>>I am not hostile to India and Indians, nor am I hostile to the Japanese. <<
Getting out my dictionary here. I don't mean rising to the level of warlike or vitriolic - "marked by lack of friendliness or by opposition."
Hard to put my finger on, but you did it for me. Thanks.
>>Japan is a demographically doomed nation. Their mistreated women folks do not care to make babies with their overworked, alcohol poisoned, and spiritually polluted men folks. . . . . I think the speed at which Japan will duplicate Britain’s fall into irrelevancy will surprise the world. . . . . No need to learn the language, just as there is little need to study Carthage’s vocabularies<<
>>>>Say bye bye to India, a make belief country with ineffective laws, political dynasties, antiquated systems, falsely valued mutual fund, and an unjustified confidence in what they had never managed to do..<<
This reminds me of arguing with my husband. OK. It's not hostile. It's very negative opinions. Better?
>>Where am I wrong?<<
Chacun a son gout. No arguing about taste.
>>In the particular case of India, and maybe only India, the Muslims are being attacked, out of the blue, for the most part.<<
Don't forget the suicide attack on the Indian Parliament, a couple of months ago. Also Kashmir. I think the US is knocking heads together at the government level but we don't control the masses, and neither do their own governments.
No, the PM you quote isn't one of the ones I was thinking of, although it was that same time frame. I was telling you we were tired of keeping the Muslims hemmed in, and maybe you guys should help instead of selling them armaments.
I think I also gave you the rap about how we wanted to turn our attention towards Latin America for a change.
It seems oddly prescient in retrospect. |
