Mccain picks Sarah Palin for VP

[Lurker]

More reasons for those patriotic Indians who are at influencial positions in USA to support Republicans' date='[/quote'] I have never quite understood this rationale. Why are Indians, and this include both bhagwa brigade as well as Congress supporters, in such a hurry to get in the blue books of United States?? Unfortunately only the Communist Parties seems to be completely averse to the idea, although in their case it is due to complete difference in ideology, which doesnt do any good to the cause. The fact remains that India needs United States as much as United States needs India. Maybe United States needs India lot more than the other way around. What can USA give India that India can not get elsewhere? Nuclear Technology?? Well screw USA lets get it from France, Russia. But would US be happy if India goes to Russia block? India has traditionally been under Soviet bloc and there is still a lot of compassion within the ranks of the two countries. Why would USA want to push India into Russian block? Democracy? Which country other than India is a better exponent of Democracy? Australia? England? France? Hey they are all Christian countries. If you want to sell Democracy as something that works regardless of religion, and in places that can relate to(read Middle East), what other country to sell as a model than India? Economy?? If USA doesnt sell its goods to India, and buys back services it would be affected as much as India is. And while India might be hurt in short run in the longer run it will actually benefit us. Case in point being Indian software giants whose bread and butter were American companies(read GE for TCS, Infosys etc), and due to falling dollars(as well as atitude of American companies) they slowly moved away from USA model and it has done them a lot of good. I dont mean to say we get isolated from USA, not at all. But if India wants to develop the first thing it needs to do is work with any country, including USA, on a EQUALITY basis. xx

[novpj]

Let me get this straight - Obama is a bad choice for the US because he may have a hand in a legislation that restricts what can be done within the nuclear deal with India- the very deal that BJP voted against. What does this make BJP - a really bad choice for Indians?

[seedhi]

Let me get this straight - Obama is a bad choice for the US because he may have a hand in a legislation that restricts what can be done within the nuclear deal with India- the very deal that BJP voted against. What does this make BJP - a really bad choice for Indians?

Obama is bad for India not just because of the deal. He opposes outsourcing. His foreign policy will probably mirror the non-proliferation concerns of the demcratic party and disarmament lobby. So India will be pressured to sign the CTBT and the FMCT. Also, India will again have to face US interference in Kashmir, which can lead to potential disaster at this juncture. The only pro-India aspect is that Obama might put Pakistan under the scanner for its duplicity. Governing India is not a single-issue proposition about the nuclear deal (unlike relations with US, where N-deal is the prominent issue), and overall BJP is better than Cong in my books.

[THX_1138]

Obama is bad for India not just because of the deal. He opposes outsourcing. His foreign policy will probably mirror the non-proliferation concerns of the demcratic party and disarmament lobby. So India will be pressured to sign the CTBT and the FMCT. Also' date= India will again have to face US interference in Kashmir, which can lead to potential disaster at this juncture. The only pro-India aspect is that Obama might put Pakistan under the scanner for its duplicity. Governing India is not a single-issue proposition about the nuclear deal (unlike relations with US, where N-deal is the prominent issue), and overall BJP is better than Cong in my books.

no and that is bad how? no such impositions have been placed on any nation lately... how many democratic governments have on previous instances interfered on this matter?

[seedhi]

no

He does oppose outsourcing, he has said that he will relook the tax benefits to companies who outsource.

and that is bad how?

India will be under constant pressure to disarm. Any nuclear cooperation with US will come with stringent conditions towards that purpose. The disarmament lobby in US and India see Obama as their hope to push through their agenda.

/no such impositions have been placed on any nation lately...

Again, India is seeking nuclear cooperation with the rest of the world. US can block such cooperation until India signs CTBT, FMCT etc. With McCain in power, India would have much less to worry about this issue. Basically Republicans are much more pragmatic. In India, any strategic expert would tell you that McCain is better for India. Why else did the foreign ministry and indeed the whole govt breathe a sigh of relief when Bush was reelected.

how many democratic governments have on previous instances interfered on this matter?

Recall the first term of Bill Clinton. They used to poke their nose in the Kashmir issue with consistent regularity. It was only after some US tourists were kidnapped that their attitude changed. Still, its a big risk that Obama may interfere in Kashmir, and this could be a nightmare for India. Compare that to the Bush term. Hardly has there been any statement or advice to India regarding Kashmir.

