Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Commie Bastards have one more success in Nepal!

Jessabell, I live in a foreign country, just like you. It has a large population of refugees and immigrants from Iraq, Palestine and Turkey.

So by your own highly dodgy ideas I must be virtually a professor on middle east conflicts!

Cheers lads I never knew I was such a spod!
 
DoUsAFavour said:
Jessabell, I live in a foreign country, just like you. It has a large population of refugees and immigrants from Iraq, Palestine and Turkey.

So by your own highly dodgy ideas I must be virtually a professor on middle east conflicts!

Cheers lads I never knew I was such a spod!

My ideas? What are you on about? You are a fake Maoist, cheering an insurgency of which you have little understanding except from what you want to hear.
 
DoUsAFavour said:
You fucking arrogant cunt. Only the a middle class and person could believe that if they go on a expensive package tour to a country they become expert on the place!!

Fuck me, I have spent several months in the Himalayas surrounded by and interacting with Nepalis but do you hear me using that limited exposure to claim that gives me the right to call myself an expert?

No, because only a ponce would do that.

So by your specifications I am a greater judge of the Nepal situation as I have spent longer in the mountains than you :rolleyes:

Im the arrogant cunt? look in the mirror sunshine. Youre the one who seems to think it alright for people to get blown up, raped, denied education, forced into armed conflict and plunged into further poverty all in the name of ideology. At no point did I say I was an expert in the situation form having been there, but it still gives me some firsthand knowledge and the right to form opinions based on actual experiences and direct contact with dozens of Nepalis who currently live there or near by, rather than dodgey sources or irrelevant material.

How long ago were you in Nepal? How long ago did you work with the Nepali? Given the changes that have taken place in the country over the last 10 years when you last had contact with the country is important.

Not once have you addressed the sources I listed, you just attempt to casually disgard them by trying to undermine the publisher, who is respected, or by being abusive.

You preiodically refuse to comment on the Maoists actions; child soldier, perpetuating the caste system, rape, abductions, executions, school closures, etc. Not once have you shown this is not the case.
 
if Joe Stalin was leading a guerilla army this muppet would stil back it, cos hey they are doing something for the poor.
 
DoUsAFavour said:
Don't be a spoon Jessabell.

That first link is the book that is a collection of papers that I have referenced it is written by respected peer reviewed academics and authors.

The second is an overview of recent Nepali history which you and you self appointed 'expert' on Nepal 'Macabre'* should read.

*I've been on an expensive two week package tour to a country so thus I am an expert on it, dontcha know!

If you'd care to mail me a copy of each, I'd be glad to read them.

Thanks.

:)

Meanwhile, we're still waiting for you to address the issues please, with sources that are up to date and refute the sources presented by Macabre.

*taps paw*

:)

Woof
 
DoUsAFavour said:
Jessabell, I live in a foreign country, just like you. It has a large population of refugees and immigrants from Iraq, Palestine and Turkey.

So by your own highly dodgy ideas I must be virtually a professor on middle east conflicts!

Cheers lads I never knew I was such a spod!

I don't live in a "foreign country". What are you on about?

:confused:

I am merely ponting out that the people who have had recent and regular contact with Nepalese (I mix with Nepalese on a more-than-weekly-basis,) are suggesting that neither the Maoists NOR the monarchy have widespread support among the people - and that the Maoists are fast losing support.

This is the consistent message I have taken from the bulk of Nepalese I communicate with - both here and in Nepal - over the last three years: that would be from mid 2002 to date.

Doesn't make me an expert but, together with the experience of others on this thread, it does go towards painting a picture.

Add to that picture the very detailed, recent reports posted by Macabre and we can elicit a failrly full - and utterly grim - idea of what's happening on the ground and the causes and likely outcomes.

If you can find any reports that refute the ones posted, fine, we can continue the debate.

If not, fine, debate over.

:)

Woof
 
revol68 said:
if Joe Stalin was leading a guerilla army this muppet would stil back it, cos hey they are doing something for the poor.

If Satan himself was leading a guerilla army.....etc.

