In a rare meeting, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi apprises FIIs about party's stand on stuck G

[Mamsalaphala]

You are talking about technicalities, I am talking about the reality.

If all secretaries are appointed and work directly with PMO & PM, why do we need any other minister at all in the Cabinet?

LOL. I am talking about reality too. You are talking fiction.

Do you really think the PM has power to appoint his Cabinet but no power to appoint the Secretary who do the actual work ? All senior appointments are handled by the PMO i.e the Principal secretary and the Cabinet secretary.

Why do you think the President of US has other secretaries assisting him ? what kind of question is that ?

1) Pokran II plan was conceived by PVN not ABV

Sadly it was not. PVN actually gave his world to the President of US that he will NOT allow the Nuclear test.

Vajpayee OTOH had declared on his election Manifesto about inducting the nuclear option.

And that is the first thing Vajpayee did after coming to power. He got sworn in on March 1998 and the Nuke was exploded on May 1998.

2) It was Vajpayee who succumbed to pressure and adhered to the voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing

Manmohan signals return to Vajpayee line on CTBT - The Hindu

Vajpayee's Self Moratorium on nuclear testing was a convenient political stand.

Moratorium itself means a temporary prohibition of an activity.

It was a political move to sooth nerves, collect data, analyse them and then prepare for any other test if required.

Manmohan converted that temporary Moratorim into a PERMANENT ban on Testing.

3) It is Modi who is undoing/weakening the nuclear liability law

No change in nuclear liability law: MEA - The Hindu

Seriously ?

Nuclear liability law is a rubbish law that is useful as a fig leaf ...... No nuclear company in the world has put up a plant in India based on that law. Go Figure

 

[dadeechi]

LOL. I am talking about reality too. You are talking fiction.

Do you really think the PM has power to appoint his Cabinet but no power to appoint the Secretary who do the actual work ? All senior appointments are handled by the PMO i.e the Principal secretary and the Cabinet secretary.

Why do you think the President of US has other secretaries assisting him ? what kind of question is that ?

You still have avoided my question on why we need ministers if all the secretaries are directly appointed and report to the PMO/PM.

Sadly it was not. PVN actually gave his world to the President of US that he will NOT allow the Nuclear test.
Vajpayee OTOH had declared on his election Manifesto about inducting the nuclear option.
And that is the first thing Vajpayee did after coming to power. He got sworn in on March 1998 and the Nuke was exploded on May 1998.
Vajpayee's Self Moratorium on nuclear testing was a convenient political stand.

Moratorium itself means a temporary prohibition of an activity.
It was a political move to sooth nerves, collect data, analyse them and then prepare for any other test if required.
Manmohan converted that temporary Moratorim into a PERMANENT ban on Testing.
Seriously ?
Nuclear liability law is a rubbish law that is useful as a fig leaf ...... No nuclear company in the world has put up a plant in India based on that law. Go Figure

Read the below article.

Narasimha Rao had asked Kalam to be ready for nuclear test - The Times of India

You claim ABV's stand was a convenient one while PVNs was real when PVN had the courage to veto CTBT? Seriously?

I consider both of their stands as convenient ones.

India is not desperate for nuclear deal. Nuclear deal is just a red herring.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

You still have avoided my question on why we need ministers if all the secretaries are directly appointed and report to the PMO/PM.

Its a foolish question. The PM is an elected member and he selects his cabinet ministers. The Principal Secretary is the chief Bureaucrat and all other secretary report to him.

Read the below article.

Narasimha Rao had asked Kalam to be ready for nuclear test - The Times of India

You claim ABV's stand was a convenient one while PVNs was real when PVN had the courage to veto CTBT? Seriously?

I have already read that, but you know only half of the story.

U.S. Detected Indian Nuclear Test Preparations in 1995, but Photo Evidence was "Clear As Mud"

• An August 1996 conversation between Ambassador Frank Wisner and BJP leader and future prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. According to an embassy message, Vajpayee's "body language" indicated that he "would favor a test."

US identified the preparation for Test and prevented it. PVN called off the test when US put pressure. Vajpayee OTOH went ahead and tested in-spite of US pressure.

I consider both of their stands as convenient ones.

India is not desperate for nuclear deal. Nuclear deal is just a red herring.

You can assume anything, but the Facts remains that it was Vajpayee who conducted the test while PVR is recognized for STOPPING the Test.

Just a few min's back you were prasing the CONgress for the nuclear deal and now you are saying we don't need it. Make up your mind.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Sure she is .......... Sushma is Sonias best friend.

