Page 7 of 14
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:02
by RayC
To
Mr Brihaspati, esq
Candles in the Wind
Goodbye Norma Jean
Though I never knew you at all
You had the grace to hold yourself
While those around you crawled
They crawled out of the woodwork
And they whispered into your brain
They set you on the treadmill
And they made you change your name
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:17
by brihaspati
Well kid from the 22nd row, glad that you thought of me more than just sexual. But I remain seductive as ever. With the power to move hearts. Unlike Norma Jean, however, I have never needed anything to clutch to. I can create clutches for others if they need it.
Jokes, apart, I have been consistent right from the beginning. I have always advocated incorporation of territories occupied by GOTSP back under Bharat.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:22
by RayC
It pleases me intensely that you called me kid.
You are of Jyoti Basu's age?

Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:22
by John Snow
Oh boy
Strangers in the night exchanging glances.....
instead of seductive, deductive would be better
what x got do with it its a second hand emotion....

Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:27
by RayC
With all due regards to your rather brilliant plans and desires to being Pakistani areas under India, I would say, leave them alone till the come home, with their tails behind them.
With the powerful elixir of Islam and ummah, they are giving vent to sub-nationalism and separation. What makes you feel that they would willingly stay united under a kaffir rule?
You may have imperialism running through you veins, but that is no answer.
Let them be to their ways and break up as they go their way!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:28
by RayC
John Snow wrote:Oh boy
Strangers in the night exchanging glances.....
instead of seductive, deductive would be better
what x got do with it its a second hand emotion....

I have no such inclinations, but then I don't hold it against those who do.
Even if a man claims he is seductive, I can rise to the occasion!
I will be frank, I can't understand what Brihaspati esq states. He is a riddle master! Honestly. He keeps me wondering what exactly he means.
Should have been in the IFS and we would not have this chaos of Sharm al Sheik!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:35
by John Snow
Imperialism by definition is the appropriation of property, land etc that belongs to some other entity, but incase of TSP it is just reunification, like Germany, vietnam, Biafra (Nigeria during 1970s)
Tomorrow if Yugo slavia happens again with merger of Bosnaia, Kosovo, croatia itas not imperialism.
PS Ray saar you misunderstand humor also when Bpathi ji said kid he was refering to himself as a kid in the 22nd row.
He was humility personified when he said but not to suggest you are kid and he big brother.... (my reading on his behalf, but he is better
suited to you get clarification from
By nature ( and astronomy) Bpathi has rings around him, you really have to peer to see through, even I get lost some times ( hows that for modesty

)
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:42
by RayC
Brihaspati is too subtle for common mortals like me!
Jupiter is also well known as ‘Brahaspati’ or ‘Guru’.
The Guru
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 22:56
by Gagan
Re-unification with pakistan? It is ok only if there are no pakjabis in it. These cretins will poison our society if we let them in. Pakjab has fertile lands, Balochistan has mineral wealth and oil and natural gas - these areas will be useful.
But the pakistanis are pure poison. I see some of them who moved to the US around partition. Not much contact with the pakis back home in pakistan. Still their ideas and thoughts are sometimes shocking. If 40-50 years in a society as open as the west does not reform, it sure as hell is not going to do any better back in desh.
These pakis are Arab-wannabes, let them be. They'll keep inventing even purer versions of Islam, and keep killing off each other. The lie they have lived all these years - they are themselves a begger of a country surviving on handouts by the US all these years, but have the regal intention to help out the kashmiris break away from India and integrate with them. They were talking of being formed in the name of Islam all these years, now when Islam comes back to bite them, they can't let go. Same with the terrorists they nursed to hurt india and afghanistan - today when these terrorists have turned inwards and are threatening to gobble up their country, they are fighting the terrorists halfheartedly because there is still desire to somehow go back to the old days and use the terrorists against India.
These pakjabis are going down, the sooner the balochs and the sindhis are rid of them, the better it will be for them.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 23:18
by brihaspati
I thought RayC was invoking an old Eastern custom (he has some Baarendra blood it appears) of posing riddles which must be answered too in riddles. Yes as John Snow Garu rightly pointed out, it was a subtle turning around based on the latter part of the "song" -
"Goodbye norma jean
From the young man in the 22nd row
Who sees you as something as more than sexual
More than just our marilyn monroe".
