Neil Kinnock (left) and Prachanda at the fourth Hindustan Times Leadership Summit on its second and concluding day, at the Taj Palace Hotel in New Delhi on Saturday, November 18, 2006.

More Pictures of the Submit

- http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/625_0019000100174531,6.htm

I agree the Maoists movement was not worth 15,000 lives.

But Monarchy is Nepal, as per current trends, is terminally ill, and some would argue dead for all intents and purposes. Whether I wish it to or not. I find it hard to beleive we are still trying to cover up for the King. The guy screwed up big time - even many of his supporters admit it. And unlike the parties, who screwed up too, he doesn't have the mass base or appeal, or the political power now, to atone for his sins. And aplogetic arguments like these hardly bolster the case for keeping the King. I would hope if people truly beleived the Monarchy should be retained, they woul come up with better reasons.

10 M-17s, AND 10 PILOTS, WE CAN FINISH ALL THE TERRORISTS LIKE BABU AND PRACHU, WITHIN FEW HOURS.

That approach was already tried - it didn't work. I am not Prachanda biggest fan myself but that guy is here to stay. I'd rather thrash him at the polls because that's more likley to work.

1) "This is all a game and Nepal will always loose, because we Nepalese can never seem to agree on things that matters to us the most, our country and we will pay the price of this soon."

Captain Haddock the reason I said this is because no matter who comes to power in Nepal they have to get an approval from India before doing so, how else will Nepal survive and which Nepali has the guts to go against Indian Policy no one, and that includes even Prachanda.

"This is all a game and Nepal will always loose, because we Nepalese can never seem to agree on things that matters to us the most, our country and we will pay the price of this soon."

"Says who? Historical enemies have come together in Nepal for the greater good of the country time and again. This country has seen reconciliation between sworn enemies - Congress and King, Communists and King, Congress and Communists and now Congress and Maoists. Show me some other places in the world where bitter enemies have come together in this way for national good. This country is stronger than some might be willing to believe."

The point I like to make to your statement is we have alway been fighting among ourselves and not among anything worthy. We see enimies within our boundry but not the ones who are playing us among our own people. Remember all these leaders who fought king and any other enemies started their resistance from India and nowhere else. Tell me how come we never got that kind of resistance or rebellion when India took our Kalapani. The same Congress, UML, Communist, and others were in power tell me how they united to get our land back. We were played and we will always be a puppet of India and others whether we like it or not, and thats what I mean when I say that Nepal will always loose.

"One can guess that Prachanda is just another Nepali who came to power with a help of India and will sell Nepal to India."

"I dont agree but by your logic who are the others? If I can guess, Girija, Madhav Nepal and how about Gyanendra?"

Girija, Madhav Nepal, Deuba or any other Nepali has nothing to loose by selling out the country as you can see from people who do not give a rats ass about the country but Gyanendra is a king as long as there is a Kingdom for him. Thats the diffference.

ne23pe -

You love your country, I can tell. I do too so I can understand the feeling. But there is a difference between your love and mine. To me loving Nepal is not about hating India. Tell me I am wrong and why but your entire judgement of politics, based on what I have read so , appears to be clouded by this hatred and paranoia about India.

"Captain Haddock the reason I said this is because no matter who comes to power in Nepal they have to get an approval from India before doing so, how else will Nepal survive and which Nepali has the guts to go against Indian Policy no one, and that includes even Prachanda. "

You make is sound like "going against Indian policy" is something every Nepali politician must do. Why? In politics, you don't oppose just for the sake of opposing. If you do that, it lands you in the dog house and no one wants to be there. Successfull politics is ultimately about pragmatism.

"The point I like to make to your statement is we have alway been fighting among ourselves and not among anything worthy. We see enimies within our boundry but not the ones who are playing us among our own people."


I disagree. Most people in Nepal are not big fans of India and will stand up for their country. Of course a struggling society will talk about different things and often fight about it. Why should that be seen as a sign of weakenss? On the contrary it is a sign of strength - people are concerned about their lives, communities and country and are raising their voices about it. Some times s*h*it happens, sometimes you screw up, but as recent history has shown, in the end, we as a society have the political maturity to patch up for the larger interests of the nation.

