why are you bringing India in ufo topics

Why not bring India into the UFO debate...

It's just as full of interesting materialistic people as any other country! Surely the UFO's would be interested in any nation with strange practises? And Indian people are, in that respect, as interesting as any other nation.

Sdrumrunner,

There are problems in every society, and all societies have their fair share of problems, so does India. However, it appears you are concentrating too much on the problems and even exaggerating them, so much so, that you are overlooking India's power on a geopolitical stage today. The caste system and dowry no longer exists on an all India-level, it is only present in the most poorest villages, and even there I would probably think it is declining. However, if I am wrong, please do not hesitate to point it out.

Yes, I know India is corrupt, and I've already said I did not actually like India, it's people and it's system. So that is a far cry from me thinking it is some kind of utopia. However, what you are failing to recognize, that US is even more corrupt and far more destabalizing for the world than India will ever be.

Are there executive orders in India, where people can be enslaved by the state and relocated in concentration camps en masse? Nope, there isn't. So as I said while the average American may have electricity, infrastructure, luxuries, all that can be liquidated with a single order. So what power does the American have?

In 2000 Bush was elected, even though he did not win the popular vote. Yes, a lot of power the American has, right?

Every American is living with a false-sense of freedom. Free, only, till the man says "no more" and he's already half-said it with the patriot act and Ashcroft has guarenteed it with his comments on ending the "experiment" of democracy. I think you should educate yourself about what is happening in America, or the western world in general today, with the NWO forum. I am sure many members there will be glad to explain to you what is going on. Hence my comment that you might regret leaving India for US. Maybe not today, but when the carpet is pulled from underneath your feet, you'll realize it's not much of a paradise.

As for Sonia Ghandi, she is actually still in the position of control, because she is the leader of the congress party. It was a political move for her to decline the position of prime minister, to prevent political meltdown(as Surfup said) however the Indian peolple had no such preoccupations.

The Indian poor man exercised his power of vote to get rid of the BJP, which was only concentrating on the upper class, and he won and has shown to the world that democracy works in some places in the world. 400 million poor Indians have a voice. Hence, my statement, that they have more power than the average American.

[edit on 3-2-2005 by Indigo_Child]

So as I said while the average American may have electricity, infrastructure, luxuries, all that can be liquidated with a single order. So what power does the American have?

Take away those luxuries, and you will no longer have control. To be controlled, a population needs to be placated. If the electricity, infrastructure, luxuries, etc. all went bye-bye, then the populace no longer has anything to lose if they revolt, and revolt they will... THAT is the power the American has... Sure, it's but a shadow of the former power the average American once enjoyed, but it is the power nonetheless...

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Sdrumrunner,

However, it appears you are concentrating too much on the problems and even exaggerating them, so much so, that you are overlooking India's power on a geopolitical stage today.

I am by no means overlooking this. Never once in any of my previous posts have I said or inferred that India does not carry weight or influence on the global stage. I completely agree -- and as well they should, considering India will most likely overtake China as the most populated nation in the world within the next decade.

Originally posted by Indigo_ChildThe caste system and dowry no longer exists on an all India-level, it is only present in the most poorest villages, and even there I would probably think it is declining. However, if I am wrong, please do not hesitate to point it out.

Yes, you are quite wrong -- and in fact couldn't be further from the truth.

There are a couple facts and links listed in my previous post should you wish to inform yourself further on the subject.

Originally posted by Indigo_ChildHowever, what you are failing to recognize, that US is even more corrupt and far more destabalizing for the world than India will ever be.

Once again, you are quite wrong with this assertion that the U.S is "even more corrupt" than India. With all due respect, I am yet to understand why you think your lone opinion somewhow invalidates the far more qualified opinions of others with a much more qualified frame of reference?

As per the role of the U.S. in the world, I will be the first to admit we have historically acted in our own best interest.

But let me ask you this.... Is it not the sworn duty of every government to look after the "best interest" of its people?

Do you honestly believe that there exists so much as a sinlge nation, whether it be on the UN Security Council or simply as a member of the global community, which does not act in the best interest of its people?

This having been said, the simple fact is in recent history, the U.S. has simply had more weight to throw around. And considering the amount of weight the U.S. has to throw around, IMHO we have acted rather responsibly.

This is not to say we haven't made many mistakes. By God, to the contrary, we've made at least our share. However, we have also acted as a force of good in this world, and let us not discount that.

Originally posted by Indigo_ChildIn 2000 Bush was elected, even though he did not win the popular vote. Yes, a lot of power the American has, right?

Let me predicate this by going on record that I am a registered Independent. I find much fault with the state of politics here in the U.S. I will also go on record by stating that I did not vote for Bush in neither the 2000 election or the most recent one (that being said, I am glad that he was the sitting president on 9/11).

Also, in all fairness, in case you were not aware, our president is elected via the electoral college, and not by poopular vote. I myself am not a fan of the system -- and believe it can and should be changed -- and while losing the poopular vote, he did in fact win the electoral college vote, which as per our faulted system is what matters.

Originally posted by Indigo_ChildMaybe not today, but when the carpet is pulled from underneath your feet, you'll realize it's not much of a paradise.

I hope you're wrong, but in the event that this does pan out to be true, I'm a survivor. I'm sure my wife and I will find a way to make it through.

And never had I said we live in a "paradise," the Hawaiian Islands and a few locals on the mainland being the exception. In fact, I can easily envision living happily elsewhere, such as Vancouver, the southern coast of France, or northern Italy, for that matter, just to name a few. We have our share of social ills which need to be fixed posthaste in our country -- I won't dispute that.

I, too, am concerned with the Patiot Act and the possible loss of freedom in this country. I remain equally critical of party-politics which I do not see to be in the best interst of the American people and the world community.

Originally posted by Indigo_ChildAs for Sonia Ghandi, she is actually still in the position of control, because she is the leader of the congress party. It was a political move for her to decline the position of prime minister, to prevent political meltdown(as Surfup said) however the Indian peolple had no such preoccupations.

Again, I do not understand, and still am awaiting for you to qualify your frame of reference, as many persons with a more qualified frame of reference will tell you that regardless of her popularity with her consituents that in reality she is nothing more than a puppet of the Congress Party.

Furthermore, I am at a loss as to how you somehow command such great authority on the subject than you can speak on behalf of 1+ billion people. The Indian people "had no such preoccupations?" Again, simply wrong.

Originally posted by Indigo_ChildThe Indian poor man exercised his power of vote to get rid of the BJP, which was only concentrating... Hence, my statement, that they have more power than the average American.

Lastly, and for hopefully the last time, I can read your justification for your assertion that "they have more power than the average American," but it doesn't make the statement any less incorrect.

Now, if one was to state that given the electoral college system in use in the U.S., the popular vote here does not directly impact the outcome of the election to the degree in whcih is does in societies where the outcome of an election is decided soley upon the results of the popular vote, than yes, I would be inlclined to agree with this statement, as it is factual.

However, to extrapolate from this that the average Indian is more empowered than the average American, well, once again, and hopefully for the last time, is simply erroneous.

Yes, the Indian poor man -- which makes up the single largest demographic in the country, excercised his and her right to vote. This is simply how a democracy works, and I find nothing extraordinary about it.

Again, I ask that for substantiation of my contradictions and/or corrections to the erroneous statements addressed above, you simply revisit my prior posts in the thread, where you can find facts, statistics, and links pertaining to each.

I appreciate you enthusiasm, but with all due respect am incliined to once again remind you that your frame of reference is not nearly as qualified as my own. Please inform me otherwise, with qualifiers, should I be wrong in this assertion.