HeinzGud
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,558
- Likes
- 1,070
No. India need us more.
Ram Setu
- Thread starter RPK
- Start date
HeinzGud
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,558
- Likes
- 1,070
Exactly all the unemployed and caste trodden people will come to Sri Lanka. (and also the rapists.) So we do not need the hobos from India running around Sri Lanka looking for jobs.
- Joined
- May 23, 2011
- Messages
- 5,614
- Likes
- 6,793
Yep. All rapists will rush to Lanka for the pretty Lankan broads.I mean this is what we do all day, fantasize about hot Sinhalese chicks. Also seeing the kind treatment our fishermen get there we the Unemployed Association of India (TM) can't wait to pack our bags and leave for the land of opportunities that is Lanka.
We, the people of Love Lanka Society(TM) thank you for your support.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2010
- Messages
- 5,033
- Likes
- 8,354
LOL ahhahahhahah
mahesh
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2010
- Messages
- 607
- Likes
- 476
Yes really, i'm remembering the cheerleaders of recent T20
:shocked:
how exactly?
from india to sri lanka....for jobs
could become the best seller in fiction category.why dont you give a try
HeinzGud
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,558
- Likes
- 1,070
The economy. Sri Lanka is a prime importer of Indian goods. If India lose our market then it will effect India. If you aren't sure ask from TATA.
:hitwall:
may be one company,one small country.indian economy doesn't rely much on exports.if you stop trade with your nearest supplier nation your economy is the one which strains.
sri lanka gdp currently pegged at mere 60 billion usd.imports from india around 2.5 billion usd-2100 while from china ,while exports are around 500 million to india and 4 odd billion usd to china.
currently SL is a trade deficit country,small gdp,net importer.
india doesn't need SL in view of economy
your economy is not that much intertwined with ours,probably you should do a proper research before posting useless comments.
HeinzGud
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,558
- Likes
- 1,070
Not just one company. Let's see TATA, Ashok Leyland, Bajaj, TVS, Hero, The Tamilnadu saree makers etc. this is a small list of business connections Sri Lanka having with India. Most of all Tamilnadu was worst hit when Sri Lanka suspended tourists from going to Tamilnadu.
Sri Lanka may have a smaller market compare to other trading partners of India. But Sri Lanka account for significant amount trade from India.
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/130915/business-times/indo-lanka-fta-trade-surges-to-5-bln-in-2012-from-600-mln-in-2000-61630.html
Last edited:
SamwiseTheBrave
Regular Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 391
- Likes
- 147
i`m sure all the Lankan broads are as hot as Jacqueline Fernandez
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2009
- Messages
- 9,080
- Likes
- 40,077
A bridge is built between two landmasses that are in agreement with each other. India and Sri Lanka aren't the best of friends. Not when they use our fishermen as target practice.
NDA will do two things when it comes to power (to live up to its commitments to AIDMK):
NDA will do two things when it comes to power (to live up to its commitments to AIDMK):
- Take "police action" on Kachchativu, and drive out the "vermin"
- Step up aggressive posturing by our Navy to ensure the Lankan Navy doesn't misbehave with our fishermen
Last edited:
still 5 B$ bilateral trade is nothing.first you say india will be worst hit,now tamilnadu is hit when srilanka stopped its tourists from coming to india.
first place tamilnadu is not a famous tourist destination.second tamilnadu has many industries with thriving business.an average of 1 lakh tourists(?) from srilanka wont make even a dent in tamilnadu economy.frankly to say you are not welcome in tamilnadu
the companies you mentioned above have global presence ,srilanka is no way special..
Vishwarupa
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,438
- Likes
- 3,600
Vishwarupa
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,438
- Likes
- 3,600
Srinivas_K
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2009
- Messages
- 7,420
- Likes
- 12,945
Ram Setu was man-made, says Science Channel
An American science channel on Tuesday restarted the debate on the Ram Setu, saying that there exists evidencesuggesting that the bridge connecting India and Sri Lanka was man-made not natural.
