India's Vietnam

[HeinzGud]

You mean reservations for the majority?
Wow, thats a first.

Yes Tamils were patronized by Brits to keep our people divided.
They enjoyed a majority in everything while Sinhalese were shunned.
It's not about jealousy but it should be fair at least.

Mods pls close this thread... it's derailing.

Not to worry. Just avoid such issues that you feel is derailing the thread.

 

[Dovah]

Yes Tamils were patronized by Brits to keep our people divided.
They enjoyed a majority in everything while Sinhalese were shunned.
It's not about jealousy but it should be fair at least.

Sums it all up for me.

 

[Ray]

well from the literature i had studied ipkf was there to maintain the ceasefire that India had brokered between ltte and sri lanka.
Indian tamils should not get radicalized and to avoid the Indian tamils going on with ltte and become a terror threat for rest of the people.
rajiv gandhi had ambitions just like IG to liberate people having Indian origin to have there own nation but i dont know what exactly went wrong and in the end ipkf were selling arms to ltte, exploiting locals, fighting with ltte and lankans at the same time. carrying out operations out of the blue moon and that too with no clear mandate that it is beneficial for ltte or lankan or India?

I believe that India went into Sri Lanka because of a widespread belief in the intelligence circle that the US was attempting to entrench itself in SL (it must be remembered that there was none of today's bonhomie with the US). The US was supposed to acquire the Trinco bay as a huge US naval base and also have a VOA transmission infrastructure. That was to be nipped in the bud since US presence in an area so close to India could have various negative output for India's defence as also internal security.

There is no doubt that SL Tamil sentiments were running high in Sri Lanka. It could be encourage to fan out into India, whereby insurgencies would be rife in all points of the compass so to say ie. East, North and South. It is obvious that such could not be acceptable to India. Hence, the intervention in SL so that it is kept confined to SL.

The IPKF was mandated to act as a peacekeeping force in the lines of the UN. However, Pirabhakaran, while feigning compliance, hit back against the Indian forces and for which they were not prepared since they were equipped for Peacekeeping.

 

[Ray]

We denied citizenship to the Tamils who were brought to work in SL by Brits. Though we kept half of them. Does Nazi do that???

We would have been a much phosphorus nation unless Tamils accepts the truth about their ancestry and let majority take the wheel of the country. (though Tamils should partly be blamed)

Supporting Pakistan was a strategic step, it got nothing do with India.

Buddha's dead now... Who cares about him!

The Tamils were brought to make Ceylon prosperous.

If the so called Ceylonese who claim to be the sole sons of the soil were industrious, then I presume there would have been no requirement to have brought Tamils.

These very same Tamils have made Ceylon tea a viable product in the international market. Now, that they have given their blood and sweat to enrich SL, it downright cussed and ridiculous not to recognise them as legitimate shareholders in SL's prosperity, in other words, give them citizenship.

I presume you subscribe to the view that all Sri Lankans who have settled abroad and got citizenship should be hoofed out and sent back to the island of SL or be chucked into the sea.

I have not understood this 'phosphorus' nation issue. Phosphorus ignites when in contact with air. It is also toxic. Therefore, I fail to see the connection of well being of SL if it mere starts burning if the Tamils withdraw their safety net thrown around SL so that SL does not burn!

 

[HeinzGud]

The Tamils were brought to make Ceylon prosperous.

If the so called Ceylonese who claim to be the sole sons of the soil were industrious, then I presume there would have been no requirement to have brought Tamils.

These very same Tamils have made Ceylon tea a viable product in the international market. Now, that they have given their blood and sweat to enrich SL, it downright cussed and ridiculous not to recognise them as legitimate shareholders in SL's prosperity, in other words, give them citizenship.

I presume you subscribe to the view that all Sri Lankans who have settled abroad and got citizenship should be hoofed out and sent back to the island of SL or be chucked into the sea.

I have not understood this 'phosphorus' nation issue. Phosphorus ignites when in contact with air. It is also toxic. Therefore, I fail to see the connection of well being of SL if it mere starts burning if the Tamils withdraw their safety net thrown around SL so that SL does not burn!

1) Tamils had be taken from India because Sinhalese upcountry people rejected to work on the lands taken from themselves forcefully by Brits.

2) These Tamils weren't come to SL by accident. They were enslaved by Brits to work and systematically settled in. (though these Tamils liked it cuz the general treatment they received from England is better than the treatment from fellow high class Tamils.)

3) The presence of Tamils in highlands had drastically changed it's demography and environment (this was an unnatural phenomenon)

4) If rejecting the citizenship of these Tamils were wrong........... Why still Tamil leaders object to the Sinhalese settlements in North and East??

 

[LurkerBaba]

1) Tamils had be taken from India because Sinhalese upcountry people rejected to work on the lands taken from themselves forcefully by Brits.

2) These Tamils weren't come to SL by accident. They were enslaved by Brits to work and systematically settled in. (though these Tamils liked it cuz the general treatment they received from England is better than the treatment from fellow high class Tamils.

