jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (40 posts)

obama comes to india

  1. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago

    Today, 7th November, 2010, Mr.Barrack Obama arrived in Mumbai, India at 12-50 pm. He went to the Taj Hotel, where 2 years before, Pakistani terrorist, took the whole city of Mumbai to ransom... they killed more than 200 people in the hotels, in CST station and on the roads of Mumbai. He presented a single white rose to the memorial of those killed in Taj hotel and wrote a note in the visitors' book.

    He said he is honoured to be in India. He offered condolences to the killed tourists, including the Israeli couple, leaving thier child an orphan. But he never uttered a word about who was responsible for these things. Why not he name the main culprit, Pakistan as epicentre of all such terrorist activities? What interest has he got in hiding Pakistan's name?

    He has come here to increase trade with India and create jobs in USA. He is welcome to do that, because, thousands of Indians are working in USA for decades. Let him plan the increase in trade with India, let him increase jobs in USA. But why does he not mention his policy on outsourcing, the main concern for India?

    Previously, he is reported to have assured the Pakistani President Zardari that US will not let Pakistan become "failed State". In India, every Indian's dream is to see Pakistan fail. How can any US President assure Pakistan about its existence? Better look after US interests and see that USA does not become a "failed state".

    1. rachellrobinson profile image84
      rachellrobinsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I don't have the answer to your question but I can say that there are American's asking the same thing.

    2. ediggity profile image61
      ediggityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think the whole US plan of spreading freedom would go over to well if President Obama said he wanted to see Pakistan fail as a state.  As far as assurance it was probably in reference to the US doing what they can to make sure Pakistan doesn't fail.

    3. SiddSingh profile image61
      SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The visit is largely symbolical - I think that Obama has understood very well that Indians are suckers for symbolism - even if it is a substitute for substance. So, he says he grieves the loss of lives, signs the condolence book, talks to survivors etc. Indians will feel glad - and that's it.

      Did he make any mention of the origins of the attack? No.



      He has no interest in hiding the names of perpetrators, but he has no interest in naming them either. Why should he?

      Accept it - India and Pakistan are a hyphenated relationship in American polity - a zero sum game.



      He has made his policy amply clear on outsourcing - "Buffalo, not Bangalore" - thus spake Obama.

      Indeed he has been raising the Indian bogey at various occasions. Sample this -

      "Let me tell you, China is not cutting education. South Korea is not cutting its education spending. India is not cutting education spending. Germany is not cutting education spending. Those countries aren't playing for second place. And neither does the United States of America. We play for first place," Obama said. (Source - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new … 840016.cms)

      “There’s an educational arms race taking place around the world right now – from China to Germany, to India to South Korea.  Cutting back on education would amount to unilateral disarmament.  We can’t afford to do that”.

      Why should he even talk about India in this way - the education budget of India is not even 10% of that of the US.

      Another one -

      "We can't afford our kids to be mediocre at a time when they're competing against kids in China and kids in India,"
      http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/US-k … 286940.cms






      I don't agree with you - it is not every Indian's dream to see Pakistan fail.

      1. couturepopcafe profile image61
        couturepopcafeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I don't think the percentage of dollars spent on education in relation to another country (India) was the point of this comment.  I think the point is simply "let's not cut education budget."

    4. Reality Bytes profile image92
      Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this



      Ahhh, do you have knowledge of India giving aid to terrorists in Pakistan to attack U.S. troops?

      1. SiddSingh profile image61
        SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Are you really serious?

        Google "india pakistan" and see the results.

        1. Reality Bytes profile image92
          Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I understand the India?Pakistan rivalry.

          It would be in Indis'a best interest if the U.S. turned on Pakistan.  I mean we are already bombing the country.

          If the Pakistani Government fell, India could fill the void?

          1. SiddSingh profile image61
            SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "Rivalry" connotes two or more entities fighting for the same thing. I would not describe any aspect of India Pakistan relationship as rivalry (except maybe the export of Basmati rice!).