Sushma Swaraj vs Sonia Gandhi: A 16-Year-Old Rivalry - Latest Political News, Business, Sports News, Entertainment News World News, Features, Video and Infographics

I am still opposed to Sonia becoming PM, Sushma Swaraj says - The Times of India

Sushma Swaraj, the politician who once threatened to shave her head | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis


I understand you are targeting Indians who are stupid enough to believe you, but you seriously cannot think ALL Indians are stupid, do you ?



Let sushmaji first resolve the Nepal crisis which she seems to have messed up.

THEN let us talk about any bigger role.

Politics is different than personal relationship. I am not sure if Sonia and Swaraj are friends. But they do share a cordial relationship. None of the parties, TMC, SP, JDU, AIADMK, TRS, even many elements of the congress , the old guards, didnt voice a word against her. You know why? Its her reputation of breaking deals and her honesty. Nepal problem is their own internal crises, now run by PMO. We can hardly call it her problem.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

Politics is different than personal relationship. I am not sure if Sonia and Swaraj are friends. But they do share a cordial relationship. None of the parties, TMC, SP, JDU, AIADMK, TRS, even many elements of the congress , the old guards, didnt voice a word against her. You know why? Its her reputation of breaking deals and her honesty. Nepal problem is their own internal crises, now run by PMO. We can hardly call it her problem.

In politics almost everyone shares cordial relationship. That is one of the first things required to become a successful politician. Personal enmities are rare.

But that cannot be stretched to mean "friendship", especially between Sushma swaraj and Sonia Gandhi.

PMO runs everything, from dal prices to dadri murder. But reality is every minister has their own role and responsibility and result area. Immediate neighbour hood is Sushma Swaraj's dept. That includes handling Nepal and she has messed up there.

 

[dadeechi]

Its a foolish question. The PM is an elected member and he selects his cabinet ministers. The Principal Secretary is the chief Bureaucrat and all other secretary report to him.

That is all theoretically fine but why do you need other cabinet ministers?

U.S. Detected Indian Nuclear Test Preparations in 1995, but Photo Evidence was "Clear As Mud"

• An August 1996 conversation between Ambassador Frank Wisner and BJP leader and future prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. According to an embassy message, Vajpayee's "body language" indicated that he "would favor a test."

US identified the preparation for Test and prevented it. PVN called off the test when US put pressure. Vajpayee OTOH went ahead and tested in-spite of US pressure.
You can assume anything, but the Facts remains that it was Vajpayee who conducted the test while PVR is recognized for STOPPING the Test.

I am aware of that story.

So you are saying PVN vetoed the CTBT but did not have the courage to conduct the test but Vajpayee had.

Also, US was smart enough to catch PVN's clandestine preparations for the nuclear tests but Vajpayee was so smart that he would declare it in his manifesto but US was still clueless?

Just a few min's back you were prasing the CONgress for the nuclear deal and now you are saying we don't need it. Make up your mind.

Please point out to the statement that I made in favor of congress. I only pointed to the fact that Modi is diluting the liability clause to please the foreign forces at the expense of Indian citizens.

PS - Opposing Modi's policy does not translate to supporting congress policy.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

That is all theoretically fine but why do you need other cabinet ministers?

Running a country is not a one man job. It take an entire SYSTEM to do it. The Cabinet ministers are important cogs in that system.

I am aware of that story.

So you are saying PVN vetoed the CTBT but did not have the courage to conduct the test but Vajpayee had.

Also, US was smart enough to catch PVN's clandestine preparations for the nuclear tests but Vajpayee was so smart that he would declare it in his manifesto but US was still clueless?

What are you go on and on about CTBT ? India is not a signatory to CTBT. Are you even aware of this ?

So where is the question of vetoing CTBT arise ?

When Vajpayee gave the go ahead to the Nuke test, US objected would not have mattered to him. Unlike PVR.

But for historical record, the US was clueless about Vajpayees go ahead. You can google that yourself since its a prominent part of history and is well documented.

Please point out to the statement that I made in favor of congress. I only pointed to the fact that Modi is diluting the liability clause to please the foreign forces at the expense of Indian citizens.

PS - Opposing Modi's policy does not translate to supporting congress policy.

Liability clause is a Red herring. You can oppose Modi based on Facts, not Fiction.

 

[dadeechi]

Running a country is not a one man job. It take an entire SYSTEM to do it. The Cabinet ministers are important cogs in that system.

Only if the PM thinks so else they are just ceremonial or optional.

What are you go on and on about CTBT ? India is not a signatory to CTBT. Are you even aware of this ?
So where is the question of vetoing CTBT arise ?

I know what I am talking. Today, CTBT is not a reality yet due to PVN's veto.

