If it is know fact that commies are anti-nationals and now are bringing communal angle to the deal by making it look anti-muslim,Then can you tell us why your patrriotic congrees beded them for 41/2 years,what is thw garuntee congree wont sleep with them again after general elections if need be?Sonia by thanking them has already hinted this and even the commie have hinted of joining hands with congres again if need be? So what would be the stand of people like you who vote congrees thinking them to be nationalist and hate commie counting them as china agent.
RE:@all right
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 11:27 AM Permalink
Left were good for the governance of India. They made UPA think on issues, debated them in coordination committee meetings. They became a good Checks & Balance System when there is none in the Parliamentary system.
What was wrong is that they started blackmailing and 59 people started dictating 226. They forgot it is not China, It is a democracy.
RE:@all right
by r patil on Jul 13, 2008 11:32 AM Permalink
They have black mailed UPA on many issues not just the n-deal,like labour reform,retail industry plus thhe chinas claim on arunachal. I again ask you when Sonia thanks them for their support(read blackmailing)what is the garuntee congree would not take their help again and get black mailed again on important internal as well as foriegn relations.Any answer.
RE:@all right
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 11:38 AM Permalink
Who said the Left was bad for India? They provided the UPA the additional bargainability while negotiating with the US. The latter knew that if they had to get an agreement, they had to concede more.
This is where the NDA failed. All constituents, particularly BJP were prepared to play second fiddle to the US. So the ended up with a deal worse than the UPA.
Omar Adbullah Minister of State of External Affairs of the then NDA government went to record on last night's Big Fight (NDTV.
1. The NDA Govt was negotiating a similar treaty 2. The terms of which were perceptibly worse 3. Though the terms were perceptibly worse, the NDA was prepared to sign.
Further Talbot, US Ambassador at the time of the NDA tenure, in a book revealed that the NDA government had secret negotiations with the US to sign NPT, CTBT, viz. internationally agreeing to permanently give up our rights to test a nuclear bomb.
If Talbot's book is not be tobelieved, then the official recordings of Vajpayee (1999) and Jaswant Singh (2000) speeches to the Gen Assembly of the UN. They promised that India would unilaterally and permanently gave up its right to test.
So who is anti-Hindu, anti-India? Who is opposing an agreement that is termed anti-Muslim and appeasing Mullahs. It is clear that BJP-NDA was always anti-national and that is why they find common ground with a Chinese centered Left/
RE:@all right
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 11:39 AM Permalink
Is it possible that speed of the reforms may have been too fast. Labour reforms would have been good but in a poor nation it was not urgent at this time. Reforms in the retail industry may have gotten all the big houses to eliminate small neighborhood merchants.
This is the checks and balanvces I am talking about. UPA may have decided that those reforms can be postponed in context of other pressing issues. Nuclear they waited for them to come on board but when they did not they went on their own.
Left was never part of the government. They wanted to have fun without obligations. Difference between a spouse and live-in.
RE:@all right
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 11:54 AM Permalink
Yes that was the bad part. But still the UPA managed the economy to post 9% growth rate for 4 years. That is a big achievement.
The double agricultural growth rate (where Left-UPA policies coincided). A near 4% growth rate is first time since 1980s.
If we did not have MMS and PC at this critical juncture when there is global economic turmoil, we would have been in much more serious problem
RE:@all right
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 12:06 PM Permalink
I agree. There policies of Non-aligned movement, self sufficiency in basic needs before indulging in luxaries, and vison of Rajiv to start opening the economy in 80's before PVN have put India where it is today.