            I didn't really understand the point about India filling the void in case Pakistan government collapses. Filling the void in what sense?

            1. Reality Bytes profile image92
              Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Does India still consider Pakistan as part of India?

              Does India recognize the sovereignty of Pakistan.

              1. SiddSingh profile image61
                SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                No, Pakistan is not considered a part of India - except in the wildest dreams of some extreme Right wingers - and even they propound this idea in half jest!

                India fully recognizes the sovereignty of Pakistan.

                I think I am getting what you mean - but that situation is not possible. An imploded Pakistan will be a nightmare 100x times that of what is currently Afghanistan - and not in the interest of the World in general, and India in particular.

                1. Reality Bytes profile image92
                  Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this



                  I agree, I was responding to this in the OP's Post.


                  Previously, he is reported to have assured the Pakistani President Zardari that US will not let Pakistan become "failed State". In India, every Indian's dream is to see Pakistan fail. How can any US President assure Pakistan about its existence? Better look after US interests and see that USA does not become a "failed state".

                  1. SiddSingh profile image61
                    SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    It takes all kinds!

                  2. Cleanclover profile image59
                    Cleancloverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    China would love to see USA as a failed state.

    5. Ralph Deeds profile image69
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Why do Indians want to see Pakistan fail? Seems to me that could have bad security consequences for India. The U.S. is experiencing problems as a result of Mexico's and the US's inability to deal with drug battles along their border. Most Americans want a stable, well-governed and prosperous Mexico as is the case with Canada on our northern border.

    6. KFlippin profile image60
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Your topic is both on point and stimulating to the conversation of just who Obama is and what he really stands for.  For certain, he makes a much bigger deal out of pronouncing 'Pakistan' than he does India, you get this holding close to heart sense when he speaks of Pakistan that seems strange, and for certain he showed no sympathy or empathy of any consequence to the dangers at your border when discussing Jihad that I could discern.  Perhaps I'm just not astute enough these days, or maybe too cynical . . . but something smells most days, something doesn't quite add up, and it may well be Obama's own fault for not letting us all in to understand him better.  We all know he delights in pronouncing Pakistan, but that is not exactly a statement on his true foreign policy leanings, etc......Best wishes to you and your people and your country.

  2. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    Anyone know how much this trip is costing us?

    1. ediggity profile image61
      ediggityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      $46 a day.

      1. Petra Vlah profile image61
        Petra Vlahposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        $46 a day? Somehow I doubt that Obama is staying at a Motel 6! - not if he is still married to Michelle who made sure her visit to Sapin was a first class world affair...

        1. couturepopcafe profile image61
          couturepopcafeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          lol And no little micro-fridge in the room!

      2. couturepopcafe profile image61
        couturepopcafeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        ediggity - not likely.  Where did you get this figure?

    2. readytoescape profile image59
      readytoescapeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Further

      Is this fool hearty move pertaining to the security of the President of the United States?

      Does a trip to this location provide an irresistible opportunity for our enemies in that part of the world?

  3. Cleanclover profile image59
    Cleancloverposted 6 years ago

    I think the root of the problem is propering government in Pakistan. If Pakistan becomes a proper democracy with absolute power in civilian hands and the Pakistan Army and ISI totally under civilian control then all terrorsit activities from that region would cease to exist.
    The real truth that nobody knows is the Army and ISI of pakistan are terrorists themselves.

    1. SiddSingh profile image61
      SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you think democracy in Pakistan is going to solve the problem of terrorism in India, you are sadly mistaken. The "theory of a thousand cuts" and "eating grass for a 100 years" did not originate from the Pakistani Army - they were all proposed by popularly chosen Prime ministers in Pakistan.

      I read a survey a few months back - it showed that something like 65% or more of Pakistan populace consider India as the single biggest threat to Pakistan. If this is true, do you really think that a democratic government will be ready to talk sense with India?