:D

Woof
 
http://www.iias.nl/host/himalaya/turin/downloads/jansarkar.pdf
The chapter from that book DUAF sourced above, Jessie has already pointed out its out of date and not relevant. Judging from the chapter titles and online reviews of the book I dont see how its going to counter argue any of what my sources have said. It seems to be a record of the growth of the maoist movement and why a revolution in the country seemed inevitable, at best it will give examples of positive steps they have taken in specific locations but that will hardly tip the scales of the horrible abuses that they have done.
 
having just looked at the source that is somewhat favourable to the Maoists in terms of acknowledging a grass roots base, it is from 2001. In 1917 anyone writing about the Bolsheviks could not have denied their support within the working class, it does not innoculate them from criticism and by 1921 they had degenerated into a dictatorship over the proletariat. I would suggest that the Maoists had never close to the popular support the bolsheviks had in 1917 and by now they lack any real popular base worth talking about.
 
I must first state that I am no expert in the matter...........

I have spent the evening speaking to two very educated Nepalese - who I know aren't representive of theit country.

I am quite impartial on the matter towards which Nepal should adopt, but their opinion was very clear.

They were very respectful of the monarchy, and if anything, they suggested that it was actually too weak, and they would actually support something which was a little stronger, and a little for forceful to alien attack.

More importantly, they stressed the importance for a ruling monarchy. They stressed how important it was - in Nepalese culture - to have one king (re: dictator) to rule over the land. I found it hard to disagree with them on such a cultural issue. They were totally aware of the corruption that exists within such an environment, but equally aware of the alternatives...............

I am afraid I am not well informed enough to impart my own opinion on the matter.
 
revol68 said:
having just looked at the source that is somewhat favourable to the Maoists in terms of acknowledging a grass roots base, it is from 2001. In 1917 anyone writing about the Bolsheviks could not have denied their support within the working class, it does not innoculate them from criticism and by 1921 they had degenerated into a dictatorship over the proletariat. I would suggest that the Maoists had never close to the popular support the bolsheviks had in 1917 and by now they lack any real popular base worth talking about.

Yeah, from the reviews of the book online it does give an account of it starting from a grass roots organisation but its not relevant to the topic. We've been arguing that the Maoists have become as bad as the king and if they got in power things wouldnt be any better. How they started out and what they have become are not of consequence to this debate. At no point in the thread has anyone said the country did have to change but the Maoist just seem to provide more of the same.
 
Macabre said:
Yeah, from the reviews of the book online it does give an account of it starting from a grass roots organisation but its not relevant to the topic. We've been arguing that the Maoists have become as bad as the king and if they got in power things wouldnt be any better. How they started out and what they have become are not of consequence to this debate. At no point in the thread has anyone said the country did have to change but the Maoist just seem to provide more of the same.

Absolutely.

There is no doubt in my mind that, initially, in the early/mid 1990's, the Maoists garnered a measure of somewhat widespread support. This has dissipated over the last three years due to the continued and worsening abuses of the people by the Maoists and the current sate of play suggests that the general feeling among the masses is that both the Maoists and govt. forces are as bad as each other. Very bad.

There is no indication that (in the extremely unlikely case of a "win") the people under Maoist rule would benefit to any real extent.

The ongoing conflict is the worst possible outcome for the general population and of course, is particularly devestating for those whom are poorest and of "lower caste".

The fighting must stop!

Woof
 
Rock Bottom said:
I must first state that I am no expert in the matter...........

I have spent the evening speaking to two very educated Nepalese - who I know aren't representive of theit country.

I am quite impartial on the matter towards which Nepal should adopt, but their opinion was very clear.

They were very respectful of the monarchy, and if anything, they suggested that it was actually too weak, and they would actually support something which was a little stronger, and a little for forceful to alien attack.

More importantly, they stressed the importance for a ruling monarchy. They stressed how important it was - in Nepalese culture - to have one king (re: dictator) to rule over the land. I found it hard to disagree with them on such a cultural issue. They were totally aware of the corruption that exists within such an environment, but equally aware of the alternatives...............

I am afraid I am not well informed enough to impart my own opinion on the matter.

Better not let DUAF know where they hang out RB.

He may emerge from behind his computer screen in a fit of pique and actually try and "off them" for holding those kind of opinions.

;)

EDIT: It is unsurprising that people in their position hold such views. After all, there's no doubt that a certain minority of the population has done extremely well out of the reign of the monarchy. The bulk of Nepali people I mix with - who invariably come from closer to the other extreme of social class - hold the monarchy in utter contempt and pretty much wholly responsible for the decades of poverty and deprevation suffered by the people. And they'd be right!