If RayC was using the song it meant that he wanted to be the "kid from" the 22nd row". I saved him from that "dishonour". However, without going through Norma Jean, we also have a saying "praaptetu shorasho barshe cha/putra mitra bodachoret" - I think we can safely assume we are both above 16, so we can talk as equals.
But the lyric was irrelevant and frankly, I think was not applicable in context. I am not sure, RayC, who speaks in riddles more. JB and I are separated in time by "brihaspati" again (not Jupiter). Now thats a riddle - Acharyaji may be of help.
Moreover, if your subnationalism works, I would be most happy, because it still does not obstruct what I desire. But in the end, RayC, I think I will have more time to see my vision come true. I have a lot of patience.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 05 Aug 2009 23:34
by RayC
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 00:05
by brihaspati
A Bharatyia society that takes the decision to reincorporate territories currently under GOTSP occupation, will only do it after it has come to certain decisions about TSP and the people under it. People are not born with genes for Islamic Jihad and universal hatred for the Quafir. Children born in TSP and AFG are not born with a gene for Jihad either. These are people, who are our kin - they have almost entirely Indic roots. I, for one think of them simply as blood brothers and sisters who are forced into a crucible of hatred from birth and not given any other options to even think of other options. Incorporation gievs them that option to be otherwise - to be different from the rabid pack of animals they seem to be headed towards.
I would consider it a civilizational duty of Bharat to create conditions under which branches of the Bharatyia civilizational family, however distant they might have become, and however wayward they might have become, are brought back to the family hold - by the ears, if need be, kicking and screaming if needs be. To be thrashed if they want to go back to the lawless streets, and loved if they behave. This is to ensure that we do not have a vicious bandit on the loose whom we could have easily controlled and mafe otherwise useful.
The concrete practical reasons for incorporation has been summarized by me several times, so am not repeating it here.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 00:49
by archan
If one starts reading starting from the first post on this page, one would confuse if this is the nukkad. Has the S-e-S story lost steam? no posts on this page are about S-e-S anymore.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 00:52
by John Snow
Ok lets get back to the real Sharam as this song from "Padosan" says{ How appropriate Padosan hai apna TSPakistan}
MMS singing the part of Saira Banu
sharma aatee hain magar, aaj ye kahanaa hogaa
ab humei aap ke kadamo hee rahanaa hogaa aap se
ruthh ke hum jitanaa jiye khaank jiye kaee iljaam liye,
aaur kaee iljaanm diye aaj ke baad magar,
***
PS I did not see Asli sharam ki baat
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 00:53
by ramana
The story is at a haitus. We need to wait for the other shoe to drop. We are seeing some moves from TSP which may turn the surrender to not a defeat. Eg. bringing in Kashmir and not prosecuting the Mumbai terrorists.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 00:58
by John Snow
The TSP thinking is simple
Provoke India to react possibly with war.
Divert Unkil from lashing him on his but for not doing enough.
The sinedie adjurment of Sayeed trial
India's so called involvement in Baloach
.....
.....
All this works for TSP Army
Meanwhile Gropper vs 10% scoring also continues
10% was snubbed
Gropper was prostrated to
Kiya nahi vulture is waiting to snoop
our MMS scored a masive self goal and left for future PMs to hang high and dry
Unkil is having another bench wise to screw our balls
QED
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 01:38
by brihaspati
MMS could have been setup by the babus as well as his political string-pullers.
Suppose we have the following hypothesis :
The inner echelons of decision making within the Congress hierarchy decides in tandem with (or is persuaded by) USA and UK, that, in the short term - stabilization of the Gilani government is necessary. If the Gilani government falls, and the unreliable PA is left with government powers, or Musharraf makes a comeback, or the PA teams up with the Talebs, or atleast some sort of TSP government pressure is not mounted against the Talebs until the AFG elections are over, USA will lose all its bases in TSP although TSP will still carry on with support of PRC.
This could panic the Congress leadership, if they do not have much faith in the fighting ability of the Indian people. The current Congress-top-think is probably geared towards equating survival with the proximity of USA. USA could convince the Congress leadership that, it ws more important to increase the prestige of Gilani in the eyes of the "commons" of TSP, since Gilani was actually on amuch weaker political basis and is only being propped up because of USA. The Congress on the other hand has been given a strong electoral mandate recently to do as they please. So some concessions, to Gilani, would be important.