      1. Cleanclover profile image59
        Cleancloverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You are mistaken how governments work Sidd. It doesn't matter what the pakistani general population think or decides. Their job is just to elect the government.
        Now all decisions are taken by the governement and it cannot work against it's own interest and growth and so with bilateral and multilateral international pressure cannot and will not allow terrorism to thrive and prosper.
        And the common man is not foolish enough to allow terrorism to thrive which is making them weaker, poorer and stunting their growth. So majority Pakistanis want peace.
        The formula for peace is simple. Keep Pakistani Army and ISI in control and you control Terrorism.

        1. Petra Vlah profile image61
          Petra Vlahposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If you really think that the will of the people matters, then you are just as mistaken - it DOES NOT - and Pakistani is not alone in that regard. Political games and strategies ARE NOT decided by the people of the world, they are decided by economic and military interests of the big players - America in particular

          1. Cleanclover profile image59
            Cleancloverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            People should kindly read what i type before replying. We share similar views.

  4. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago

    Mr.Sidd Singh, I think you have not heard or read about what happened in 1947. Just for the sake of invading India, Pakistanis., ie., the muslim majority headed by Jinnah demanded that independence be given to them on 14th August, 1947 itself. One day after, India got independence. Before that muslim raiders entered Kashmir, in the hope of conquering and annexing it with Pakistan. The Maharaja was shaken and when it became known that he cant hold on for long, he hurried to Delhi and signed the instrument of accession.

    Do you think the capture of Kashmir is their only agenda? No. They aim to spread their borders southwards and turn India into an Islamic nation. If we fail to take the initiative and see Pakistan fail, we will find ourselves fail. If we dont kill the tiger, it will cut us to pieces. I dont mention the whole Pakistani people.... it the evil war machine and terror-infrastructure that are planning to destroy India.

    For America, it is simple diplomacy.. for India., it our lives, it is our culture, it is our land and our civilisation.

    Even if China defends, Pakistan, they cannot match India, as India is the most trained and experienced army in the world. China holds 1.4 billion slaves in their country. But India has 1.1 billion civilised, well trained (in every field) people.  You can read in newspapers today that India has surpassed China in ecomonic growth.

    No one has the right to pledge our grown economy to China or Pakistan or USA.  Our forefathers failed to take cognizance of what our neighbours planned... and lost all richness and glory. We cant afford to lose that once more.

  5. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago

    Failing of Pakistan is not the policy of India... But the birth of that country, carved out from a united India was on a bed of skulls and bones of hundreds of thousands... Almost every family in India was affected by the savagery of the religious fundamentalists. Political leaders will use polished language for diplomacy sake and use mild words in dealing with Pakistan.

    But continued terrorism, claiming an Indian state as theirs, donating some areas to Chiina to build a strategical road, and joining hands with China against India will show that their ambition is to revive their savagery in the whole sub-continent which started in 11th century (1191). If they want to live peacefully, no one will stop them. If they dont want peace, they are doomed to fail.

    Above all, how long will they pull on with the already fallen America's military aid? If America stops donating "aid" from their peoples' tax-money, will not Pakistan fail?

    1. Reality Bytes profile image92
      Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this



      You are correct without the United State's taxpayer money, Pakistan could not defend herself.  I do not think the aid is enough to allow a Pakistani offensive?

      1. SiddSingh profile image61
        SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        At this stage, USA has committed USD 2 billion over the next five years for Pakistan as "aid for fighting terrorism" on the western border (meaning Afghanistan). This aid will be used specifically for buying weapons - including helicopters.

        Sadly, The Indian experience has been this - any weapon that lands in Pakistan will be ultimately used against India - or more specifically - in bolstering the eastern border of Pakistan.

        Here is a link for more details about US aid to Pakistan
        http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-1 … rists.html

      2. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
        VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        American aid to Pakistan is really not enough to take offensive against India. But they can initiate it and call all their muslim neighbours for help, as is their practice.  In 1971 war, almost all muslim countries directly came to the aid of Pakistan.... but in vain.

  6. optimus grimlock profile image59
    optimus grimlockposted 6 years ago

    you can keep him

    1. SiddSingh profile image61
      SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Too late! He's already gone!

 
working