Science Channel, as part of a promo for an upcoming show titled What on Earth, has interviewed an archaeologist who says, "The rocks on top of the sand actually pre-date the sand. So there is more to the story."
This adds credence to the Hindu mythological text in the Ramayana which claims that the Ram Setu bridge was constructed under the guidance of Lord Rama. The bridge currently connects Pamban island in India's Tamil Nadu state with Sri Lanka's Mannar island (which was man-made).
All of this hints that while the sand formation was natural, the rocks (that are said to be 7,000 years old) have been placed there.
The Ram Setu, also known as Adam's Bridge, is wrapped in mystery and mythology. As mentioned in a Hindustan Times report, it's a series of limestone shoals bridging the 30-kilometre gap between India and Sri Lanka across the Gulf of Munnar.
An image of the Ram Setu as seen from space. Courtesy: Twitter/@ScienceChannel
Raging debate over Ram Setu
There are different views on the history and legacy of the Ram Setu. One version says that there was a legitimate land connection between India and Sri Lanka during the Ice Age, while another has said that Sri Lanka was part of the mainland Indian sub-continent, and broke away about 1,25,000 years ago. Hindu mythology has it that followers of Lord Rama built the bridge to felicitate the rescue of his kidnapped wife Sita.
A report by News18 said that the depth of the sea in this stretch varies between three feet and 30 feet.
In 2008, the then Congress-led central government told the Supreme Court that there exists no bridge between India and Sri Lanka, and that if Lord Ram built one, he must have also destroyed it later. As reported by The Times of Indiain July 2008, the Centre acquiesced with ally DMK's position in the Sethusamudram case.
"There is no bridge. It was not a man-made structure. It may be a superman-made structure, but the same superman had destroyed it. That is why for centuries nobody mentioned anything about it. It (Ram Setu) has become an object of worship only recently," the government had said, as per the report.
Sethusamudram shipping canal project
It acquired political prominence when the Indian government planned the Sethusamudram shipping canal project, meant to create a shipping route through the Gulf of Munnar. Ships that currently sail from the West coast of India bound for the eastern hemisphere currently have to circumnavigate Sri Lanka because the Gulf of Munnar is shallow and cannot be used by ships. The Sethusamudram project aims to reduce the distance the ships have to travel.
The News18 report said that this would reduce the distance between India's west and east coasts by about 350 nautical miles, saving about 10-30 hours of sailing time. A bridge would also add to India's exchequer through shipping fees, it was felt.
However, doing so would damage the Adam's Bridge section of the maritime border between India and Sri Lanka. The matter reached the Supreme Court, with several petitions challenging the government's plan of dredging the Ram Setu to construct its shipping channel.
To resolve this dispute, the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) was tasked with researching if the chain of islands were man-made or historic, said a report on The Telegraph. The BJP, which was in the Opposition at the time the project was first conceived, had been opposing it citing people's beliefs that Lord Ram created the path to reach Lanka to rescue Sita and that the islets should be protected.
In March this year, ICHR chairman Y Sudershan Rao said their research could influence the government's plans for the future of the Sethusamudram project. "We will look for material confirmation on whether it was a natural phenomenon or some human efforts were there," Rao was quoted as saying in the report.
The problem, however, Rao said, is that there was a "dark period" in history — between 4th Millennium BC and the 1st Millennium BC, and that they were trying to analyse this period in greater depth.
Published Date: Dec 13, 2017 11:21 am | Updated Date: Dec 13, 2017 11:21 am
http://www.firstpost.com/india/ram-...w-about-prehistoric-adams-bridge-4256169.html
to the westerners, stop calling it adam's bridge, adam has nothing to do with this bridge.
An American science channel on Tuesday restarted the debate on the Ram Setu, saying that there exists evidencesuggesting that the bridge connecting India and Sri Lanka was man-made not natural.
Science Channel, as part of a promo for an upcoming show titled What on Earth, has interviewed an archaeologist who says, "The rocks on top of the sand actually pre-date the sand. So there is more to the story."