It is these same people - who initially had great hopes that a Maoist takeover would be of some benefit - that now decry the Maoists as vicious thugs and hold no hope for any improvement either during this devastating confict, or after. They do not see an end to the war, do not believe it's winnable and do not believe that a Maoist win would benefit the majority of Nepalese.

Interestingly, in some areas and regions outside of KTM, the King still enjoys the solid support of the peasant population, where the King is revered (almost) as a deity. The monarchy organise periodic "ride abouts" where the King and a bunch of lackies are shipped to a village and then paraded on horseback through the streets in full royal regalia (see picture above - :mad: ) to the ecstatic cheering of hundreds of poverty stricken peasants. Bizzare!!

It is another indication of just how messed up and fragmented the country is.

Most people, sensibly, will blow with the wind and simply purport support for whichever group of thugs is standing in front of them with guns, raiding their homes for food and money. Only then to suffer at the hands of the opposing group of thugs who come along later and accuse them of treason/collaboration/whatever.

It just goes to show how both sides in the conflict will use and abuse the poor in order to (try to) get their hands on (or retain) the levers of power.

As is often the case in these kind of conflicts.

:(

Woof
 
Ryazan said:
Only a middle class person who sits behind a computer naivley cheerleading a maoist insurgency (with suspect knowledge of maoism) in safety could be such a dick.
If that's middle class, what do you call tourists who swan around the 12th poorest country in the world in the middle of a civil war badgering peasants with their cuntistry, and telling them they'd be better off if India invaded and "shat on" anyone opposed to the caste system.
 
Nobody has said that on this thread. But I think, no matter how anecdotal it might be, actually having experience of, not say living in Nepal as I don't think that would be very limited in it's scope for proper understaning (seen as it is a holiday) but speaking and listening to Nepalese about their views on the Maoist insurgents, those from the poor, will give some window into understanding a little the social mood about these liberators of opression. I don't think having a go at someone for going to that country is a good defence of your, or anyone else's views on the insurgency in Nepal. As far as I am aware, Jessie Dog and Macabre have not said that they are speaking for the Nepalese, in some condescending fashion, as if they know what it is like for them. they have simply relayed information (anecdotal for sure, buit still useful) from the Nepalese themselves. And it isn't all good. Now, that might not be what some of the Maoists on U75 want to hear, but the Nepalese poor, refugee or otherwise will have lets say, a more realitistic attitude towards the insurgents, given their contact with them, either directly, or through other means like bombing and the effects this has on the behaviour of the Royalist armed forces towards the poor population.

The Maoist insurgency, like similarly the revolution in Cambodia throughout the 70's was shaped largely by outside forces (only in that the Communists were not autonomous in their influence and decisions), and their widespread support among the peasants and their inherent strength as a movement is a myth. Read propaganda, for sure, but also have the abilty to use the brain you have in order to perhaps cross reference this propaganda with other information, and also make yourself aware of not only hard facts, but other views that are hostile or mixed about the insurgents. Then a less rabid and one dimensional attitude might be formed for wider understanding and opinion to creep in, and, God forbid, a little acknowledgement that criticism of the Maoists can be valid, even if you are for the Maoist cause.
 
shirtsquare-lousy.jpg


http://www.thoseshirts.com/lousy.html
 
Those implementing some form of state Socialism and through these systems with the, at first uncynical, attempt at bringing about revolutions and eventual Communism across the world, contributed to the killing of millions of people. Communism has never existed. Yet.
 
Ryazan said:
Nobody has said that on this thread.
Macabre said it. If India was to invade and "shit on" the maoists then I don't see how that wouldn't result in widening the war and producing much more brutality than at present.

I'm sceptical enough of how professional journalists report the situation so I'm hardly going to take some clearly unobjective (public school educated perchance?) tourist seriously. Do you think taking a holiday in civil war ravaged Nepal is a working class thing to do?
 
I holdiay in Russia, and am working class. Should I not go there because of it's poor human rights record, and the conflict in Chechnya? Because the people are poorer than I. I should not have Russian girlfriend because it is just not the done thing? I mean, where is the line to be drawn here? I doubt Macabre went there with the specific aim of trying to have a laugh at somebody elses expense. And the Indians, well, they have a Communist insurgency of their own to deal with.
 
fishfingerer said:
Macabre said it. If India was to invade and "shit on" the maoists then I don't see how that wouldn't result in widening the war and producing much more brutality than at present.

