Bhuban da, >ULFA was not up-to-date with their home work.
It looks more like they have painted themselves into a corner. Hopefully, the ULFA has a set of alternative demands, in the likely event that their singular demand for sovereignty is rejected by the GOI. What then? If they don't have a fall-back plan, what options will they have left? IMHO, the case for autonomy should have been the major demand. Practically speaking, sovereignty is next to impossible (whether its the right thing to demand or not is not the question). If autonomy was the major demand, this problem would have been solved long time ago. --Ram On 4/28/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rajen et al > > Only a little submission. ULFA was not up-to-date with their home work. They > indeed appealed to the intelligentsia to back up their demand for > sovereignty. I thnik we didn't rise to the occasion. ULFA also felt the need > rather late. > > Regards > > Bhuban > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ 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