AFAIK Jaffna Tamils were favored by the British, guys who came from mainland India were treated like crap

 

[Ray]

1) Tamils had be taken from India because Sinhalese upcountry people rejected to work on the lands taken from themselves forcefully by Brits.

A good one!

Not wanting to work for the British!

I would be surprised if colonialists took decisions after a vote.

Ceylonese were a plumb lazy lot!

2) These Tamils weren't come to SL by accident. They were enslaved by Brits to work and systematically settled in. (though these Tamils liked it cuz the general treatment they received from England is better than the treatment from fellow high class Tamils.)

Ceylonese themselves were enslaved.

So, what's new?

3) The presence of Tamils in highlands had drastically changed it's demography and environment (this was an unnatural phenomenon)

Colonialism is all about economy and not demography.

Why should the British bother about the same when Tamils are better workers?

Would you employ lazy folks?

4) If rejecting the citizenship of these Tamils were wrong........... Why still Tamil leaders object to the Sinhalese settlements in North and East??

Ask them. It is your country.

Could it be that they are following the Buddhist Sri Lankans in this game of demography weeping?

 

[HeinzGud]

A good one!

Not wanting to work for the British!

I would be surprised if colonialists took decisions after a vote.

Ceylonese were a plumb lazy lot!

The reason is that the upcountry people were slaved to work on the lands of themselves.
Brits used a cunning tactic against them, most of the upcountry people except for nobility didn't had any deeds for their lands. In fact they didn't keep deeds. So Brits passed a law ordering to confiscate lands that didn't had deeds!
If Ceylonese were lazy why didn't Brits took Vellars cast Tamils from TN. The reason was that lower class TN Tamils were willing to do anything to get something to eat. It's not about anyone's laziness.

Ceylonese themselves were enslaved.

So, what's new?

Enslaved but had dignity and pride

Colonialism is all about economy and not demography.

Why should the British bother about the same when Tamils are better workers?

Would you employ lazy folks?

If Tamils were not lazy why not took them from Jaffna????

Ask them. It is your country.

Could it be that they are following the Buddhist Sri Lankans in this game of demography weeping?

The Tamil political leaders live on the misery of their people in SL

 

[Virendra]

Enslaved but had dignity and pride

Are you trying to say that tamils didn't have dignity and pride??

If Tamils were not lazy why not took them from Jaffna????

Why take them from Jaffna instead?
a) There's no dearth of hardworking talent in India. We have a huge lot to cater anyways
b) Sri Lankan tamils are not Indian citizen. They are welcome on tourist visa and skilled immigrant visa, we won't engage in any other business with them. They are not my countrymen, that seals it.

The Tamil political leaders live on the misery of their people in SL

Which politician of the day doesn't ?

Now, whatever happened to the topic huh !! Lets get back on the highway.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Rahul M]

in the end ipkf were selling arms to ltte, exploiting locals,

sorry but have to call BS on this. you are (likely mistakenly) repeating ltte propaganda.

dear heinz ketchup, if you do not give the tamils equal status as sinhalas, be prepared to have more ltte or worse in the future. after a half century of strife your country and society has a chance of peace, do not blow it.

 

[pmaitra]

The IPKF was sent in to disarm the Tamil guerillas. They were not prepared to fight a war. The spark was caused by a RAW goof up that led to the death of 10 or 14 LTTE members (suicide by cynide).

Please tell us more about the RAW goof-up. Thanks!

 

[Ray]

The reason is that the upcountry people were slaved to work on the lands of themselves.
Brits used a cunning tactic against them, most of the upcountry people except for nobility didn't had any deeds for their lands. In fact they didn't keep deeds. So Brits passed a law ordering to confiscate lands that didn't had deeds!
If Ceylonese were lazy why didn't Brits took Vellars cast Tamils from TN. The reason was that lower class TN Tamils were willing to do anything to get something to eat. It's not about anyone's laziness.

I am sure there was some law in Ceylon before the British arrived which established ownership of the land they tilled on?

So, the point raised by you is odd, to say the least.

The British took the people suited for the job and so they selected the farmer class. What's wrong with that? Surely, tilling on virgin land could not be done with the sophisticated and the urban!

Enslaved but had dignity and pride

A good one.

Slaves claiming dignity and pride!

If Tamils were not lazy why not took them from Jaffna????

I have not understood what is 'took them from Jaffna'.

If you are meaning why Tamils of Jaffna were not taken to the plantations, the answer is simple. They must be proving to be of economic benefit where they were.

The Tamil political leaders live on the misery of their people in SL

I presume that the Buddhist politicians of SL are living off the miseries of their people too! Or else, why keep this divide alive?

 

[lemontree]

Please tell us more about the RAW goof-up. Thanks!

