India-US News and Discussion

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 06 Oct 2009 06:10

RaviBg wrote:Is Obama leaning to China on Arunachal issue? - B Raman

US has been leaning to China on Tibet secretly for the last several decades. Indians dont even know this.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 06 Oct 2009 07:21

Why not invite Obama to be the chief guest at the Republic day parade 2010. Let him see what change means. Let him see that the whole world is not based on religious differences as the way he perceives it. Let him come to India and see what is meant by freedom. Let him see that freedom is not about being separate but being together and enjoying the fruits of success, happiness while sharing the sufferings to lessen the pain. Let him see that religious perceptions are kept personnel and not imposed on others. From a religious point of view let him see the peaceful Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh, Parsi, Jewish, Bahai, Christian, Atheist, Muslim, irreligious, spiritual India. Let him see what Humanity means in India. I would suggest he must be given a chance to see a small part of this incredible India.

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 07 Oct 2009 09:48

Barack Obama cancels meeting with Dalai Lama

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 07 Oct 2009 10:03

darshan wrote:Barack Obama cancels meeting with Dalai Lama to Keep China Happy

Don't forget this is the same Barack Hussein Obama who has put our present-day India... Manmohan Singh's Modi-bashing, Purohit-arresting, Unkil-GUBOing, not-sleeping-because-jihadi-weeping, Ultrasekoolar India... on the Watch List of the United States Commission for International Religious Freedom.

I wonder if this is how Nixon must have looked to an earlier generation of Indians. I mean, I've experienced the foreign policies of good US presidents and bad US presidents.

But Barack Hussein Obama goes beyond "good" or "bad"... he defies any classification

amdavadi · Post by **amdavadi** » 07 Oct 2009 11:56

"yes we can" will turnout to be worst then nixon for India. I been saying for the long time, people who bought into whole
"hope & change" will see how he will screw India in favour of his old paki college room-mate.

arun · Post by **arun** » 07 Oct 2009 16:07

Indian Origin US citizen Venkatraman Ramakrishnan jointly shares the 2009 Nobel Prize for Chemistry :

Indian American gets Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Agencies
New Delhi, October 7, 2009

Indian American Venkatraman Ramakrishnan would jointly share the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for 2009 with Thomas A. Steitz and Ada E. Yonath for studies of the structure and function of the ribosome.

Venkatraman Ramakrishnan was born in 1952 in Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu. He did his Ph.D. in Physics from Ohio University in 1976. He is a senior scientist at Structural Studies Division, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, UK. …………..

India Today

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 07 Oct 2009 19:33

arun wrote:Indian Origin US citizen Venkatraman Ramakrishnan jointly shares the 2009 Nobel Prize for Chemistry :

Indian American gets Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Agencies
New Delhi, October 7, 2009

Indian American Venkatraman Ramakrishnan would jointly share the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for 2009 with Thomas A. Steitz and Ada E. Yonath for studies of the structure and function of the ribosome.

Venkatraman Ramakrishnan was born in 1952 in Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu. He did his Ph.D. in Physics from Ohio University in 1976. He is a senior scientist at Structural Studies Division, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, UK. …………..

India Today

I heard about this news all over the place this morning with a sense of pride. I only hope this will be treated as scientific achievement and nothing more, and US con men wanting to shape Indian policy, Indian elites, DDM, etc don't go overboard with "impending superpower" bla bla. Remeber slum dog Oscars, some 2-bit mouthpiece of Gore, Pachuri, being eulogized for leading a UN group that won nobel peace etc etc.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 07 Oct 2009 19:48

^^ Dread to read TOIs headlines tomorrow..

then dread to read BBC headlines day after "India goes ga ga over Nobel" or something quoting the TOI/ HT headline...

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 08 Oct 2009 03:45

Guys - I reported a few posts to mods for possible abuse of form guide-lines. ... Can we please keep the news focussed to India US relations and not become Obama or MMS bashing site....

To put it mildly they represents US and India government and many voted for them. Please stop it and clean up OT posts.

It can result in Flame wars...