[THX_1138]

He does oppose outsourcing, he has said that he will relook the tax benefits to companies who outsource. India will be under constant pressure to disarm. Any nuclear cooperation with US will come with stringent conditions towards that purpose. The disarmament lobby in US and India see Obama as their hope to push through their agenda. Again, India is seeking nuclear cooperation with the rest of the world. US can block such cooperation until India signs CTBT, FMCT etc. With McCain in power, India would have much less to worry about this issue. Basically Republicans are much more pragmatic. In India, any strategic expert would tell you that McCain is better for India. Why else did the foreign ministry and indeed the whole govt breathe a sigh of relief when Bush was reelected. Recall the first term of Bill Clinton. They used to poke their nose in the Kashmir issue with consistent regularity. It was only after some US tourists were kidnapped that their attitude changed. Still, its a big risk that Obama may interfere in Kashmir, and this could be a nightmare for India. Compare that to the Bush term. Hardly has there been any statement or advice to India regarding Kashmir.

again if that is indeed true, which it is not, that is bad how?

[seedhi]

again if that is indeed true' date=' which it is not, that is bad how?[/quote'] Firstly, it is true. Every disarmament activist is fervently hoping that the deal does not go through during Bush tenure, as they will have much greater leverage on Obama/Biden to scuttle the whole thing. How can anyone deny that this lobby has more traction with the democrats than republicans? How is this bad? Well, we wont be able to get latest nuclear tech for one. More importantly, any pressure on India to disarm is unacceptable. After all we sit facing two nuclear capable potential threats.

[THX_1138]

Firstly, it is true. Every disarmament activist is fervently hoping that the deal does not go through during Bush tenure, as they will have much greater leverage on Obama/Biden to scuttle the whole thing. How can anyone deny that this lobby has more traction with the democrats than republicans? How is this bad? Well, we wont be able to get latest nuclear tech for one. More importantly, any pressure on India to disarm is unacceptable. After all we sit facing two nuclear capable potential threats.

here is the thing dude... no one gives a hoot. this is an absolute non issue here. there is little opposition to the deal here from either side of the isle because india is considered an ally. india is held in high opinion here and contrary to what one might believe, people here dont blame india for "stealing our jobs". there was an initial opposition to this whole change in economic setup, just as in the 80s there was an opposition to the massive growth of Japanese control over American industry, especially the automobile, steel and semiconductor industries. however, in due course of time, americans are either too myopic to be concerned or are too mature to stay opposed to a democracy that has been supportive of united states lately. heck, we even departed from our previous nonsense stand of supporting iran in the last united nations referendrum and supported a movement that required iran to pause its nuclear aspirations. the only person who has protested this nuclear deal is senator russ feingold, and not because he is a democrat, not because he hates india, but because he wants greater involvement of the IAEA in the indian nuclear plan to ensure that there civilian program remains firmly distinct from the military program. if approved by the nuclear council, this deal with pass with considerable ease in both the congress and the senate and the possibility of a presidential veto by obama or by mccain is more remote than the possibility of imam bukhari admitting that islam is indeed a joke.

[seedhi]

here is the thing dude... no one gives a hoot. this is an absolute non issue here. there is little opposition to the deal here from either side of the isle because india is considered an ally. india is held in high opinion here and contrary to what one might believe, people here dont blame india for "stealing our jobs". there was an initial opposition to this whole change in economic setup, just as in the 80s there was an opposition to the massive growth of Japanese control over American industry, especially the automobile, steel and semiconductor industries. however, in due course of time, americans are either too myopic to be concerned or are too mature to stay opposed to a democracy that has been supportive of united states lately. heck, we even departed from our previous nonsense stand of supporting iran in the last united nations referendrum and supported a movement that required iran to pause its nuclear aspirations. the only person who has protested this nuclear deal is senator russ feingold, and not because he is a democrat, not because he hates india, but because he wants greater involvement of the IAEA in the indian nuclear plan to ensure that there civilian program remains firmly distinct from the military program. if approved by the nuclear council, this deal with pass with considerable ease in both the congress and the senate and the possibility of a presidential veto by obama or by mccain is more remote than the possibility of imam bukhari admitting that islam is indeed a joke.

Ofcourse, this is hardly an issue to figure in the US elections. Americans (of whatever origin) will and should vote for whoever they feel is good for them and not for India. But the inescapable fact is that McCain is (probably) better for India than Obama. That is just the nature of geopolitics at this point of time. I think probably Obama would win. He may even turn out to be good for India if he puts pressure on Pakistan to mend its ways, if that happens and yields good result, it will outweigh everything else for me. I remain optimistic for India in any case.