As is usual in such cases, MMS might have been reassured that it would all only be verbal, and not meant concretely and as a commitment. The coterie around the dynasty however were not sure of the political fallout, and hence the "future leader" was solidly kept out of any association with this. If any negative thing comes out of S-e-S, it will be blamed on the benign ego of a well-meaning but elderly gentleman inching towards senility (no MMS is not senile - but I am saying it could be passed off as such).
One of the political campaigns to tackle such things in teh future is to hold down the dynastic leadership to make statements and clariify their positions. They must be held on record and forced to speak on this. If they refuse to, then that should be highlighted. There a re a million ways to goad people holding such formal positions.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 01:48
by ramana
Ramachandra Guha the Histronics expert is already forwarding the line that its the over 75 crowd of MMS, SMK and MKN are responsible - hinting at senility as you mention.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 04:55
by RamaY
B-ji
your analysis above presumes that MMS is above influence. I am not convinced based on his histrionics during nude-deal (oops nuke deal)
To my eyes it all looks very scripted... The nuke deal, Hindu Taliban, Mumbai attack, INC (easy) win, and now S-e-S.
These events remind me something I read on venn? Daigram explaining the cosmic dance of sub-atomic particles....
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 05:35
by SwamyG
Brihaspati ji: Would then you consider Indians diaspora spread across the globe as case of 'Bhartiya' succeeding? We have both the territory and concept at stake here. In the past, there were always an 'external hand' to pool in the nationalists - other kingdoms, clans, Islamic invaders, European powers etc. Now as the mode of attack is as much indirect as much it is direct; it will pit an Indian against another onlee - The Divided Elites.
Territories can be lost and gained. If the concept/ideology/value system falls below a critical mass then it will take a whole lot to rejuvenate the system.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 05:41
by SwamyG
>>>MMS could have been setup by the babus as well as his political string-pullers.
Ah glad to see guru log making these observations too. I had put forward this theory of him being setup.... Instead of just painting MMS alone as the fall guy, it is essentiall that many more are put into the category. MMS has gained enough support with his "gentleness". It will be a whole lot tough to demonize a person who was instrumental in liberalizing the country. Or the Rajmata is going to allow him to take all the hits.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 08:07
by brihaspati
RamaYji,
I have also set him as amenable to "persuasion". Of course he is subject to "influence". But he is too weak politically to take such decisions all alone. Such decisions have to come from a more protected and better hidden core. The script is definitely there - and I had been worrying for quite some time in various threads that the new GOI seemed too "eager" and over-ambitious and was in a hurry, and for me that was a possible indication that they knew they had little time before something quite negative was possible.
My worry is that the phenomenon that happened around Sanjay, is repeating itself around RG jnr. A so-called young gun think-tank could be forming. But this time around, the interested "outsiders" will not take the risk, and will ensure that at least some of their controllers belong to this circle. Likely candidates will be those who have had long "foreign" stints - I have a certain gentleman from "God's own" in mind.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 08:12
by brihaspati
SwamyG,
a full response will perhaps be chided here as OT. The core needs a candidate acceptable to the interested powers, and sufficiently politically weak to carry out core commands implicitly. I will take the other question to "scenarios" thread.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 09:01
by arun
Sitaram Yechuri, CPI{M} Politburo and Rajya Sabha member, writing in the Hindustan Times about the Sharm El Sheikh joint declaration.
Predictably says that the joint declaration was an out come of our Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh succumbing to US pressure:
No more a puzzle
Sitaram Yechury
August 05, 2009
……………… The only explanation for such contradictory positions is that India is succumbing to US pressures. It is known that the US requires Pakistan in its fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan and it is not prepared to brook any diversion of Pakistan’s attention to its eastern border. Hence, the pressure’s on India to delink the dialogue process from the fight against terrorism. ………….
Hindustan Times
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 09:23
by RamaY
Probably so!
Think about it. An unknowner (politically) has been picked up to lead the economic reforms in socialist india and was forced (after kalamji's quite diplomacy against rajmaata) to be a PM, who initiates a strategic partnership with superpower. Then without much effort gets reelected, something even PVNR or ABV could not do. Now we see any and every project against PRC moves is a success while submitting to anything TSP.