When Vajpayee gave the go ahead to the Nuke test, US objected would not have mattered to him. Unlike PVR.
But for historical record, the US was clueless about Vajpayees go ahead. You can google that yourself since its a prominent part of history and is well documented.

I have lived through this history myself and do not really need to google those events.

Liability clause is a Red herring. You can oppose Modi based on Facts, not Fiction.

I said "India is not desperate for nuclear deal. Nuclear deal is just a red herring."

In a rare meeting, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi apprises FIIs about party's stand on stuck G | Page 3

I have already quoted the links how liability clause was being diluted by Modi.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

The same could be said about the bjp when they were in opposition.


Another example of taking the opp aboard is when the opp disagrees with a bill , they govt agrees to some amendments in some other bill and the opp stages a walkout , thereby letting the bill pass in the lower house. When it comes to the upper house they get the amendments they wanted.

I sense a deeper issue here. I don't think Modi's interested in the Bill passing as such. He thinks there is great political gains to be made by showing that opposition is stalling great leader's reforms.

The irony in your statement is that the word "Secular" was added to the constitution of India via the 42nd amendment in 1976 which was the most undemocratic rule that India had since it's Independence.

THE CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT)

It is, therefore, proposed to amend the Constitution to spell out
expressly the high ideals of socialism, secularism and the integrity
of the nation, to make the directive principles more comprehensive and
give them precedence over those fundamental rights which have been
allowed to be relied upon to frustrate socio-economic reforms for
implementing the directive principles. It is also proposed to specify
the fundamental duties of the citizens and make special provisions for
dealing with anti-national activities, whether by individuals or
associations.

The fact that no one has had the ability to modify the amendment shows that India values this ideal and is a reflection of our society.

 

[dadeechi]

The fact that no one has had the ability to modify the amendment shows that India values this ideal and is a reflection of our society.

It would be incorrect reading of the history

1) No government since this amendment had 2/3rds majority except for Rajiv Gandhi.

2) In India,people vote for the parties not necessarily for their policies

3) Tomorrow let's say Modi gets courage like Indira (which I highly doubt) to impose emergency and amend constitution for Ban on cow slaughter and Uniform civil code (BTW both of which are already part of the constitution under the directive principles) , Do you really believe opposition parties would come back later and overturn these amendments? It is much easier to implement policies than revoke them. Reservations in India is a classic example of that.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

It would be incorrect reading of the history

1) No government since this amendment had 2/3rds majority except for Rajiv Gandhi.

2) In India,people vote for the parties not necessarily for their policies

3) Tomorrow let's say Modi gets courage like Indira (which I highly doubt) to impose emergency and amend constitution for Ban on cow slaughter and Uniform civil code (BTW both of which are already part of the constitution under the directive principles) , Do you really believe opposition parties would come back later and overturn these amendments? It is much easier to implement policies than revoke them. Reservations in India is a classic example of that.

Take all your excuses elsewhere. Simple thing- if the indian people felt that strongly they'd have supported a party that wants to change it. The fact that no single election has this been a key driver shows that Indians are perfectly fine with it. You are free to waste your time with what if scenarios as much as you want.

 

[dadeechi]

Take all your excuses elsewhere. Simple thing- if the indian people felt that strongly they'd have supported a party that wants to change it. The fact that no single election has this been a key driver shows that Indians are perfectly fine with it. You are free to waste your time with what if scenarios as much as you want.

Yeah. Indians supported emergency too as they brought back Indira again.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Yeah. Indians supported emergency too as they brought back Indira again.

Not interested in BS. Not one party including the BJP wins an election on this, no one has the guts to try to change it but Bhakt will come up with endless theories of secular and sickular and whatnot.

 

[dadeechi]

Not interested in BS. Not one party including the BJP wins an election on this, no one has the guts to try to change it but Bhakt will come up with endless theories of secular and sickular and whatnot.

I do not get your point at all. Secularism is needed in countries where majority of it's population follows a monotheistic thought which cannot be reconciled with the others.

Hinduism is based on thought of "vasudhaiva kutumbakam". So adding this word to the constitution is totally redundant in nature.

Now coming to the reason why the word is derided is not because people are not secular but because parties which claim to be secular have started implemented communal policies in the name of secularism. That is the crux of the issue.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

I do not get your point at all. Secularism is needed in countries where majority of it's population follows a monotheistic thought which cannot be reconciled with the others.

Hinduism is based on thought of "vasudhaiva kutumbakam". So adding this word to the constitution is totally redundant in nature.

Now coming to the reason why the word is derided is not because people are not secular but because parties which claim to be secular have started implemented communal policies in the name of secularism. That is the crux of the issue.

yea yeah whatever. Tak big things when people actually give a $hit.