>"Remember all these leaders who fought king and any other enemies started their resistance from India and nowhere else. Tell me how come we never got that kind of resistance or rebellion when India took our Kalapani. The same Congress, UML, Communist, and others were in power tell me how they united to get our land back. We were played and we will always be a puppet of India and others whether we like it or not, and thats what I mean when I say that Nepal will always loose. "

You are making it sound like all politicians are traitors who want to surrender the country to India and the King is the great saviour who can deliver us from it all. Besides being childish, the facts don't bear out to support such an argument. The Monarchy has historically compromised a lot with India too. 1950, 1965 and throughout the times. When the King compromises, it is seen as pragmatic diplomacy, but when the parties do the same thing, why is it a sell-out? That is sheer hypocrisy.

"Girija, Madhav Nepal, Deuba or any other Nepali has nothing to loose by selling out the country as you can see from people who do not give a rats ass about the country but Gyanendra is a king as long as there is a Kingdom for him. Thats the diffference. "

How about they too lose their country? Girija Koirala or Madhav Nepal did not join politics to sell their country. Nobody in their right minds would so and I hope you can agree that both these guys maybe a lot of things, but lunatic is not one of them. Your reasoning is utterly conspiratorial - by the same token, the King has the most property to loose if the country gets over taken - so he should be the one compromising with India to sell the country to save his property? Makes senses? Neither does your logic.

You are right Captain Haddock every reason I made is illogical because its about corrupt leaders, and against the maoist, and last but not least because its against India. I guess I am fresh out of logics tell me what you want to hear that India is one of the best neighbors to have, maoist leader Prachanda can be one of the best leader in our country, and our leaders can change when given a second chance.

I really did not see your logic either.

Thats not what I said. I'd suggest you go back and read again - both this and other threads I have posted to. I don't think my point is too hard to understand - you just need to put aside your hatred of the political parties and India and look at things objectively. Maybe then it might make some sense. I am not being overly optimistic but the picture is not all the bleak either.

What the fawk is that mofo Pushpe doing at a leadership conference anyway? From what I understand, the conference was about discussing ways to "make India a global superpower." I just find that theme hilarious - as if being a superpower is a goal in it of itself. A topic like "increasing regional cooperation" or "empowering the poor of india" would have been more meaningful. Making a country a "superpower" has to do with competition and doing "better than others." hardly surprising - given the attitude of the indians I have met... Anway, what i want to know is what is that mofo pushpe doing there anyways? What the fawk does he know about economic growth, global trade and competition? Makes me feel ashamed to see our country represented by dumbnuts like these.

“For my part I believed they killed 13,000 Nepali, rendered more then 300,000 people homeless, made flesh trading through Nepal much easier since everyone wants to leave the conflicted effected area and leave the country for better life, giving children guns instead of books, divide country based on race and ethnicity, and the list continues.”

Ya ya go read history facts on who killed how many people, but not the one you read when you were grade 6/7 where the first page started with prithivi narayan shah and ended with birendra.

And ne23pe, for which statement should I give justification? I haven’t even given my opinion towards Maoists, gyanendra or any other politicians in this thread. I was only analyzing the statements you made. If you need my justification for the support of maoists, then you are free to dig up several previous threads in which I’ve given justification.

I might sound like a fanatic of the king-but trust me, i'm not. the only reason i'm speaking for him is bcoz given the choices his far more better. in the past 10-12 yrs, he atleast tried sincerely to resolve the problem and all he got in return was hatred for doing so with the the false propoganda spread among the ppl of the country-thanks to our irresponsible leaders and our biased press.

it is good to be optimistic but again at the same time one has to be realistic too. some of us in this thread seem to be overly protective abt the selfvested maoist leadership and india. even if we forget for a moment the fact dat they have taken thousands of lives and displaced 300000 ppl, how can we even start trusting them (maoist) when they say dat even the verdict of the ppl is unacceptable to them (i'm referring to their stance abt monarchy here). they have made it clear dat even if thru referendum the ppl went for monarchy they would be against it. isn't dat an example of being selfvested??

india and its leaders wishing for the best for nepal. dats a load of crap too.......wot neighbor harbors a internationally recognized and tagged terroist (i'm referring to prachanda the last mofwker)who has been issued a redcorner notice?

as for the political parties, still don't think they're true to the ppl. they have already started squabbling abt issues to the primeminstership during the interim govt. i don't think dat says much abt their being responsible towards ppl.