Looks like the axis is being prepared against PRC. While I am all for that, I am not sure if the game is up for India or TSP...
I really pray god that MMS is something I hope he can be...
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 10:41
by John Snow
Folks here is first cut of my thoughts (borrowed form tetrahedral nature of carbon molecule).
I will explain in detail the relationships classification and why so. For BRF its like carrying coals to new castle

Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 10:49
by Philip
Surrender Singh.
Surrendering has been the hallmark with which the MMS/Sonia regime will be remembered by history.From S-al-S to the EUM with the US.Here is a scathing indictment of the shamfeul policy of surrendering by a former scientific adviser of Mrs.Gandhi (the original).
"It is important to also note that all the three defence service chiefs have vehemently and repeatedly, verbally and in writing, individually and collectively conveyed to New Delhi at the highest levels their strong and total opposition to India entering into an EUMA with the U.S. because of its serious national security-compromising character. But the Cabinet Committee on Security chaired by the Prime Minister brushed aside these acute concerns and went ahead and approved the EUMA."
Concern over a pernicious agreement
Ashok Parthasarathi
The End-Use Monitoring Agreement with the U.S. seriously compromises India’s national security, and no other country has imposed such a requirement on India. It must not go through.
A critical agreement finalised during U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to India last month was the Indo-U.S. End-Use Monitoring Agreement, or EUMA. It involves U.S. government inspectors continuously monitoring all hi-tech weapons and advanced electronic systems and equipment across a broad front imported by India from the U.S., to ensure that they are used by the Indian defence services and the Department of Atomic Energy and the Department of Space only for the purpose — “end use” — for which they are imported.
External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna, in a statement in Parliament on July 21, said that signing such an EUMA was essential under U.S. law for India to undertake such imports. He gave the impression that all that the EUMA does is to bring under one umbrella the case-by-case permissions for such imports India had been seeking and securing from the U.S. government from as far back as the 1990s. Therefore this was largely procedural in nature, he implied.
Simultaneously, the Minister indicated that thanks to two years of intense negotiations, the EUMA was uniquely to New Delhi’s advantage: the periodic inspections in India of all U.S.-origin hi-tech and defence equipment would be undertaken by U.S. inspectors only at places and times “mutually agreed” upon, places and times specified by the Indian government. But that is not what “mutually agreed” means. He emphasised that such a provision did not exist in any of the 82 earlier EUMAs concluded by the U.S. and so this was a great victory for the Indian government. What he did not say was that those 82 countries were those of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and U.S. military allies.
Despite the Minister’s statement, followed by the Prime Minister’s defence of the EUMA with the U.S. government there are serious concerns about it among parliamentarians, the media and the military and scientific leaderships on several counts.
First, no other country from which India has imported and is importing hi-tech defence and other equipment — be it France or other West European countries, South Africa, Israel or Russia — has ever asked for an EUMA, even when India imported state-of-the-art weapon systems. Here are some examples:
— The Sukhoi-30 MKI supersonic fighter bomber from Russia especially tailor-made for Indian needs which, apart from carrying a wide range of lethal conventional weapons in a tactical role, can carry nuclear weapons over a 5,000-mile range, that is, to Beijing and Shanghai, (with mid-air refuelling) and is accepted even by the U.S. government as the best such weapon system in the world;
— The 90-mile beyond visual range air-to-air missile, also from Russia, which three former chiefs of air staff have characterised as “the best such missile in the world.” They also acknowledged that it was India’s possession of the missile that “deterred Pakistan from using its air force in the Kargil War.”
— Then there is India’s first indigenous nuclear submarine, INS Arihant, which would have just been impossible to realise without the Soviet Union’s/Russia’s massive allround consultancy, technology transfer, technical services and training, technical “knowhow” and “show how” design of the submarine as a whole, and above all numerous operational “tips” based on 50 years of experience in designing, building and operating nuclear submarines. Although Soviet and Russian assistance was extended throughout the 25-year designing and building of Arihant, at no time did anyone in the Russian government ever even mention any end-use restriction. And yet, if India were to import some incomparably low-tech electronic warfare equipment from the U.S., the U.S. government will demand the application of the EUMA.
Secondly, it is a matter of concern that under the EUMA India has to turn over to U.S. inspectors not only the hardware and software of all U.S.-origin systems and equipment purchased by India for their scrutiny, but also all data and information logs containing the entire history of the equipment as used by India.
