do a little bit of thinking on his own - I mean this is a country where you will, if you look carefully enough, find some research paper on the mating habits of crabs which like to bang guppies if they can get a hold of them... and they remain so clueless about India... I know India was never that prominent on their radar, but I also know that we were definitely not that insignficant... So the question remains...

Let me explain. Just listen to US media, say NPR which I do on my drive to & from work. 99.9% of the so called "news" is celebration of US culture from a Euro-centric perspective. There will be a segment on food, one on some music, sports for sure, something on latest health R&D, something about some movie, something about theater, some writer, some celebrity giving a pompous commentary about himself/herself, something about GWOT, a segment on the latest dems Vs reps circus, slicing and dicing every insignificant utterance etc. Basically this is the list that fills the 3 hours or so of airwaves. And BTW, even this is referred to as "liberal media". I need not even describe the Fox-news led demagoguery.

My point being this is the crap that is fed to the public day in and day out, and there is very little room for anything intellectual beyond what can be digested with room temperature level IQ. Thus, its not as if there are no scholars who understand India and TSP perfidy. Matter of fact, I would wager to bet that there will be many more US scholars who know more about Hindu civilization than the JNU chutiyas. More scholars of Hindu philosophy than many fake swamis in India peddling nonsense (like many US preachers). But you won't hear them and their views on India because there is no market for it, or at least the ruling elite makes sure there is no market for it.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 31 Oct 2011 06:08

^^^Agreed. Money talks louder than diplomatic sancti-moaning.

However, with unkil, the money interests too aren't free of state pressure. I'm sceptical about attempts to let GM into India wherein the seeds for the next planting are owned by the company and not the farmer (there're no seeds to plant, apparently in the engineered varieties). It might look like a money-alone thing but I'd be surprised if there's no US state line pushing its entry.

With arms, high-tech etc, we already know of how the state's black lists and sanctions have helped things along.

As for 'noncontroversial' sectors like retail, I'd rather desi firms get an upper hand and first stab at the home market than deep pocketed phoren firms borrowing at close to 0% in their home countries. Need for an industrial policy isn't a figment of some imagination. Perhaps.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 31 Oct 2011 12:22

JE Menon wrote:So the question remains...

JEM Boss.. forgive me, I am surprised that you have this question. Truly I thought that this answer was known if not voiced often and openly.

It is ideological, the binary simplistic creationist post Nicean-Abrahamism does not, and can not understand, duality embracing quantum minded Dharmic world view.

This is not a religious issue, in western sense (in Indian sense that distinction is meaningless) it is philosophical. Even folks nominally born as Hindu's in India, but not versed with Indian philosophical world view (increasingly seen these days) -- can not understand India (DiE, RNI etc) Westerns who understood India openly claim to have needing to walk away from the Constantine's dogma to get there.

How do we expect a world which is the epitome of celebration of Byzantium to understand us? US is the high temple of linear thinking in its socio-political establishment, despite extending shelter to Einsteins and Oppenheimer.

If US can understand us, it will have to evolve to a point where it will cease to be the US as we know and love so well.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 31 Oct 2011 17:26

JE Menon

Boss, just replying to quotes from you that are relevant to this thread. I'd like to debate other issues you raised, but probably on another thread.

<<Is it not a fact that after India mobilized and threatned to act post parliament attack, India did welcome Jack Straw, Rumsfeld etc?>>

Sure. It would have been difficult and useless to reject their visits. Those visits also served a purpose.

Sure, I agree. They may be dog bones alright, but those gains were anyday more than what would have been achieved by rushing to war with the military power that we have. But as an aside, leaving aside the military option, MMS's pathetic surrender on 26/11 is a colossal disgrace.

This does not mean that Pak will not pay, and is not paying. Look where it is today – even over the past three years its downward spiral has been pretty spectacular.

I respectfully disagree. As BR veterans, need I remind you that the "upward spiral" as India's case might be, or "downward spiral" as you claim is the case with TSP is contextual. We know that TSP's worth as a nation is measured only by extent of damage it can cause to India. So, for all its downward spiral, can you disagree that with all the aid US has pumped into TSP, TSP is in a much stronger position to annihilate a few Indian cities today than it was prior to 9/11. Thats the tragedy of the double game US has played. Viewed from this angle, TSP's downward spiral is not as spectacular as you claim, and by extension, India's upward spiral doesn't mean much as long as the TSP albatross with all is venom and fury hangs around its shoulder.

<< my points on US's euro centric worldview and its non-European "useful idiots" >>

What has this got to do with us boss? ...

It is only to the extent that it impacts us I see a problem.