Its a long story which cannot be explained in one post, but this link has an article that gives the causes for the IPKF-LTTE flareup.
Submission to LLRC Part XI: President Premadasa challenges India, delivers arms directly to the LTTE | Asian Tribune

 

[pmaitra]

Its a long story which cannot be explained in one post, but this link has an article that gives the causes for the IPKF-LTTE flareup.
Submission to LLRC Part XI: President Premadasa challenges India, delivers arms directly to the LTTE | Asian Tribune

Thank you.

Looks like Premadasa was paranoid of a permanent Indian occupation and therefore, negotiated with and armed and supported the LTTE. Matters became worse due to (1) fast unto death of Thileepan and (2) suicide by militant hostages with Sri Lankan forces. Result was Prabhakaran going back on his promises and Premadasa fully exploited this situation.

This does not at all increase my respects for the LTTE and confirms the treachery of the Sinhalese. Overall, IPKF got bogged down into a meaningless, illogical jumble of conflicts with every side having done their bit of betrayal and double-faceted acts.

This forces me to draw a parallel to the Soviet-Mujahideen War (1979-1989) in Afghanistan. It was a very similar scenario there and it was not clear who was on whose side. Now I am less critical of the Soviet tactics of bombing villages into oblivion en masse. Sorry, this sounds cynical, but that is the reality that humanitarianists and activist pacifists do not understand.

 

[Bhadra]

This is a clear example of someone dicussing the past to spoil the present and the future of Sri Lanka by one whoes identity as SL is only worth the show of a flag. The statements are divisive, at time racist and aimed to fuel the conflict in now a peaceful country.

 

[Ray]

Sri Lanka's woes have not vanished.

However, to offset the same, she is desperate to have a whole lot of nations as stakeholders in SL's future so that when it erupts they intervene so as to not lose their assets!

Selling the Soul to remain Whole!

 

[HeinzGud]

I am sure there was some law in Ceylon before the British arrived which established ownership of the land they tilled on?

So, the point raised by you is odd, to say the least.

The British took the people suited for the job and so they selected the farmer class. What's wrong with that? Surely, tilling on virgin land could not be done with the sophisticated and the urban!

The Kandyan provinces were in a state of turmoil. They had been under British rule for 32 years. Under the wastelands ordinance, the British had expropriated the common land of the peasantry and reduced them to penury. In the 1830s, coffee was introduced into Ceylon, a crop which flourishes in high altitudes, and grown on the land taken from the peasants. The principal impetus to this development was the decline in coffee production in the West Indies, following the abolition of slavery there.

However, the dispossessed peasantry were not employed on the plantations: The Kandyan villagers refused to abandon their traditional subsistence holdings and become wage-workers in the nightmarish conditions that prevailed on these new estates, despite all the pressure exerted by the colonial state. The British therefore had to draw on its reserve army of labour in India, to man its lucrative new outpost to the south. An infamous system of contract labour was established, which transported hundreds of thousands of Tamil 'coolies' from southern India into Sri Lanka for the coffee estates. These Tamils labourers died in tens of thousands both on the journey itself as well as on the plantations.

Matale Rebellion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A good one.

Slaves claiming dignity and pride!

Bhagat Singh also didn't had any dignity and pride according to Mr. Ray's logic! WTF!

I have not understood what is 'took them from Jaffna'.

If you are meaning why Tamils of Jaffna were not taken to the plantations, the answer is simple. They must be proving to be of economic benefit where they were.

That's a reasonable suggestion but why Brits didn't import Vellar tamils from TN as Dutch imported most of them to Jaffna??? that raise a concern!

 

[maomao]

^^^^^ Where did you learn to argue? Have you ever heard of going off tangent and making preposterous statements?

Your statements are funny in an oxymoron manner because they do not make any sense!

 

[HeinzGud]

Thank you.

Looks like Premadasa was paranoid of a permanent Indian occupation and therefore, negotiated with and armed and supported the LTTE. Matters became worse due to (1) fast unto death of Thileepan and (2) suicide by militant hostages with Sri Lankan forces. Result was Prabhakaran going back on his promises and Premadasa fully exploited this situation.

This does not at all increase my respects for the LTTE and confirms the treachery of the Sinhalese. Overall, IPKF got bogged down into a meaningless, illogical jumble of conflicts with every side having done their bit of betrayal and double-faceted acts.

This forces me to draw a parallel to the Soviet-Mujahideen War (1979-1989) in Afghanistan. It was a very similar scenario there and it was not clear who was on whose side. Now I am less critical of the Soviet tactics of bombing villages into oblivion en masse. Sorry, this sounds cynical, but that is the reality that humanitarianists and activist pacifists do not understand.

What treachery??? almost all Sri Lankans were against the Indian intervention and RAW should know about it. Premadasa was openly criticizing IPKF and also claim to send them back when he become president. Premadasa worked accordingly.

Are all Indians try to find some error in Sinhalese people to hate???

 

[HeinzGud]

^^^^^ Where did you learn to argue? Have you ever heard of going off tangent and making preposterous statements?

Your statements are funny in an oxymoron manner because they do not make any sense!

That's because you are too ignorant person.
Don't post anything if you can't refute my claims!