I'm sceptical enough of how professional journalists report the situation so I'm hardly going to take some clearly unobjective (public school educated perchance?) tourist seriously. Do you think taking a holiday in civil war ravaged Nepal is a working class thing to do?

Nice to see you take quotes out of context, have you read my sources? Anything to comment on them or are you just going to continue dodging the issuse by side tracking to debate and more personal attacks and judgments.

As pointed out several times the tourist industry is the countries biggest money maker, the tourist spots are not war torn because both sides recognise the need to keep tourists coming to nepal. Many nepalis depend on tourists for a living and are very grateful for the people who decide to go there.

It seems you'll trust professional journalists enough if the're providing a report that suits you, what about the human rights organisation sources I posted?
 
Macabre said:
Nice to see you take quotes out of context,
What do you mean by saying "I would like to see them [maoists] get shat on by the Indian army." Describe how the Indian army would shit on the maoists or anyone else violently opposed to the caste system. What tactics would they use that haven't already been employed by the Nepalese army.

have you read my sources?
Yes, have you? Because one of the first lines in one of them says "Maoist campaigns also include public humiliation and punishment schemes against those who practice caste and gender discrimination". This contradicts your claim that the maoists are perpuating the caste system.

As pointed out several times the tourist industry is the countries biggest money maker, the tourist spots are not war torn because both sides recognise the need to keep tourists coming to nepal. Many nepalis depend on tourists for a living and are very grateful for the people who decide to go there.
How altruistic of you. Nothing like throwing a few shekels about to assuage one's useless liberal guilt.

It seems you'll trust professional journalists enough if the're providing a report that suits you, what about the human rights organisation sources I posted?
This may come as something of a shock to you but....bad things happen in wars. :( And sometimes they're done by the side you'd like to see win or at least force some concessions and compromise. If you got your wish and the Indian army went into Nepal to shit on the maoists, do you really think there wouldn't be a telephone directory sized AI file after a month or two? That the root causes of the war would just vanish if enough suspected malcontents are killed or locked up? And will your kind ever understand that support for a cause is rarely, if ever, unconditional?
 
fishfingerer,

Now you're just embarassing yourself.

Stop gibbering and post up your sources that contradict those already given.

A quote from one of Macabre's links that comes directly from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists from May 2005 for example:

The nine-year-old civil war in Nepal has already claimed over 12,000 lives and injured thousands more. It has resulted in massive displacement of people and gross human rights abuses. Both sides to the conflict have systematically flaunted their responsibilities to protect civilians and captured combatants. Yet each side is responsible for the conduct of its own forces and cannot justify abuses by pointing to the poor conduct of the other side.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/05/20/nepal10990.htm


*yawn*

*tap tap*

:)

Woof
 
I'll make it easier for you chaps.

These quotes are from the HRW report linked by Macabre above.

The report was published recently (don't have the exact date, but it was later than April 2005),

Now. Just read the quotes and come up with your credible, recent sources that will refute the information provided.

Thanks.


the Maoists need to end their targeting of civilians, agree to good-faith negotiations, and show the Nepali people and the world that an agreement with them would be worth the paper it is written on. Otherwise, the misery in Nepal will continue.


most of [the public] appears to have little interest in living under a Maoist government.


Both sides have dismal records. Summary executions, torture, and arbitrary arrests and abductions are common. Human rights defenders, lawyers, and journalists are routinely attacked for their work.


The Maoists have cut off heads and used civilians as human shields


The Maoists rarely commit enforced "disappearances," but only because those they abduct are usually publicly denounced and executed in the name of the People's War.


They abduct schoolchildren in the remote hill districts for forced indoctrination and have been accused of forcing unarmed civilians to act as cannon fodder in human-wave attacks on police and army posts.


[The Maoists] do not have the military capability to take Kathmandu by force. Because of the primitive nature of the combat, the cost of victory in human lives, according to a British analyst, "would be too high for either side to sustain."


The Maoists have gone back and forth on the issue of whether they would insist on a republic, but they are unequivocal in their demands for an end to a political role for the monarchy. Although many Nepalis agree that the powers of the king must be severely curtailed, it is unclear whether they would welcome the demise of the monarchy.


This is not to suggest that a Maoist rise to power would not be a human rights disaster.


With unintended irony, the [Maoists] homepage includes a section on "human rights."


