tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13437119.post8959490716437949286..comments2024-03-01T13:51:47.721+05:30Comments on Reality, one bite at a time: Between the Nimitz and the deep blue seaSiddharth Varadarajanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07721228307097170092noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13437119.post-40653591833883030572007-07-11T19:17:00.000+05:302007-07-11T19:17:00.000+05:30An otherwise excellent article, marred by one para...An otherwise excellent article, marred by one paragraph that suggests that India was dragged into the nuclear weapons arena kicking and screaming. That's pure fiction, nukes are part and parcel of Great Power ambition, arm in arm with Uncle Sam.<BR/><BR/>RajeshUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09221299533795730867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13437119.post-5048191974074984382007-07-10T17:00:00.000+05:302007-07-10T17:00:00.000+05:30I remember reading similar worthless articles duri...I remember reading similar worthless articles during the peak of the cold war. Such a debased articles can only appear in The Hindu. The world has moved on and Siddhardh is still talking about the same old verbatims of the 70's and 80's. Come on Sidd, your 'LSE' degree is worth more than working as a Dy. Editor of a discredited newspaper.<BR/><BR/>BairaviAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13437119.post-12140484616521828112007-07-10T16:56:00.000+05:302007-07-10T16:56:00.000+05:30When India drew Chinese démarche, Siddhardh wrote ...When India drew Chinese démarche, Siddhardh wrote an article on Chinese anger to say that "India will have to carefully evaluate the inevitable signals ... likely send to China and the rest of Asia." The same siddhardh <BR/>displayed a deafening sound of silence when the Chinese argued their rights for Arunachal Pradesh. Who is Siddhardh batting for: Indians or Chinese? Is it because he is not allowed to write on this issues in The Hindu. If this is truly the case, then it is understandable as India's national newspaper does not allow the scope for criticism on the Chinese in its op-eds. But nothing stopped him from writting on this (Chinese demand for Arunachal Pradesh) a line on two in this blog. Is it because Siddhardh is confused about his line of thinking?. If so, why should Ramesh Thakur expect The Guardian to publish articles from """one of India's finest journalists""".<BR/><BR/>SharmaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13437119.post-63264088592154092942007-07-10T16:46:00.000+05:302007-07-10T16:46:00.000+05:30To Motilal:You said: >>> "If you look at the giant...To Motilal:<BR/><BR/>You said: >>> "If you look at the giant fiasco unfolding in Iraq, you can see where the reality diverges from theory. For the NeoCons in Washington, this war was an opportunity to put the superior capabilities of US military on display to the world"<BR/><BR/>No, you are wrong. The reality is as good as the theory. The US won the war against the biggest army in the middle east in 41 days. Thus they showed their superiority in Iraq, as they had shown in dismembering Serbia. They have problem only in peacekeeping in Iraq, which was not the objective of the neocons anyway. If the US wanted to show raw military power, they could have taken Iraq to the Islamic ages.<BR/><BR/>>>> If India wants to play a more prominent role on the world stage, it will have to take on more responsibility.<BR/><BR/>But who wants India's help on the world stage?. Donot live on illusions.<BR/><BR/>>>> However, that does not obligate India to agree with all American demands.<BR/><BR/>True. Nor do the Indians need to oblige with the Chinese/Russians.<BR/><BR/>>>> The US will never make a 100% percent commitment to India.<BR/><BR/>There is no such thing as a free lunch.<BR/><BR/>>>> India foreign policy should be driven by Indian interests. <BR/><BR/>SharmaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13437119.post-31554219136579501242007-07-08T23:06:00.000+05:302007-07-08T23:06:00.000+05:30If you look at the giant fiasco unfolding in Iraq,...If you look at the giant fiasco unfolding in Iraq, you can see where the reality diverges from theory. For the NeoCons in Washington, this war was an opportunity to put the superior capabilities of US military on display to the world; it has only exposed its limitations. The objective of this war was to make an average American more amenable to the concept of using military power to further US interests in the world. However, for next 20-30 years, Americans will be looking inwards and unwilling to fight unprovoked wars.<BR/><BR/>There is nothing wrong in co-operating with US (or France, for that matter) to send a peacekeeping mission to Africa. If India wants to play a more prominent role on the world stage, it will have to take on more responsibility. However, that does not obligate India to agree with all American demands. Europe works very closely with US on humanitarian relief efforts, but stays out of her wars.<BR/><BR/>As far as American ‘help’ to India is concerned, it will be balanced by American ‘help’ to China and Pakistan. The US will never make a 100% percent commitment to India; in return India will continue to consult with Europe and Russia before making up her mind. American foreign policy is driven by American interests, India foreign policy should be driven by Indian interests.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com