Fair enough! There are enough rants against India
happening anyway on this board.
But the questions I have asked in this post - about
their idealogy, the definitiveness of their vision -
are these pertinent or are these rants?
I am not a fan of the Indian bureacracy. In the years
since the first promises of revolutions in our region,
however, much has changed. People in other regions
somehow have seized the moment and moved forward -
inspite of what some may call a debilitating system.
We have remained mired in old shibboleths. Our local
leadership within the Indian system and without (in
equal measure) is devoid of any vision. And yet, there
is never much serious discussion on it.
Almost as if this "sovereignity" thing is a sacred god
in itself. Or for the rest of us a false god!
--- J Kalita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rajib,
>
> Why do you keep on ranting against the ULFA only?
> You should rant
> against the Indian Army who kill and torture
> innocents in large numbers
> and Indian bureaucrats (the establishment) who are
> mostly all corrupt
> to the bone in the same breath to have any semblance
> of reasonableness
> in your writings.
>
> Jugal
>
>
> On Thursday, December 9, 2004, at 06:36 PM, Rajib
> Das wrote:
>
> >> And ULFA was NOT 'discredited' when it emerged.
> Even
> >> now it is
> >> discredited only in certain circles. ULFA could
> not
> >
> > "Certain circles" indeed! Innocent civilians
> bombed
> > out and the level of extortion and the money
> hoarded
> > in Bangladesh are somewhat universal yardsticks
> for
> > defining discredited or not.
> >
> > In any case we are talking about the future and
> the
> > system for it. Not about what ULFA was 20 years
> back.
> > About what it is today and what it is capable of
> > tommorow versus what the current system is today
> and
> > what it is capable of tomorrow.
> >
> > So what is the verdict on the following about ULFA
> AS
> > THINGS STAND TODAY:
> > a. Its capability to define the "sovereign" nation
> it
> > is fighting for
> > b. Its capability or defined vision in terms of
> how it
> > will govern the sovereign nation in a way that is
> > fundamentally better than what it is today?
> > c. Its defined idealogy and the committment of its
> > cadre to its idealogy?.
> > d. Its capability to wage war "successfully"
> > e. And to cut it short, its record of respecting
> > people's opinion?
> >
> > Then there is the small point about whether it
> does
> > indeed represent the sovereign nation it has
> defined
> > for itself?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
> > http://my.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Assam mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
> >
> > Mailing list FAQ:
> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html
> > To unsubscribe or change options:
> > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
Mailing list FAQ:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html
To unsubscribe or change options:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
