<p>
[quote]
That is like saying “Osama bin Laden is in Pakistan therefore nuke Pakistan”. This argument makes absolutely no sense at all.<a href=“%5E%5Ehope%20this%20works!”>/quote</a>
This argument makes perfect sense. Pakistan has done a fine job of exporting terrorists to the entire world. I would love to nuke Pakistan (Terroristan) any day, even if Osama was somewhere else. </p>
<p>“In making such a statement, it appears that you have put a discrete value on a human life. So tell me…how much am I worth?” - obviously, nothing to me. A value on human life - hmmm - I will accept this rate: at most 2 innocents for every terrorist/naxalite/commie executed</p>
<p>“How do you define “improving the lot of its people.”” - economic progress is my first priority.</p>
<p>“Take their sovereignty and self determination into your own hands and decide for them because (of course) how does an expendable “collateral” rescource come to think for itself?” - now you see my perspective. </p>
<p>“Who is left to decide…ok this party fits the “criteria” for suppression. It cannot be done. Any attempt to do so would be legislating of opinion and would only lead to ultimate corruption.” - I will decide which groups to liquidate. “ultimate corruption” - India cannot be more corrupt than it is now - my model country is China and I’ll admit that it is corrupt but not ultimately corrupt</p>
<p>India’s problem w/ insurgents cannot be solved w/out the use of encounters. In the rare case that a few terrorists are actually sent to jail (most are acquitted), members of the same terrorist group kidnap some high-level official and demand the release of their comrades. Result: Indian policemen and BSF (Border Security Forces) men die trying to capture terrorists who are eventually released. The way that India is trying to solve the insurgency problem - through appeasement - will not work. Holding peace talks w/ Pakistan, a nation that set up the Taliban and supports terrorists, will achieve nothing. </p>
<p>“India has definitely come a long way from where it used to be.” - no one can disagree w/ you there - but India could have come a longer way - India’s democracy is always called a “vibrant democracy” by the Western media outlets and gov’ts - few people bother to scrutinize India’s democratic system</p>
<p>India has several different ethnicities and the infamous caste system. Politicians instigate masses on the basis of their ethnicities and lead them to communal riots. Politicians direct one ethnicity to kill members of other ethnicities. Several politicians have criminal records and strong ties w/ gangsters. Many use their gangsters to intimidate or even kill their opponents. Any notion that India has a “vibrant democracy” is wrong. </p>
<p>Quite recently, workers at a Honda plant (in Gurgaon, near Delhi) were striking w/out a permit. When a few police officials came to persuade the crowd to disperse and to get a permit before striking, the officials were brutally attacked by the striking workers. That same afternoon, masses of policemen suppressed the striking workers. The next day, politicians profusely apologized to the workers and gave them substantial amounts of money. Commies, always so eager to march for the worker’s cause, started another violent protest. The police, who suppressed the workers to secure the city, were castigated severely. That is India: commies/labor unions create trouble and unrest for the authorities and the authorities receiving blame for securing the city.</p>
<p>You are still confused by who I am targeting: let me clarify this once and for all - all commies, commie-sympathizers, terrorists, rebels ought to be executed - I do not care if they are affiliated w/ other socio-political groups - I am willing to accept a ratior of at most 2 suspected people killed for each commie, terrorist or rebel.</p>
<p>“Political taste cannot be controlled by law or enforcing action (both morally and practically).” - politics is no place for morals, I’m a Machiavellian - Hitler used effective methods to suppress all commies - I do not approve of his treatment of the jews but I agree whole-heartedly w/ his treatment of the commies.</p>
<p>“The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.” - John F. Kennedy - Indian voters are (in my opinion) more ignorant than American voters. When the Brits left India, they left an unofficial but rampant culture of corruption amongst the Indian population. One of our nationalist leaders, Subhash Chandra Bose, also advocated a dictatorship for India. Unfortunately, Nehru established a democracy that is a sham. The Indian constitution is an excellent document but it is not enforced strongly. There are rival Islamic courts that are used in India - these courts use medieval Sharia law. </p>
<p>“a not so ignorant NRI” - you are not certainly not ignorant about politics, you are definitely ignorant about Indian politics - NRI = non-residential Indian - in another thread, you mentioned you were a Burmese - This might sound strange to you, but newsflash, Burma is not part of India.</p>
<p>You have failed to mention any specific examples concerning India to support your point. Let me make your job easier, even though it does go against my point: the former chief minister of Tamil Nadu (an Indian state) effectively modernized and developed large parts of the state. He is the kind of man I would accept as the dictator of India. He lost the election for chief minister b/c his opponents instigated members of lower-caste and rural communities. </p>
<p>BTW, your arguments have no appeal to me - I would approve of anything being done for the economic progress of India - My heroes are Deng Xiaoping (premier who liberalized China’s economy and committed Tiannamen Square massacre) and Lee Kuan Yew.</p>
<p>I have no respect for a democracy where most voters are ignorant - “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” - Winston Churchill,</p>
<p>This is the end to my long, discursive post.</p>
(on my side anyways).</p>