Thanks.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 08 Oct 2009 04:08

arun wrote:Indian Origin US citizen Venkatraman Ramakrishnan jointly shares the 2009 Nobel Prize for Chemistry :

Indian American gets Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Congrats. (Congrats to .Ohio University

's Physics department too!)

arun · Post by **arun** » 08 Oct 2009 09:02

TOI’s Indrani Bagchi on the implications of the likely appointment of Rand’s Christine Fair as the US State Departments Deputy Assistant Secretary for South Asia:

Fair's likely appointment as India pointperson raises eyebrows

As background, Christine Fair's (in)famous March 31, 2009 comments on India’s role in Balochistan which was much quoted by the Pakistani’s:

What's the Problem With Pakistan?

Christine Fair: I think it would be a mistake to completely disregard Pakistan's regional perceptions due to doubts about Indian competence in executing covert operations. That misses the point entirely. And I think it is unfair to dismiss the notion that Pakistan's apprehensions about Afghanistan stem in part from its security competition with India. Having visited the Indian mission in Zahedan, Iran, I can assure you they are not issuing visas as the main activity! Moreover, India has run operations from its mission in Mazar (through which it supported the Northern Alliance) and is likely doing so from the other consulates it has reopened in Jalalabad and Qandahar along the border. Indian officials have told me privately that they are pumping money into Baluchistan. Kabul has encouraged India to engage in provocative activities such as using the Border Roads Organization to build sensitive parts of the Ring Road and use the Indo-Tibetan police force for security. It is also building schools on a sensitive part of the border in Kunar--across from Bajaur. Kabul's motivations for encouraging these activities are as obvious as India's interest in engaging in them. Even if by some act of miraculous diplomacy the territorial issues were to be resolved, Pakistan would remain an insecure state. Given the realities of the subcontinent (e.g., India's rise and its more effective foreign relations with all of Pakistan's near and far neighbors), these fears are bound to grow, not lessen. This suggests that without some means of compelling Pakistan to abandon its reliance upon militancy, it will become ever more interested in using it -- and the militants will likely continue to proliferate beyond Pakistan's control.

The text of Outlook Magazine’s interview of Christine Fair which carries a “clarification” on the (in)famous Balochistan comment loved by the Pakistani's:

'Pakistanis Have Blown My Comments Out Of Proportion'

An individual afflicted by equal-equalitis it seems

.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 08 Oct 2009 10:17

Many academics tend to have a skeptic's view which forces them to look for the "other side" even when points of view are cut and dried. Chris Fair's statements should be seen in that regard.

In reality, she herself admitted that she goofed up badly after Mumbai and her Balochistan comments were probably regretted the moment the likes of E-a-S started using them.

What I hear is that she is persona non grata in TSP after her latest trip there.

Net net, is she likely to say something that might piss off India? Sure. But she would probably be one of a handful of people in DC who has publicly said that the only way to "handle" TSPA is by a policy of coercion or compellance. That puts her several leagues above the likes of Uneven and co.

BTW, she was on PBS today:

Fair essentially bitchslapped David "Doofus" Ignatius of the Washington Post, who went on a chai/samosa tour paid for by TSPA and wrote several lifafa pieces praising the bogus Swat "operation" and the ISI.

The other thing I'm rather dismayed by is that we're all captivated by the successes that the Pakistanis have made in dealing with the so-called Pakistan Taliban, but with respect to the effort in Afghanistan, the Afghan Taliban -- we're talking about Mullah Omar, for example -- remains very much safe in the sanctuaries in Pakistan. And the terrorist groups that attacked India -- like Lashkar-e-Taiba -- of course, also remain free to roam around Pakistan.

So buried in the success story that Pakistan has tackled the militants that threaten it is the very -- the much larger story that Pakistan has done nothing about those very groups that threaten us.

...

In fact, some of the most vicious supporters of suicide terrorism in Afghanistan are actually allies of the Pakistani state. So we're going to have to see what they actually do in Waziristan and who they target. I'm skeptical

...

I think Pakistan's become very -- it's developed a sense of entitlement to our assistance. And so the very fact that eight years into this we're really fundamentally trying to alter the way in which we do business is very disconcerting for the Pakistanis.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 08 Oct 2009 10:58

Cross Posting from the Indian Interests Thread

An interesting article in today's Express by Pratap Bhanu Mehta. For the core BRF beliefs, not much new, but I could categorise his views as 'useful', coming from someone not exactly in our camp! Definitely worth a read and even circulating to our liberal friends, especially in the US!