To the extent that I have not seen a single article, not one, show me, in an important publication like NYT, WP, Economist etc, by someone expressing the Indian nationalist PoV. Someone challenging this truly hideous notion that has taken root, namely, the rapist TSP must be appeased by the victim India. Will any SDRE making a living in US be given the space to deviate from this US's scripted worldview of India & TSP, to make a cogent, articulate argument highlighting India's travails with the TSP rapist?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 31 Oct 2011 17:33

^^^Show me the same kind of article in the HT TOI or any mainstream English media in India

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 31 Oct 2011 18:49

JE Menon wrote:JwalaMukhi,

You may be right of course. Clearly the Brits have a special line into Unkil's ear at least where India is concerned, or has had one at least until some few years ago...

Still, I can't imagine Unkil did not do a little bit of thinking on his own - I mean this is a country where you will, if you look carefully enough, find some research paper on the mating habits of crabs which like to bang guppies if they can get a hold of them... and they remain so clueless about India... I know India was never that prominent on their radar, but I also know that we were definitely not that insignficant... So the question remains...

They (west) cannot understand the caste.. they cannot grapple the oral history traditions running through families and kirtankaar bards. the romila thapar JNU version is what is used by almost all writers of history in west. They treat caste as cousin of nation (originating from tribe). Where tribe evolved into a well defined nation-state in west, it became blurry caste in India, this is their contention and understanding. Others who refuse to see it as nation-state's cousin, see it similar to "guild".. Then they invest all their resources in funding orgs and efforts who work for giving westphalian characteristics to the caste, which is what we are seeing these days in form of mandal, dravida supremacists, dalit writers belonging to kancha ilaiya's school, maratha sewa sangha in MH, the EJ's all over, the Diggi rajas, the rabid brahmin haters (which end up dishing out theories from AIT and associated crap to latest 26/11 was brahmin-baniya-hindutva conspiracy

. yes there are such people, one of them have been erstwhile police commissioner of Mumbai). all supported and funded by usual suspects from political specturm and are up to similar dirty tricks.

It is not that west do not know alternative view. They study indic (i.e. dharmik) pov too, but lable it as Hindutva and hence insignificant at least and fascist at most. There are no words for dharma in english, hence there cannot be a term for dharmik. There is no term for sanskriti, hence no understanding of sanskritik glue which we keep on talking about. cultural glue is so awful, since culture is only group festivals and rites.

India is geography where westphalian castes co exist together mixed physically but segregated demographically. Like multitudes of small oil droplets in emulsion not mixing with neighbouring droplet. hence India is chaos which was put together by british, this is the contention. If you look at India from this PoV, even you will arrive to same conclusion as our leftist biraders from JNU arrive.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 31 Oct 2011 19:56

Atri ji, excellent summary.

but one significant break in the West's theory will be the emergence of a new generation which will have a significant portion of "mixed" castes.....We need just 2 generations: the West's grandstanding will collapse simply b/c the reality no more matches what they are saying. they used "separate" castes to make that theory. if "separation" increasingly ceases to be prevalent, then the assorted theories cease to matter as the biggest assumption of all these theories ceases to "exist"....

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Oct 2011 23:26

Bobby Jindal's remarks calling Hinduism a pagan religion have caused a lot of resentment especially one who was born of Hindu parents.

No need for that sort of rhetoric.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 31 Oct 2011 23:32

devesh wrote:Atri ji, excellent summary.

but one significant break in the West's theory will be the emergence of a new generation which will have a significant portion of "mixed" castes.....We need just 2 generations: the West's grandstanding will collapse simply b/c the reality no more matches what they are saying. they used "separate" castes to make that theory. if "separation" increasingly ceases to be prevalent, then the assorted theories cease to matter as the biggest assumption of all these theories ceases to "exist"....

There is nothing called as mixed castes. One caste will become dominant in that person and the person will identify with that social group.
The western social theories cannot explain Indian social dynamics and social order
Western concept of Indian social order has many defect and is based also on incorrect information.
That incorrect information m ay have been planted deliberately into the western data points.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 31 Oct 2011 23:42

Arre Bhai, paanch hajar plus saal ka experience in every known filed of human life kanha se le ke aaayen orr Indic blood and soul soch ko samghe. Till then let blind men define the elephant by gropping the tail, trunk or T..te.
Jindal is talking in Christian terms to Christian fundoes. Cant blame him for lack of intellectual deapth, he is mere a politican. Here is the biggest Idol Vatican..

Vatican calls for global authority on economy, raps “idolatry of the market”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/ ... 7020111024
condemned what it called “the idolatry of the market” as well as a “neo-liberal thinking” that it said looked

exclusively at technical solutions to economic problems. “In fact, the crisis has revealed behaviours like selfishness, collective greed and hoarding of goods on a great scale,” it said, adding that world economics needed an “ethic of solidarity” among rich and poor nations.“If no solutions are found to the various forms of injustice, the negative effects that will follow on the social, political and economic level will be destined to create a climate of growing hostility and even violence, and ultimately undermine the very foundations of democratic institutions, even the ones considered most solid,” it said.It called for the establishment of “a supranational authority” with worldwide scope and “universal jurisdiction” to guide economic policies and decisions.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 01 Nov 2011 04:12

>>I respectfully disagree. As BR veterans, need I remind you that the "upward spiral" as India's case might be, or "downward spiral" as you claim is the case with TSP is contextual.

