India wanted LTTE 'put in its place': Norway report

[Yusuf]

Individual relatives? I answered it. Political asylum.

 

[Mr.Ryu]

Yes not only INDIA any right minded man would have wanted LTTE to be gone for the betterment of People in there. But now they are gone now what next ???

Why is INDIA and global community silent now ? when do the people affected there with all this politics be 'put in their place ?'

 

[Yusuf]

Darfur. We should have sent in troops there too. We need to show our humane side. We should have in Ruanda too.

 

[S.A.T.A]

India's betrayal of the Elam cause,something that India chamipoined with a vehemence rarely displayed elsewhere,after Indira Gandhi's trajic assassination cannot be seen in isolation from the general political discourse that characterized congress party under Rajiv Gandhi.Rajiv's congress was in the late 80's grappling with the rise of Hindu nationalism,something that was very much absent under Indira.What was earlier seen as movement for Tamil self determination in Ceylon,a cause that resonated in Tamil Nadu,now began to be increasingly viewed by the Rajiv's coterie as a secessionist movement of the Hindu Tamils.

The congress in the wake of the Shah Bano affair and the emergent Ram janma Bhoomi movement had concluded that Hindu nationalists posed the biggest political threat to four decades of congress dominance and hence it was essential that in order to not give any quarter to the rising Hindu nationalist, all national cause that had the Hindu orientation must be abandoned.Rajiv Gandhi did not have a problem with the Elam movement or the tactics of the Tamil militia,he had a problem with the Hindu tone of the movement.That was enough for Rajiv Gandhi to abandon the Tamils to the Sinhalese war hounds.

 

[Mr.Ryu]

@Yusuf what Ruanda i never heard of it ? i guess it's a country though

but why ru comparing SL to Ruanda or any thing else ?

We are so close geographically, culture, Politically and more over close relation between PEOPLE

 

[SPIEZ]

Individual relatives? I answered it. Political asylum.

If 1 person wants to bring in 1 person it's ok.
If 1 person wants to bring in 5 people its ok.
If 5 people want to bring in 5 people its ok.
If 5000 people want to bring in 5000 people isit acceptable ?

Darfur. We should have sent in troops there too. We need to show our humane side. We should have in Ruanda too.

Saar, let's first consider the case of people related or people who are important for our goodwill. Isn't there a proverb "Charity starts at home " ?

Second if we leave it to our politicians( I include every politician) they are bound to screw that up too.

 

[Param]

The social contract that a citizen of the state signs with the state, accepting the state's authority, has an implicit requirement of justice. The failure of the state to dispense justice, law and order augurs badly for the smooth functioning as we have seen.

The Sikhs are well within their rights to demand justice, and one must appreciate their willingness and steadfastness, inspite of all t
hat has happened, to reaffirm the state's authority over them. By not picking up arms, and seeking consitutional methods for the redressal of wrongs, they are setting an important precedent which is worthy of emulation.

It is not only important for the Sikhs to get justice but it is important for all communities of India and the state to ensure that Sikhs get justice as it is in national good, and a fundamental requirement for the very raison d'etre of Indian state.

OTOH SL Tamils have not signed any such covenant or a contract with the state of India.

Nobody is stopping you from articulating your position but you must realize what sort of a relationship you have with the state.

You as a subject of India and also as a citizen of the world, have a right to demand justice but it is not binding over the state of India to heed to your demands. The state of India has to weigh the pros and cons of meddling in another sovereign state's affairs.

What "social contract" did Bangladeshis sign with India in 1971?

There is a simple word that can describe the Govt's attitude_ BIAS.

 

[Virendra]

I guess it would be great to have some Sri Lankan posters here for this discussion .. to add more perspective and insight.
Our knowledge is severely restricted by the means that feed it to us. There could be distortion of facts and context in the middle.
Sri Lankans and Tamil Nadu guys are the two parties who've - "been there, seen it all"

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Param]

As a Tamilian I am the most angry at MK. If he had wanted to he could have brought down the Govt in 2008. Today we guys are being made to hear lame excuses on the pretext of "national interests".
Hope his families Karma catches up at Tihar.

Those who say that India cannot meddle in other country's internal affairs, how do they justify GoI supporting, training and arming one of the sides during the conflict? Isn't that interference?

I hate to say this.I do not know whether Karma is true or not, but when a conflict arises with China or Pak I will not be expecting any Babur or DH-10 cruise missiles over Chennai or anywhere TN.

 

[Singh]

[/B]
What "social contract" did Bangladeshis sign with India in 1971

There is a simple word that can describe the Govt's attitude_ BIAS.

This is a non sequitur.

The reason we liberated Bdesh was strategic and in the case of SL Tamils too the reason is strategic.

 

[Singh]

As a Tamilian I am the most angry at MK. If he had wanted to he could have brought down the Govt in 2008. Today we guys are being made to hear lame excuses on the pretext of "national interests".
Hope his families Karma catches up at Tihar.

Those who say that India cannot meddle in other country's internal affairs, how do they justify GoI supporting, training and arming one of the sides during the conflict? Isn't that interference?

Strategic interests/ pros and cons/ capabilities etc.

I hate to say this.I do not know whether Karma is true or not, but when a conflict arises with China or Pak I will not be expecting any Babur or DH-10 cruise missiles over Chennai or anywhere TN.