The liberal paradox
Pratap Bhanu Mehta

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-l ... x/526490/0

Some excepts -
their version of liberalism is not about replacing American hegemony with some equitable conception of world order; it is about using the language of liberalism and multilateralism to preserve and prolong American pre-eminence

rather than owning up to its own limitations and its powerlessness against American double standards, American liberalism needs an object on which to assert its ideological identity. Since they dare not take on China, India is the easier target

India needs to watch out for the fact that the “liberal” construction is likely to gain ascendancy, posing challenges for how we carve a place for ourselves in the world.

arun · Post by **arun** » 08 Oct 2009 11:45

Rangudu wrote:Many academics tend to have a skeptic's view which forces them to look for the "other side" even when points of view are cut and dried. Chris Fair's statements should be seen in that regard. {Snipped} .................

Nice to see you on BRF Rangudu

.

Thanks for the PBS Newshour transcript you posted which I have taken the liberty of liberally crossposting.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 08 Oct 2009 19:27

It would be much easier to write off Christine Fair's Baluchistan comments as an innocent mistake, or (very publicly and specifically expressed) academic skepticism, if it weren't for Sharm-el-Shaikh.

At Sharm-el-Shaikh, the GOI made statements that seem to suggest India has been involved in stirring up trouble in Baluchistan. It is difficult to spin the S-e-S declaration in a way that doesn't seem like an apparent vindication of Christine Fair's accusations.

By suggesting in such an overt manner that India has been involved in destabilizing Baluchistan, the GOI essentially repudiated its own moral high ground.

What good it did us to hold the moral high ground is not the issue here. The point is that the GOI lost legitimacy for its contention that Pakistan, unlike India, uses terrorism as an instrument of state policy. An equal-equal involvement of both India and Pakistan with destabilizing "non-state actors" in the other's territory, has been indicated where in fact there is none.

Why the GOI would do this I have no idea.

Taken in conjunction with Christine Fair's earlier little faux-pas, however, the most obvious explanation seems to be that the GOI did it under GOTUS pressure, going along with Washington's diktat that the Pakistan government must be entirely whitewashed and absolved of its support for terrorists, and that any terrorism emanating from Pakistan must henceforward be ascribed to "non-state actors".

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 08 Oct 2009 19:55

prad wrote:Rudradev:

isn't it India's stand too that Islamabad should clean its mess and stop with supporting L-e-T like groups??? what role would Washington's diktat have in this??? it has been India's position all along. i don't see how America changed India's position relative to Pak supported terrorism.

Why don't you contrast the Sharm-el-Shaikh declaration with any other declaration on India-Pakistan relations, that the GOI has made in the past?

Has any previous GOI allowed its statements to suggest even tangentially, that India might be involved in destabilizing Pakistan's internal security in Baluchistan or anywhere else?

Was there any obvious need for the GOI to make a reference to Baluchistan, or sign off on the inclusion of a reference to Baluchistan, in the Sharm-el-Shaikh declaration?

You may not see it, but it amounts to dignifying Pakistani contentions that India is supporting secessionism in Baluchistan with an official response, at the highest level. A response that goes beyond simple flat-out denial, and worse yet, has been made in the context of Pakistani terrorism against India. We have no equal-equal involvement in Baluchistan, and nothing to talk about... so why did the GOI pledge at S-e-S to "discuss" Baluchistan? That too, in a statement which de-links further dialogue from the cessation of Pakistani support for terrorism against India, in Kashmir and elsewhere?

The US connection if any is far from obvious, and the only hints of it are the coy references made to Indian activities in Baluchistan by Christine Fair. The Paki propaganda machine used those references to claim that India is, in fact, involved with supporting what it calls "terrorism" by Baluch secessionists. In light of this one would expect the GOI to be extremely wary of any joint statement referencing Baluchistan in the broader context of terrorism and dialogue. On the contrary, the GOI if anything lent credence to such propaganda by its Sharm-el-Sheikh declaration.

America hasn't "changed India's position on Pakistani terrorism" outright, that's not what I am contending.