Boss, clearly the TSP’s downward spiral is not “contextual”. In virtually every sphere of social and economic development it’s been going down the tubes.

>>We know that TSP's worth as a nation is measured only by extent of damage it can cause to India.

No it is not. It is measured by it’s worth, in terms of how it manages to take care of its people, contribute to humanity, etc... and in this respect it is worthless. Pakistanis however may see their worth in terms of how much they can damage India. But it is of no consequence.

>>So, for all its downward spiral, can you disagree that with all the aid US has pumped into TSP, TSP is in a much stronger position to annihilate a few Indian cities today than it was prior to 9/11.

Well, yes, to the extent that they have increased the size of their nuclear arsenal. Nothing else. In that sense we are also in a much stronger position. This would have been the case whether or not there was US aid.

>> Viewed from this angle, TSP's downward spiral is not as spectacular as you claim, and by extension, India's upward spiral doesn't mean much as long as the TSP albatross with all is venom and fury hangs around its shoulder.

This is the key here “viewed from this angle”... Are you sure that is the right angle to view it from to get an accurate representation of the maximum objective reality? To suggest that India’s upward trend does not matter much is not quite accurate either. Who will argue that our standing today is worse or equal to what it was, on May 10, 1998? No it is clear things for India have improved dramatically for the better. Pointless to ignore or overlook or underplay it.

>>To the extent that I have not seen a single article, not one, show me, in an important publication like NYT, WP, Economist etc, by someone expressing the Indian nationalist PoV.

This is the part I don’t get. Why should they express an Indian nationalist PoV? Why do you expect them to? Did you really expect something like that to begin with? Why, are they somehow more “objective” and “fair” in their treatment of humans not like them than others are? Might as well ask for a Spanish newspaper to write from an Indian nationalist PoV. Frankly it is a meaningless expectation.

>> Will any SDRE making a living in US be given the space to deviate from this US's scripted worldview of India & TSP, to make a cogent, articulate argument highlighting India's travails with the TSP rapist?

Maybe, maybe not. In either case, so what? Maybe I’m being a bit thick here, but I’m not really getting your point. If they did give an SDRE the space to deviate from the scripted worldview, what would that be supposed to mean?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 01 Nov 2011 04:12

Thanks all for the replies above...

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 01 Nov 2011 17:23

JE Menon wrote:
>>To the extent that I have not seen a single article, not one, show me, in an important publication like NYT, WP, Economist etc, by someone expressing the Indian nationalist PoV.

This is the part I don’t get. Why should they express an Indian nationalist PoV? Why do you expect them to? Did you really expect something like that to begin with? Why, are they somehow more “objective” and “fair” in their treatment of humans not like them than others are? Might as well ask for a Spanish newspaper to write from an Indian nationalist PoV. Frankly it is a meaningless expectation.

>> Will any SDRE making a living in US be given the space to deviate from this US's scripted worldview of India & TSP, to make a cogent, articulate argument highlighting India's travails with the TSP rapist?

Maybe, maybe not. In either case, so what? Maybe I’m being a bit thick here, but I’m not really getting your point. If they did give an SDRE the space to deviate from the scripted worldview, what would that be supposed to mean?

One last time. All of your above responses prove my point which you seem to take issue with, namely, an SDRE will be given space only if he/she expresses a US-centric viewpoint and espouses a euro-centric worldview, namely serves as a "useful idiot". BTW, I am not saying US has to allow an Indian nationalist viewpoint. They are under no obligations. But what I am saying is that free speech only has its worth if dissenting viewpoints are allowed, or else whats the difference between Xinhua news agency that dictates what needs to be said, and US which has other means of achieving the same end?

And one more time, you don't find anything troubling that here we are 10+ years into GWOT, and the dominant viewpoint in US is that the biggest perpetrator of terror, TSP, must feel "secure" from the worst afflicted victim India? And there is not a single voice in the main stream media that can challenge this hideous notion?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 Nov 2011 18:48

ramana wrote:Bobby Jindal's remarks calling Hinduism a pagan religion have caused a lot of resentment especially one who was born of Hindu parents.

No need for that sort of rhetoric.

The simple rule for all the self patronizing by the Americans about how liberal they are. Be it Bobby Jindal or Nikki Haley , an immigrant has has to put his or her pagan roots to shame in order to be elected in America.

A Muslim or Hindu cannot run for high office like MMS, Jail Singh, Adbul Kalam , AK Anthony etc. Every candidate has to whether democrat or Republican has to declare that they go Church to be considered Kosher- even Obama had to do so.