Thirdly, for the computer software (so much of which is used nowadays in hi-tech defence and other equipment) in the U.S.-origin equipment, Indian military and civilian computer scientists have often been able to develop modified software known only to India and so secure. However, when such equipment is tested and analysed using U.S. simulators, the software becomes evident to the U.S. inspectors. This will seriously compromise the security of the equipment and of the overall weapon system of which it is often “the brain.”
Fourthly, and extremely seriously, India is now fully aware that the end-use it is putting the U.S.-origin weapon systems to and all the technical and operational data relating to it, particularly modifications and improvements India has made as collected by U.S. inspectors, are passed on by the U.S. government to Pakistan.
When any “inspection” of a U.S.-origin equipment at any Indian air /sea/army bases — which the EUMA provides for at the discretion of the U.S. — takes place, the inspection team will consist usually of specialised technical and intelligence personnel from the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the U.S. National Security Agency and, of course, the weapon-system supplier. Such teams come with sophisticated simulators to test the U.S.-origin weapon systems and equipment under simulated battlefield conditions.
Then, there is a much larger issue. The situation discussed above is with regard to various U.S.-origin equipment incorporated into Indian aircraft, surface ships, submarines, tanks, artillery guns and so on. What will happen when the weapon system as a whole is of U.S. origin? India has already had a taste of that from its experience with the old troop and helicopter-carrying vessel USS Trenton, which was imported and inducted into the Navy as INS Jalashar. The U.S. undertakes surprise inspections of any part of the vessel; studies all ship logs, requires a U.S. Navy officer to be on board when India makes any modifications or improvements or even repairs to keep the old vessel going… And this for a 30-year-old helicopter-and-troop carrier.
Against such a background, what kind of EUMA will the U.S. apply should India decide to purchase one or other of the two U.S.-origin multi-role combat aircraft — the F-16 offered by Lockheed and the F-18 offered by Boeing — against the Rs.42,000-crore global tender floated by the Defence Ministry for 126 such aircraft last year? The conditions will obviously be far more stringent than the inspection methodology and coverage which apply to the EUM for individual weapons such as artillery and radar. What will the government do then?
It is important to also note that all the three defence service chiefs have vehemently and repeatedly, verbally and in writing, individually and collectively conveyed to New Delhi at the highest levels their strong and total opposition to India entering into an EUMA with the U.S. because of its serious national security-compromising character. But the Cabinet Committee on Security chaired by the Prime Minister brushed aside these acute concerns and went ahead and approved the EUMA.
Then there is the issue of the penetration and suborning of India’s armed forces and civil services by U.S. agencies at the operational level. The Indian Express (July 26, 2009) reported how the External Affairs Ministry had expressed concern over a recent senior-level inter-ministerial meeting convened by the Defence Ministry at which some Defence Ministry officials agreed to a purchase contract for U.S.-origin arms in which, at the insistence of the U.S. representatives, the end-use clauses were made extremely intrusive and stringent, and hence more objectionable than those framed under the joint EUMA itself.
The Prime Minister stated in Parliament on July 29 that “there was no provision in the EUMA to allow U.S. inspectors access to Indian military sites and other sensitive installations.” But in the very next sentence he said: “Inspections if necessary (as decided by the U.S. government) would happen at a mutually agreed time and venue after a request. United States government “request” [for inspection] was put forward by the U.S.” — and the Indian government has got to comply.
With these numerous, wide-ranging and highly deleterious implications for India’s national security of the EUMA, it is imperative that the Government of India terminate the EUMA. If the Indian government does not have the will to do so, it should at least announce in Parliament that the purchase of U.S.-origin hi-tech equipment would be “purchases of very last resort.”
(Ashok Parthasarathi was Science Adviser to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.)
http://www.hindu.com/2009/08/06/stories ... 690800.htm
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 10:52
by RayC
archan wrote:If one starts reading starting from the first post on this page, one would confuse if this is the nukkad. Has the S-e-S story lost steam? no posts on this page are about S-e-S anymore.
It is in every thread!
You start talking of 'A' and it is all over the alphabets and also figures!
A few cuss words thrown in for variety!
This happens when one changes from steam to electrivity and diesel.
Ask Lalloo!
But you are right.