The plight of SL Tamils is also because of karma. Your feeling of hurt is also because of karma.

 

[SPIEZ]

There's only one reason why we did fight from the freedom of Bangladesh and not that of SL Tamils. It's called BIAS, whether it's strategic or not.

 

[Yusuf]

@Yusuf what Ruanda i never heard of it ? i guess it's a country though

but why ru comparing SL to Ruanda or any thing else ?

We are so close geographically, culture, Politically and more over close relation between PEOPLE

For me SL, Sudan, Ruanda is the same when it comes to them handling their citizens. Any problems there should be via international mechanism.

SL for me is important as far as maintaining Indian dominance in IOR goes. For that if we have to work with the Sinhalese and that is how it should be.
I'd rather bother about Indian territory help by Pakistan and the people under its oppression. I'd rather bother about Kashmiri Pandits get their lad back. What happens to SL Tamils can at best get my sympathies and prayers.

 

[Yusuf]

There's only one reason why we did fight from the freedom of Bangladesh and not that of SL Tamils. It's called BIAS, whether it's strategic or not.

Far more at stake when we fought to liberate Bangladesh. There are differences too between SL and Bd.

It's the entire region of Banglas who rose against West Pak. Not a particular ethnicity unlike SL which has two ethnicities or linguists slugging it out.
Liberating BD was a Huuuge strategic success as it cut pakis into half and made sure they were only on one flank.

 

[Bangalorean]

There's only one reason why we did fight from the freedom of Bangladesh and not that of SL Tamils. It's called BIAS, whether it's strategic or not.

I really don't think so.

1971 was a different time, different dynamics. It was the right time to hit the Pakis. We struck when the iron was hot.

In the 90s though, we were beggars. Our economy was in deep shit. Punjab was burning, Kashmir was burning, N-E was burning, our 1971 ally (USSR) had disintegrated.

And there was no Indira Gandhi in the 90s. Most important.

There is no comparison between 71 and SL. Nothing to do with bias.

 

[Mr.Ryu]

INDIA must act maturely usually i here we cant take on SL because they will ally with PAK and CHINA that will more damage our interest

Damn i say stop this they are ally with PAK and CHINA because INDIA supported LTTE and was left in blue not knowing how to control them.

Misadventure by INDIA 3 decades ago and Poor people in SL suffers now

so it's INDIAS job to clear what it has started in first place and stop complaining that PAK and CHINA will become friends of SL.

If our Army say we can take on both PAK and CHINA if situation arise what threat we will have in SL just they dont match up.

Give the affected people way to live and a dignity life to Carry out that's all.

 

[SPIEZ]

Far more at stake when we fought to liberate Bangladesh. There are differences too between SL and Bd.

It's the entire region of Banglas who rose against West Pak. Not a particular ethnicity unlike SL which has two ethnicities or linguists slugging it out.
Liberating BD was a Huuuge strategic success as it cut pakis into half and made sure they were only on one flank.

Again I get back to my point everything need to have an ulterior motive. Why not we cut the two ethnics in lanka in two ? Ulterior motives.

What is done is done, why at least now don't we start looking into the future ? We cannot undo the past, we cannot wash of our hands from what we did in Lanka.

If India wants to be a global it starts right now with its neighbours.

 

[S.A.T.A]

[/B]
What "social contract" did Bangladeshis sign with India in 1971?

There is a simple word that can describe the Govt's attitude_ BIAS.

although India intervened in the conflict between the Pakistanis,where they were beating the shit out of each other,there was no real possibility of India incorporating Muslim Bangladesh into the Indian union.On the other hand Hindu Tamils of the NE SL would have seamless incorporated into the Indian national framework,perhaps under the auspices of the TN.What rationale drove India to help the Muslim Bangladeshis win freedom,the Elam cause had one even better and more strategic.

Elam is not a lost cause and given what we know about the Sinhalese,the idiots are perfectly capable of reviving another one in not so a distant future.One can hope that when opportunity arises a more capable leadership,devoted to the Indian cause is at the helm.

 

[Mr.Ryu]

For me SL, Sudan, Ruanda is the same when it comes to them handling their citizens. Any problems there should be via international mechanism.

SL for me is important as far as maintaining Indian dominance in IOR goes. For that if we have to work with the Sinhalese and that is how it should be.
I'd rather bother about Indian territory help by Pakistan and the people under its oppression. I'd rather bother about Kashmiri Pandits get their lad back. What happens to SL Tamils can at best get my sympathies and prayers.

Ok then why did INDIA not support other nations when it tried to stop the manslaughter ? Bro please see the UN resoulitions that have been stooped by INDIA against SL

 

[Mr.Ryu]

Far more at stake when we fought to liberate Bangladesh. There are differences too between SL and Bd.

It's the entire region of Banglas who rose against West Pak. Not a particular ethnicity unlike SL which has two ethnicities or linguists slugging it out.
Liberating BD was a Huuuge strategic success as it cut pakis into half and made sure they were only on one flank.

Noop now what you say as different situation seems same to me.

There was no Bangladesh untill INDIA created it so it was their Internal problem

What you gained by splitting PAK ?

Now you fight with PAK
also
We are not in good terms with BD are we ?