Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Worswick who wrote (2536)	3/5/1998 9:37:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Worsick, I was under the impression that that Kashmir will be at least the third brick (after Pakistan and Bangladesh). Have I missed something? History was never a very strong point with me. Zeev

To: Worswick who wrote (2536)	3/5/1998 9:55:00 AM
From: Mohan Marette	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

What is a Nation without territory,but an Idea. To me in hindsight it seems that nothing more than territorial greed seems to be at the base of Indian-Kashmiri politics from 1947 to the present moment. Worswick,of course it is all about territory.I mean what is the U.S without Texas,California, Arizona,New Mexio etc,or what is Israel without the West Bank,what is China without Taiwan,Hong Kong,Macau,and Tibet and on the same line what is India without Kashmir (hey the king guy acceded to the Union remember). So you are absolutely right in that it always about territory,unless of course one is satisfied with the idea of a 'banana republic' and then of course one can wait for the tourists to come and feed them. Oh what is the use,I just stop now as these are topics of endless discussions and may lead no where.But I must say the discussions are nonetheless are fascinating. PS: I wonder what the Pakistanis' take on Kashmir is, just as illuminating and contentious I am sure.<gg>

To: Worswick who wrote (2536)	3/5/1998 10:19:00 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Worswick, "Personally, I believe that the dream of an Indian union began to fall apart when Mountbatten absolutely sold out, first the Indian princes and abrogated all the British solemn treaties... Politically, everything... absolutely every single political act follows from the compromises of 1947 and the poisoned cake that was served to all the participants on Indian Independence Day." I (though I have not studied Indian history as others on this thread have) agree with this. It follows the pattern the British followed when their "empire" was dismantled. They did similar things in Palestine in the late 40s, and fanned Arab nationalism with one hand while voting for the partition of Palestine with the other; they guaranteed a miserable outcome. And of course they were even worse with Ireland, and various parts of Africa. Not to mention what the British colonialists did in the 17th and 18th centuries in North America. "Quiet" genocide. They belong in the Hall of Shame that we are building on this thread, though it is easier to put individuals there than a whole country (or more accurately, a government).