So, I don't think there is anything wrong in Bobby Jindal's remarks, since he does not believe in Hinduism- his attacking Hinduism dispels fears of him being a closet Hindu in the eyes of his voters(they will always be suspect in the American Public eyes and have to repeatedly make declarations- remember he needs to get elected in Louisiana). He is doing it for personal benefit. Alteast he is not sitting in India and working for foreign interests.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 01 Nov 2011 19:19

Mindy Kaling On Diets, High School And Other American Pastimes. Never heard of this SDRE before, but this morning she was on NPR. Usual familiar theme: condescending interviewer, and the SDRE relating her experience of trying to fit in. Judjing by her name, another BJ?

subodh · Post by **subodh** » 01 Nov 2011 20:14

CRamS wrote:Mindy Kaling On Diets, High School And Other American Pastimes. Never heard of this SDRE before, but this morning she was on NPR. Usual familiar theme: condescending interviewer, and the SDRE relating her experience of trying to fit in. Judjing by her name, another BJ?

Vera Chokalingam. I know her through mutual friends. Good kid. Is on the US version of The Office.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 02 Nov 2011 01:46

Hindu phobia in Kentucky
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2 ... ost_30.php

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 02 Nov 2011 01:54

Aditya_V wrote:
ramana wrote:Bobby Jindal's remarks calling Hinduism a pagan religion have caused a lot of resentment especially one who was born of Hindu parents.

No need for that sort of rhetoric.

The simple rule for all the self patronizing by the Americans about how liberal they are. Be it Bobby Jindal or Nikki Haley , an immigrant has has to put his or her pagan roots to shame in order to be elected in America.

A Muslim or Hindu cannot run for high office like MMS, Jail Singh, Adbul Kalam , AK Anthony etc. Every candidate has to whether democrat or Republican has to declare that they go Church to be considered Kosher- even Obama had to do so.

So, I don't think there is anything wrong in Bobby Jindal's remarks, since he does not believe in Hinduism- his attacking Hinduism dispels fears of him being a closet Hindu in the eyes of his voters(they will always be suspect in the American Public eyes and have to repeatedly make declarations- remember he needs to get elected in Louisiana). He is doing it for personal benefit. Alteast he is not sitting in India and working for foreign interests.

True but he may have killed his aspirations to becoming US president or VP. In an world and even an America where people are increasingly changing their religious worldview a person who takes such a rigid stand and criticizes other religions (20-25% of world espouses indic beliefs if not more) will not be able to represent the US of A. The newer generation will not see him as a president and can you imagine him interacting with heads of India, China and South East Asian states - it will not make for warm and cozy relationships for sure. This guy has established a self checking mechanism. These people don't know the Tortoise and Hare story

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 02 Nov 2011 03:21

Aditya_V wrote:
ramana wrote:Bobby Jindal's remarks calling Hinduism a pagan religion have caused a lot of resentment especially one who was born of Hindu parents.

No need for that sort of rhetoric.

The simple rule for all the self patronizing by the Americans about how liberal they are. Be it Bobby Jindal or Nikki Haley , an immigrant has has to put his or her pagan roots to shame in order to be elected in America.

A Muslim or Hindu cannot run for high office like MMS, Jail Singh, Adbul Kalam , AK Anthony etc. Every candidate has to whether democrat or Republican has to declare that they go Church to be considered Kosher- even Obama had to do so.

So, I don't think there is anything wrong in Bobby Jindal's remarks, since he does not believe in Hinduism- his attacking Hinduism dispels fears of him being a closet Hindu in the eyes of his voters(they will always be suspect in the American Public eyes and have to repeatedly make declarations- remember he needs to get elected in Louisiana). He is doing it for personal benefit. Alteast he is not sitting in India and working for foreign interests.

Let's put in perspective. A mere 44 years after the Civil Rights Act, Obama was elected President. In 1965, there was a ruckus over Bill Cosby playing a co-lead on TV in I Spy.

With immigration restriction loosened in 1965, the Indian presence has grown to ~3MM in the US with a disproportionate visibility in commerce, the professions and even government. For good or ill, Indians show up in almost every sphere—even Nomura has Jesse Bhattal as Wholesale CEO. In the early 1980s, Vikram Pandit became Morgan Stanley's Syndications Manager—previously the white shoest of all positions in the most white shoe investment bank. etc.etc.

The point is this: America has changed remarkably in the last 3 decades and the pace of change is getting even faster. What holds true today such as religion, ethnicity, race etc. won't matter in 5 years. Money, smarts and media savvy will be everything. It's not a hope, or wishful thinking—it's the way things are shaping up.

Jindal won't be a speck on the political scene in 5 years outside of Louisiana.

JMT

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Nov 2011 03:23

Tathastu!