However, the GOI for some reason made a statement so ill-advised as to erode our moral high ground, and our locus standi to demand the secession of Pakistani terrorism... by allowing it to be suggested that India may be involved in reciprocal support for terrorism against Pakistan. If you have any explanation for this, please offer one. I don't have one that I can offer with certainty... but it is very interesting that Baluchistan was previously referred to by Christine Fair in the same context i.e. a public accusation of Indian moves to destabilize Pakistan.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 08 Oct 2009 20:08

Malayappan wrote:Cross Posting from the Indian Interests Thread

An interesting article in today's Express by Pratap Bhanu Mehta. For the core BRF beliefs, not much new, but I could categorise his views as 'useful', coming from someone not exactly in our camp! Definitely worth a read and even circulating to our liberal friends, especially in the US!

The liberal paradox
Pratap Bhanu Mehta

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-l ... x/526490/0

Excellent article, and a more erudite version of CRamS's simplistic thesis. China: Apart from working like slaves producing cheap goods, their civilization also is exotic enough, and not too much for westerners. Hinduism on the other hand send shivers and contempt up their spine. On TSP: they are useful terrorists, no doubt about that, and their elite are definetly more TFTA than ours. Even our own Sarmila Boase and Bollywood sluts can't resist the likes of Wasim Akram

, westerners are no different.

a_bharat · Post by **a_bharat** » 08 Oct 2009 20:12

prad wrote:i didn't question your take on GoI's statement at SeS.
...
the reason why GoI did it??? i have no idea. only MMS has the answer to that.

He probably mistook stupidity to "thinking out of box", or he wanted to be a statesman at country's expense.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 09 Oct 2009 15:06

Latest news:

Obama wins Noble Peace Prize.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 09 Oct 2009 15:29

^^ Was about to post the same news. But what exactly has he done towards Peace? Or is it to spite Bush and co.? Fact is just the other day he was planning to accommodate the Taliban.. i mean he's not made any breakthroughs in the Middle East or anywhere and is just a few months into his Presidency just as yet.

rkirankr · Post by **rkirankr** » 09 Oct 2009 15:40

a_bharat wrote:
prad wrote:i didn't question your take on GoI's statement at SeS.
...
the reason why GoI did it??? i have no idea. only MMS has the answer to that.
He probably mistook stupidity to "thinking out of box", or he wanted to be a statesman at country's expense.

Well I think MMS wanted to win Nobel prize but Obama beat him to it.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 Oct 2009 16:12

Muppalla wrote:Latest news:

Obama wins Noble Peace Prize.

What a joke, that guy has been in power for how long? 6 months? Where was he before? No Bull prize indeed.

Well hopefully now that he got it anyway, MMS signing the CTBT wont be the cover up required to ostensibly justify his prize.

I hope.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Oct 2009 16:20

Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

arun · Post by **arun** » 09 Oct 2009 16:43

X Posted.

No prizes for concluding that America’s favourite Rogue State is the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

At least one person in the US accepts that the US by providing aid to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is financing terrorism against India:

America's Favorite Rogue State

Gordon G. Chang, 10.09.09, 12:01 AM EDT

Is it time to cut off aid to Pakistan?

…………… in any event, it's time we stop funding terrorism against India. The United States, through its assistance programs, effectively enabled Pakistan's ISI to mastermind the Indian embassy bombing last July, and it's almost certain our money was used for the attack this week. At some point, we have to accept responsibility for the consequences of our decisions.

We can fight terrorism or we can support the Pakistani military. History says we cannot do both.

Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China. He writes a weekly column for Forbes.

Forbes

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 09 Oct 2009 17:24

Gerard wrote:Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

A german radio commentator asked some prof in a German Univ how the Nobel Peace Prize for Obama makes sense. The Professor started off in a typical ambivalent fashion
"Na Ja <stammer> <stammer> that way every Nobel prize can be questioned. "

The points the commentator raised were this:
- As the Supreme Commander of the US forces, the US is fighting a war in Afghanistan
- To date, only the US has used nuclear weapons. Has Obama achieved anything at all with Nuclear weapons -> anycthing concrete?
- So is this a prize for not being GWB!

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 09 Oct 2009 17:42

perhaps this is given preemptively to make the U.S. restrain from starting another War with wither one of NK or Iran or worse (Both)

arun · Post by **arun** » 09 Oct 2009 18:03

Neela wrote:
Gerard wrote:Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
......................