[THX_1138]

Ofcourse' date=' this is hardly an issue to figure in the US elections. Americans (of whatever origin) will and should vote for whoever they feel is good for them and not for India.[b'] But the inescapable fact is that McCain is (probably) better for India than Obama. That is just the nature of geopolitics at this point of time. I think probably Obama would win. He may even turn out to be good for India if he puts pressure on Pakistan to mend its ways, if that happens and yields good result, it will outweigh everything else for me. I remain optimistic for India in any case.

that is what i define as talking from the rear end. both candidates are equally progressive with respect to relationship with india. you want mccain because as i said before, he is the proxy through which you can continue your campaign against islam... you like mccain because he vowes to continue a war of aggression against the middle east and somehow you feel that that is ethically justified and you must support him in this measure. go back and read some history book and it will dawn upon you that democratic presidents have always been advantageous for india. kennedy contemplated the use of nukes against china when china was indeed a threat to indian sovereignity, whereas nixon wanted china to attack india during the 1971 campaign... reagan supported pakistan throughout the afghan campaign, but clinton held pakistan accountable...

[seedhi]

you want mccain because as i said before' date= he is the proxy through which you can continue your campaign against islam

I never said this and clearly stated the reasons why I see McCain as being more advantageous to the interests of India in the current geopolitical scenario. Obama is going to discourage outsourcing, he has said so clearly. He is a principal mover behind the Hyde Act, the purpose of which is to keep check on the India strategic nuclear programme. What has Islam got to do with this I dont understand?

...clinton held pakistan accountable...

I did write that Obama might be more tough on Pakistan than McCain. And I do see this as a positive. But it comes fraught with the risk of increased US involvement in Kashmir. Lastly, strategic policy experts in India also say that republicans are better than democrats for Indian interests. How do you explain that the re-election of Bush was greeted with sighs of relief in Indian govt circles?

[THX_1138]

I never said this and clearly stated the reasons why I see McCain as being more advantageous to the interests of India in the current geopolitical scenario. Obama is going to discourage outsourcing' date= he has said so clearly. He is a principal mover behind the Hyde Act, the purpose of which is to keep check on the India strategic nuclear programme. What has Islam got to do with this I dont understand? I did write that Obama might be more tough on Pakistan than McCain. And I do see this as a positive. But it comes fraught with the risk of increased US involvement in Kashmir. Lastly, strategic policy experts in India also say that republicans are better than democrats for Indian interests. How do you explain that the re-election of Bush was greeted with sighs of relief in Indian govt circles?

you know, there is a larger tax incentive for companies to run carbon neutral businesses, and there are tax incentives for using recycled products, and tax incentives for using renewable energy... yet very few organizations exploit these measures. so what if obama withdraws a few token tax incentives in order to discourage outsourcing? the BPO industry accounts for less than 2% of India's GDP, not the mention the savings that organizations receive from outsourcing are considerably higher than the tax incentives. furthermore, how long do you suppose this outsourcing business is going to stay? already the cost effectiveness is diminishing, and with the rise of more english speakers in vietnam, the business is likely to migrate there within a decade or two. our economy needed a jump start that the BPO business provided, but since then, we are doing quite well for ourselves as our economy evolves from a manufacturer to a consumer. in 2002 we consumed 37% of our total services and goods produced... in 2007 the number was at 44%... soon as be consume more, our dependence of the BPO trade will diminish, which it already is. as for reigning in the nuclear program of india... people have tried before, but without any success. so stop mouthing of.

[punjabi_khota]

you know, there is a larger tax incentive for companies to run carbon neutral businesses, and there are tax incentives for using recycled products, and tax incentives for using renewable energy... yet very few organizations exploit these measures. so what if obama withdraws a few token tax incentives in order to discourage outsourcing? the BPO industry accounts for less than 2% of India's GDP, not the mention the savings that organizations receive from outsourcing are considerably higher than the tax incentives. furthermore, how long do you suppose this outsourcing business is going to stay? already the cost effectiveness is diminishing, and with the rise of more english speakers in vietnam, the business is likely to migrate there within a decade or two. our economy needed a jump start that the BPO business provided, but since then, we are doing quite well for ourselves as our economy evolves from a manufacturer to a consumer. in 2002 we consumed 37% of our total services and goods produced... in 2007 the number was at 44%... soon as be consume more, our dependence of the BPO trade will diminish, which it already is. as for reigning in the nuclear program of india... people have tried before, but without any success. so stop mouthing of.

