SanjayC wrote:This shows how little you people understand how a country becomes a serious player in international affairs. It is not about charity (thought that itself is a good thing) but power projection and getting a foot in the door. Otherwise, you will never be invited to the high tables of the world. Are there no poor people in UK or Australia that they run at the first opportunity to deploy their forces overseas? There are many benefits -- look at East Timor where Australian companies are now ruling its economy or look at Iraq where US companies are extracting oil.Jarita wrote:We are all filled with grand ideas of India of yore and obviously want to play in this space. But first it would be great if we could rehabilitate the people who suffered in Uttarkhand last year. We still have not reinstated and stabilized them let alone these grandiose plans. A humanitarian mission in Iraq would send two signals, a slap on the face of our own people who need more and a signal that we are participating in Iraq. Any extra funds we have need to be spent pragmatically to secure our neighborhood first.
By deploying forces, countries come under your influence. India needs to become a stakeholder in the Yazidi issue (the same way Goras keep raising the Kashmir issue at every international fora and try to become mediators between us and Pakistan, or like Norway inserted itself in Tamil-Sinhala conflict). Yazidis have a natural affinity for us, they claim to have originated in India, are pagans like us. If even this section of world population cannot be leveraged by India for its own benefit, then we are idiots. I suggest India come in open support of pagans everywhere in the world (who follow belief systems similar to us) just like Whites come to the aid of Christians all over the world. There is a formula for this: Any group of people equally hated by Christians and Muslims are natural allies for us (as Hindus too are equally hated by Christians and Muslims). In my book, Yazidis are hated by Muslims and Christians as they are idol worshipers -- and this is good enough for us to come to their aid.
America maneuvered to get Jews a country in Middle East and look at how they have propped it in opposition to Arabs. If there was no Israel, the same Arab Yahoos would have focussing their entire attention on America. Now, US doesn't have to bother much as Israel acts like the lightening rod for Arab anger against infidels.
I suggest India get involved in the Yazidi issue, initially through humanitarian help and raising issue of their human rights in different world fora. Gradually, there is a need to raise the demand for separate homeland for Kurds. While having a pagan country right in the middle of Middle East would itself have its uses for us, we can later angle for a military base there. Think strategically and think long-term. This is how all world powers behave -- this is the same vision that is driving Goras to fund conversion programs in AP and Tamil Nadu to make them Christian majority areas and declare them as a separate Christian country some decades down the line, with special strategic relations with the Whites. Look at how long term they are thinking. It is said that the church thinks 500 years in advance.
Look at the irony -- the Goras want a piece of land in India and are even willing to change the religious profile of people through social and religious engineering to achieve their goal, and here we have a willing pagan population sitting in Middle East and we are sitting on our haunches doing nothing.
As far as "feed our own poor before we start playing world games" argument goes, the same argument was used against our Mars mission. It's a crap argument made by losers.
As for Afghanistan argument where our billions went down the drain, the mistake India made was to become sanata clause carrying goodies for the general population. While that may be fine, the main thrust should have been on propping up our own candidates among their politicians or arming some tribes on our own. The idea should have been to gain political influence (the same way that the ISI funds some Nepal politicians), and not just pure humanitarian work hoping that indirectly it will create some goodwill among the political class. The political class will simply go with the countries which are lining their pockets better or supporting them to gain political office.
Am sure those powerful arguments were used by the US when they were trying to persuade indians to get into Iraq.
By the way talking about projections we were over half of allied armies too. Lots of indians in the Middle East.
We are already on the high tables. We have changed geographic boundaries over the last 60 years. Only deep inferiority complexes of our DIE will want crumbs of the ME table played by key western players to participate.
Humanitarian aid is being provided by other groups too but the key western players are walking away with all the credit. We will get nothing. We will only be under the high table if we put our soldiers in harms way and for what. Forget it.
Lt us not fight these crusades for anyone. We have nothing to gain. If this was participation in Thailand or our civilizational space then it is a different issue.
In the Middle East all the big players want to kill or convert us. We are the biggest enemy to them.
. Are Hinduism, and Sikhism, which have a decent sized population in the UK, not considered as “faiths” by the Cameron Government 