- So is this a prize for not being GWB!

Possibly. Some others like Tim Marshall on Sky News think that way:

The Nobel Prize For Not Being George Bush

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Oct 2009 18:15

Obama Nobel win shocks Swedish peace group

"The choice of Barack Obama as the recipient of the world's foremost peace prize is shocking," said the group's chairwoman Anna Ek in a statement.

Ek conceded that the US president had sent "positive signals" with regard to his future commitment to global peace.

"But at the same time Obama is the president of the biggest military power in the world and is waging two wars in the world. That should certainly disqualify him from a peace prize," said Ek.

Social Democrat press spokesman Urban Ahlin also confessed to being caught off guard by the award.

"I was quite surprised I have to say. The efforts Barack Obama has made for peace do not currently correspond to a peace prize," he told news agency TT.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 09 Oct 2009 18:33

SwamyG wrote:Oh man, I am a great supporter (as if he needs it from me) of Obama. So let me rephrase my first sentence, I like him and some of his policies.........and being a Dharmic guy that I am (ha ha), I resonate with some liberal, conservative, ithiyaadi thoughts.
But ........... but...............I pray that Lord Murugan comes down to my house and explain why Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 09 Oct 2009 19:11

Gerard wrote:Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

oiropeans

, he bought world peace by winning elections in America.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Oct 2009 19:20

Palin, Vaughn, Rabinowitz Win Awards

At the same time, and amazingly enough, the Pulitzer Prize for Literature went to Sarah Palin for her stated intention “to read a book someday.” The former Alaska governor was described as “floored” by the award, announced in Stockholm by nude Swedes beating themselves with birch branches, and insisted that while she was very busy right now, someday she would make good on her vow to read a book. “You’ll see,” she said from her winter home in San Diego.

And again in a stunning coincidence, the Motion Picture Academy of Arts and Sciences announced the Oscar for best picture will be given this year to the Vince Vaughn vehicle “Guys Weekend to Burp,” which is being story-boarded at the moment but looks very good indeed. Mr. Vaughn, speaking through his publicist, said was “touched and moved” by the award and would do everything in his power to see that the picture lives up to expectation and opens big sometime next March.

Obama's Nobel for Good Intentions

Apparently, they now give out a Nobel Peace Prize for good intentions. Unless I have missed something, President Obama has not yet achieved a nuclear free world -- which was also, by the way, Ronald Reagan's good intention. He has not yet achieved peace between Israel and the Palestinians ...

At first I thought the announcement of the prize was a joke. On further reflection, the Noble Committee has made itself a joke.

negi · Post by **negi** » 09 Oct 2009 19:46

People do not realise Obama has been given the nobel for preventing TSP and India going on a war after 26/11 , for peaceful handling of NoKo and IRAN nuclear issue and of course giving green chit to PRC as far as human rights are concerned.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 09 Oct 2009 19:51

negi wrote:People do not realise Obama has been given the nobel for preventing TSP and India going on a war after 26/11 , for peaceful handling of NoKo and IRAN nuclear issue and of course giving green chit to PRC as far as human rights are concerned.

Nominations were finalised in Jan 2009 I think.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 09 Oct 2009 20:07

Gerard wrote:Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

The Atlanticists in action. Now where is SanjayM with his analysis?

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 09 Oct 2009 20:17

^^ Its a terrible conspiracy to sink the hallowed credibility of the Noble Nobel!

/Am aghast and all that. Thanks for the hankie.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 09 Oct 2009 21:06

Yeah, I am an Obama supporter too, but all this does is cheapen the prize and make it a laughing stock.

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 09 Oct 2009 21:15

Checklist for Obama's accomplishments to get coveted award
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T24xGiplKQ

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Oct 2009 21:45

Its time for Dalai Lama to return his Nobel.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 09 Oct 2009 22:08

This prize was a cheap thing anyways. It has been a tool to advance bhestern interests. Why should India worry about this award? Except the prize money, of course.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 Oct 2009 23:06

surinder wrote:This prize was a cheap thing anyways. It has been a tool to advance bhestern interests. Why should India worry about this award? Except the prize money, of course.

True but some times it gets too blatant for even the slimy Anglo-Saxon.