Is this outsourcing under consideration only BPO type ? What about the Wipro/TCS/Infy type software outsourcing ? Doesn't have to do anything with English speaking.

[THX_1138]

Is this outsourcing under consideration only BPO type ? What about the Wipro/TCS/Infy type software outsourcing ? Doesn't have to do anything with English speaking.

that will continue regardless since people with those skills are just not available in the same abundance as they are in india. furthermore, that outsourcing will soon diminish too with the emergence of romania and estonia as major IT hubs.

[seedhi]

you know, there is a larger tax incentive for companies to run carbon neutral businesses, and there are tax incentives for using recycled products, and tax incentives for using renewable energy... yet very few organizations exploit these measures. so what if obama withdraws a few token tax incentives in order to discourage outsourcing? the BPO industry accounts for less than 2% of India's GDP, not the mention the savings that organizations receive from outsourcing are considerably higher than the tax incentives. furthermore, how long do you suppose this outsourcing business is going to stay? already the cost effectiveness is diminishing, and with the rise of more english speakers in vietnam, the business is likely to migrate there within a decade or two. our economy needed a jump start that the BPO business provided, but since then, we are doing quite well for ourselves as our economy evolves from a manufacturer to a consumer. in 2002 we consumed 37% of our total services and goods produced... in 2007 the number was at 44%... soon as be consume more, our dependence of the BPO trade will diminish, which it already is. as for reigning in the nuclear program of india... people have tried before, but without any success. so stop mouthing of.

Outsourcing based services sector is probably the fastest growing part of the economy, and contributes a significant portion of our exports and to forex reserves. It is hardly negligible. About the role in Indias strategic programme, the establishment in New Delhi would have preferred Bush for a third term if it was up to them.Republicans are the preferred choice for Delhi right now, hence the urgency in the N-deal. Still, with Obamas election already looming large, they must have started planning for the end of the honeymoon of last 8 years.

[Aditi]

:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha: Nice try, McSame!

[THX_1138]

:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha: Nice try, McSame!

i saw a t shirt that has two: bush and mccain on a single sculpture like the head of the mythical janus... and it says... "McSame 2008"

[THX_1138]

Outsourcing based services sector is probably the fastest growing part of the economy' date= and contributes a significant portion of our exports and to forex reserves. It is hardly negligible. About the role in Indias strategic programme, the establishment in New Delhi would have preferred Bush for a third term if it was up to them.Republicans are the preferred choice for Delhi right now, hence the urgency in the N-deal. Still, with Obamas election already looming large, they must have started planning for the end of the honeymoon of last 8 years.

that would be the finance sector. nice try though. what part of less than 2% of the GDP do you think is "significant portion"?

[seedhi]

that would be the finance sector. nice try though. what part of less than 2% of the GDP do you think is "significant portion"?

Thanks, but its still one of the fastest growing sectors. I think you have a comprehension problem- I said significant portion of our export earnings, not the GDP. Indias services exports are around $80 billion, and out of that I think around $30 billion is IT exports, and around $10 billion is BPO. $40 billion in export is not significant? Thats almost 20% of our entire exports. And again, growing much faster than the manufacturing export sector.

[sandtest]

I have never quite understood this rationale. Why are Indians' date=' and this include both [b']bhagwa brigade as well as Congress supporters, in such a hurry to get in the blue books of United States??

Go easy on those islamist sympathiser invented words like Bhagwa Brigade yada yada, or else tell congress as p-sec will you? It seems Indian dhimmi Hindus consider shouting bhagwaa brigade, saffron, hindutvavaadi etc. etc. as a proof for their pseudo-morality driven newfound lust for neutrality :giggle:

The fact remains that India needs United States as much as United States needs India. Maybe United States needs India lot more than the other way around.

Both countries need each other equally -- no more no less. Common threat of radical Islamism, Chincommie menace will put them together in future. One can see all that has started slowly. There is no permanent friend or foe-- there are only permanent interests and interests change with time. Surely Indian interests merge with US at the moment. Try to see the daylight if you can, I know it's hard for folks permanently brainwashed by leftist leaning media and intellectuals of JNU jholawala types who pass as expert in India.