This adds credence to the Hindu mythological text in the Ramayana which claims that the Ram Setu bridge was constructed under the guidance of Lord Rama. The bridge currently connects Pamban island in India's Tamil Nadu state with Sri Lanka's Mannar island (which was man-made).
All of this hints that while the sand formation was natural, the rocks (that are said to be 7,000 years old) have been placed there.
The Ram Setu, also known as Adam's Bridge, is wrapped in mystery and mythology. As mentioned in a Hindustan Times report, it's a series of limestone shoals bridging the 30-kilometre gap between India and Sri Lanka across the Gulf of Munnar.
An image of the Ram Setu as seen from space. Courtesy: Twitter/@ScienceChannel
Raging debate over Ram Setu
There are different views on the history and legacy of the Ram Setu. One version says that there was a legitimate land connection between India and Sri Lanka during the Ice Age, while another has said that Sri Lanka was part of the mainland Indian sub-continent, and broke away about 1,25,000 years ago. Hindu mythology has it that followers of Lord Rama built the bridge to felicitate the rescue of his kidnapped wife Sita.
A report by News18 said that the depth of the sea in this stretch varies between three feet and 30 feet.
In 2008, the then Congress-led central government told the Supreme Court that there exists no bridge between India and Sri Lanka, and that if Lord Ram built one, he must have also destroyed it later. As reported by The Times of Indiain July 2008, the Centre acquiesced with ally DMK's position in the Sethusamudram case.
"There is no bridge. It was not a man-made structure. It may be a superman-made structure, but the same superman had destroyed it. That is why for centuries nobody mentioned anything about it. It (Ram Setu) has become an object of worship only recently," the government had said, as per the report.
Sethusamudram shipping canal project
It acquired political prominence when the Indian government planned the Sethusamudram shipping canal project, meant to create a shipping route through the Gulf of Munnar. Ships that currently sail from the West coast of India bound for the eastern hemisphere currently have to circumnavigate Sri Lanka because the Gulf of Munnar is shallow and cannot be used by ships. The Sethusamudram project aims to reduce the distance the ships have to travel.
The News18 report said that this would reduce the distance between India's west and east coasts by about 350 nautical miles, saving about 10-30 hours of sailing time. A bridge would also add to India's exchequer through shipping fees, it was felt.
However, doing so would damage the Adam's Bridge section of the maritime border between India and Sri Lanka. The matter reached the Supreme Court, with several petitions challenging the government's plan of dredging the Ram Setu to construct its shipping channel.
To resolve this dispute, the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) was tasked with researching if the chain of islands were man-made or historic, said a report on The Telegraph. The BJP, which was in the Opposition at the time the project was first conceived, had been opposing it citing people's beliefs that Lord Ram created the path to reach Lanka to rescue Sita and that the islets should be protected.
In March this year, ICHR chairman Y Sudershan Rao said their research could influence the government's plans for the future of the Sethusamudram project. "We will look for material confirmation on whether it was a natural phenomenon or some human efforts were there," Rao was quoted as saying in the report.
The problem, however, Rao said, is that there was a "dark period" in history — between 4th Millennium BC and the 1st Millennium BC, and that they were trying to analyse this period in greater depth.
Published Date: Dec 13, 2017 11:21 am | Updated Date: Dec 13, 2017 11:21 am
http://www.firstpost.com/india/ram-...w-about-prehistoric-adams-bridge-4256169.html
to the westerners, stop calling it adam's bridge, adam has nothing to do with this bridge.
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2016
- Messages
- 996
- Likes
- 1,471
formation is natural which went under sea during end of last period of Ice age....Sand carbon dating unlike stones in sea is not considered a perfect or valid method as sand near & in costal water keep shifting even if it is sandwich right beneath the rock. The sattelite pic of the area shows the ripple in sand which is caused by sea as sand is being moved from one place to another....Size of stones are to big to be made or put their by humans.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Messages
- 5,719
- Likes
- 11,620
Slavery has not been rooted out from our brains.
__________________________________________