Let's bite into the meat!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 10:56
by John Snow
We just keep the Mods busy and sometimes give them opportunity for a Lathi charge

Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:01
by RayC
Surrendering has been the hallmark with which the MMS/Sonia regime
Surrendering would mean roll over and play dead!
I don't think that they have surrendered. They are quite vocal and loud in Parliament and they don't agree that it is so, notwithstanding Gilani crowing with delight across the border along with Kiyani.
I feel that they have done a master stroke - they aped the willow. It bends under fierce wind, but returns to normal when the wind blows over.
In the Parliament, there was no wind!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:03
by RayC
John Snow wrote:We just keep the Mods busy and sometimes give them opportunity for a Lathi charge

Hopefully not fierce as at Hanakon village, near Karwar, where a thermal plant is planned!

Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:07
by Raja Ram
On the performance of many distinguished editors of India during Emergency,
"Unfortunately, many chose to crawl, when they were asked to bend" - Ramnath Goenka,
At S-e-S, it was a crawl by our strong and distinguished PM, not a bend of willow!!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:26
by RayC
Crawl?
Even swimmers crawl!
The front crawl, or forward crawl, is a swimming style usually regarded as the fastest of all the styles developed. It is one of two long axis strokes.
So, he is swimming in confusion of world politics!
And guess what? Domestically still surviving!
Give him credit!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:29
by Sanku
Credit I think is due, but elsewhere.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:34
by RayC
Sanku wrote:Credit I think is due, but elsewhere.
Doesn't matter.
No one is in the race for a Bharat Ratna!
Or is it so?
Why not the Nobel Prize?
Like the Good Friday Agreement?
Maybe you are right!
The meek shall inherit the Earth. OK if not the Earth, at least the Nobel Prize!
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:38
by John Snow
Credit always comes due. if it does not, you have to write off.
( Also what is this long axis strokes? I am worried now. I never knew them and never used them. Did I miss something?

)
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:50
by RayC
Learn to walk before you want to swim is the popular adage!
Poor Man MMS.
He is so meek and so softspoken that maybe those who drafted the Jt Statement never could hear what he said!
Ms Gandhi has backed him and she is the last word for India, right?
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 15:18
by arun
X Posted :
arun wrote:
After the indefinite adjournment of the case against Hafiz Saeed, yet another way of the Government of Pakistan saying that the Pakistani perpetrators of the Mumbai terrorist attack will not be punished. After all Pakistan can hardly be expected to arrest terrorists that have fled the Islamic Republic

.
Our Prime Minister Dr. Manhohan Singh had it completely wrong when he stated in Parliament that an ant-terrorist consensus had emerged in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 15:34
by JwalaMukhi
Pakistan is just a side show. The nub of the problem is not Pakistan, but the epicenter is pakistan. Pakistan, which is roguish/prodigal part of India, shall return to mothership with its tail between the legs. The manner and time of which should be determined by Indian establishment.
The statement at S-e-S if seen as the outcome of the negotiations between the Paki establishment and Indian establishment, it is humiliating to the capability of Indian establishment. It may exactly be the outcome of negotiations between the US establishment and Indian establishment, with Bakis as sideshow. It has many ramifications:
1) Indian establishment is afraid of Unkil
2) Indian establishment trying to embellish between Unkil and Russia, and in the process has not been able to put Indian Interests first.
3) Indian interests are being decided not by Indians.
4) Thorough probe into Mumbai issue will likely lead to damning conclusions implicating not just Bakis but maybe sponsors of Bakistan.
Pakistan is a bilateral issue between India and Unkil/west or a trilateral issue between India, Unkil/west and China. The statement at s-e-s is a feeble attempt to deflect from this and turn pakistan as a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.
Re: Capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh
Posted: 06 Aug 2009 23:27
by John Snow
This is what our leaders should know that Pakis beleive in
President Merkin Muffley: How is it possible for this thing to be triggered automatically and at the same time impossible to untrigger?
Dr. Strangelove: Mr. President, it is not only possible, it is essential. That is the whole idea of this machine, you know. Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy... the FEAR to attack. And so, because of the automated and irrevocable decision-making process which rules out human meddling, the Doomsday machine is terrifying and simple to understand... and completely credible and convincing.
This is what the Mullahs and Talibunnies want to do.