What can USA give India that India can not get elsewhere? Nuclear Technology?? Well screw USA lets get it from France, Russia. But would US be happy if India goes to Russia block?

Typical commie rant without fact....see this is what communists of India moan, not surprised you are repeating them. fact that in absence of NSG approval (and NSG read as USA), India or any country which is NOT a signatory to NPT can do zilch in terms of technology and Uranium import. In past 30 years how many reactors our beloved Russia was able to provide us?...may be two, maximum third still in discussion. Kondaikulum, reactors still not completed is the only one I can see as truely something reliable for power supply...Fact that Russia too is a signatory of NPT cannot proliferate to India while all 45 NSG members and most important USA and it's corporate umbrella are left watching the show of Russia and India. Get the fact right and shove it to your commie intellectuals who harp on the same line in Indian newspapers...IAEA-NSG means USA alone....Just one YES of USA and see majority of IAEA countries including morale preachers such as Canada are falling over each other to get business with India in nuclear field. That's the benefit you get when you come out of socilaist Nehruvian era idiotic foreign policy. India was isolated by an apartheid NPT regime, which provided impunity to 5 countries and descriminated India inspite being one of the staunch democracy with cleanest record in proliferation -- more cleaner than even USA and UK who have done verticle proliferation among themselves. Times changed and so changed our threat and growth and thus the new world order in making.

India has traditionally been under Soviet bloc and there is still a lot of compassion within the ranks of the two countries. Why would USA want to push India into Russian block?

Again there is no permanent freind or foe, only permanent interest....sooner we Indians realize this better will be for us else we will be again stuck with Nehruvian kind of idiotic "Panchsheel". Russia after Vladimir Putin is not the same, it now realizes China as potential ally in future...we are going to face this one or other day that Russia and China will be on same table against USA. What will stop Russia from selling Sukhois to China (ohh wait they have already sold that in much larger no. to keep balance with USA in Taiwan straits). We know Communist China has lust for our land in Arunachal and Sikkim...Moron Nehru has already lost some portion, your commie brethrens want to repeat that and rejoice with "panchsheel" don't they?:giggle:

Democracy? Which country other than India is a better exponent of Democracy? Australia? England? France? Hey they are all Christian countries. If you want to sell Democracy as something that works regardless of religion, and in places that can relate to(read Middle East), what other country to sell as a model than India?

And what's wrong in that?...if democracy can spread in authoritarian Quranic land of Islamists (which is most unlikely), then so be it.....and if India can be an example then so be it, afterall their ancestors were once all pagans like we Hindu idolater kaafirs, it's only great Islam that has made them today what they are :giggle: Alas!, How I wish that idolatry of pagans is much better than their newfound 7th century lust for heaven promised by an entity called allah.

Economy?? If USA doesnt sell its goods to India, and buys back services it would be affected as much as India is. And while India might be hurt in short run in the longer run it will actually benefit us. Case in point being Indian software giants whose bread and butter were American companies(read GE for TCS, Infosys etc), and due to falling dollars(as well as atitude of American companies) they slowly moved away from USA model and it has done them a lot of good.

I don't want to be so thankless and that is for good interests of India. Although I am noway remotely connected with USA or IT, but I know India's software boom owes totally to USA. What big names like TCS, Infy, Wipro et all are today are all due to outsopurcing of software services by USA based manufacturing, infrastructure, banking, software-hardware companies etc. I also know USA is getting literally IT-coolie job done from Indians, but no denying that it's a major source of income for India registered companies and their Indian employess neverthless. Many Indians and their newfound wealth is because of IT placements in USA which incidentally my brother-in-law proudly calls as "On-Site" deployment.:D I know he would never have earned a good 40 lac rupees in an year, if he remianed in Pune office and like us heathens stuck in the endless Maya of Karmic cycle of Indian salaries.:--D Point is, USA has legacy of technological advantage and we have huge talent pool which will continue to grow in future, no harm in combining together and getting best of both worlds when it's Win-Win for both.

I dont mean to say we get isolated from USA, not at all. But if India wants to develop the first thing it needs to do is work with any country, including USA, on a EQUALITY basis. xx

India should give preference to those where full bang for buck is. No need to preach pseudo-morality of Equality and all that, in past we have stuck ourselves with impractical alliances like Non-Alignement Movement (NAM) and became a laughnig stock in western world. Be it defence, geo-strategy or business co-operation USA is going to be the most suitable ally for India in future.