Many villagers find themselves in an untenable position: if they refuse to provide food or shelter to the Maoists, they risk being executed as "class enemies" or "traitors"


Those suffering most are civilians from the country's most vulnerable communities: the rural poor, Dalits (low-caste Hindus), and indigenous communities.


http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/10/12/nepal11862.htm


Look forward to reading your sources.

:)

Woof
 
And this:

Last month, Maoist forces also carried out a spate of attacks on schools...initiated on 14 April 2005. Among the schools targeted were a school in Nepalgunj, Banke district, on 17 April and another in Kalyanpur, Chitwan district on 21 April. Three children were reportedly injured when the Maoists threw a bomb at students at a school in Khara, Rukum district, on 17 April.

Hundreds of schools across the country remain closed due to threats by Maoists. Furthermore, Maoist forces have regularly abducted large numbers of students from schools for political indoctrination and propaganda campaigns. None of these targets can be described as military they were all civilians and civilian objects the targeting of which is prohibited under international humanitarian law.

From Nepal: Maoist Rebel Abuses Continue again.



That's enough Ceeing and Peeing for me.


Your sources?


Edit: 'Cos it's not like we've been waiting for two fucking weeks despite repeated polite requests or anything, is it?


:)

Woof
 
Jessiedog said:
fishfingerer,

Now you're just embarassing yourself.

Stop gibbering and post up your sources that contradict those already given.
Read Page 1 of the link on post 283 and tell me what it says, go on. :confused:

From here.
About 25 per cent of the rural population suffers from social discriminations of various forms. While some of them are termed "untouchable", others face varying degrees of discrimination and social exclusion. The Maoists have banned all these and there have been reports that those found continuing with practices of untouchability and caste exclusion have been punished severely or even killed. This reportedly has created much goodwill for them among the lower-caste populations of the rural areas, especially since the democratic political parties had not addressed the problems of social oppression in the villages after they formed the government in 1991.

In a masterstroke of political savvy, the Maoists have also started giving land to the families of Royal Nepal Army soldiers and police personnel who were killed in combat with them. Their argument is that they were `poor peasants' who had joined the Royal forces not for ideological reasons but to survive. Therefore, they argue that it is their duty to provide for their families, as they do for the families of their own cadre who were killed in combat.

In a context where most families of soldiers who are killed in combat with the Maoists are yet to receive even one rupee of the compensation announced by the Royal Nepal government, this is a strategy that not only reinforces the moral hold of the Maoists in rural areas but also provides them with a steady stream of recruits.

I'll have to fucking repeat this I suppose: Will your kind ever understand that support for a cause is rarely, if ever, unconditional? Do you understand that just because one supports the broader aims of a cause, it does not automatically mean that one always agrees with the methods, ideology and tactics? Do you understand that? Yes or no will do.

Do you, like Macabre, believe an invasion by the Indian army would sort the maoists out good and proper? Typical smug bullshit colonial mentality. You never ever learn. :(
 
fishfingerer said:
What do you mean by saying "I would like to see them [maoists] get shat on by the Indian army." Describe how the Indian army would shit on the maoists or anyone else violently opposed to the caste system. What tactics would they use that haven't already been employed by the Nepalese army.
Where did I say that I would like to see the indian army shit on the Maoists, I believe I said they would if India got involved because of the sheer size of thier army and an unwillingness to have rebels on a chinese boarder.


fishfingerer said:
Yes, have you? Because one of the first lines in one of them says "Maoist campaigns also include public humiliation and punishment schemes against those who practice caste and gender discrimination". This contradicts your claim that the maoists are perpuating the caste system.
So you read the first few pages then stopped, did you go on to read pages 37-42?
"Although the Maoists claim political empowerment of Dalits and women as a central tenet of their agenda, within the Maoist leadership, all three principals are men and none are Dalit. In fact, the chief architects of the movement, Baburam Bhattarai and Pushpa Kamal Dahal (alias “Prachanda”), are both “upper-caste” Brahmin men, while the leader of the
military wing, Ram Bahadur Thapa (alias “Badal”), is of Magar origin."
"When juxtaposed against the Maoists’ expressed political rhetoric of Dalit empowerment, the lack of real Dalit representation in the movement is striking. In effect, Dalits are serving as dispensable persons who can literally take the bullets for the Maoist insurgency. Nowhere is this imbalance more starkly reflected than in Dalit women’s participation in the movement. The 2003 National Women’s Commission’s report indicates that women account for 33 to 50 percent of the Maoist militia in various districts and constitute 50 percent of the cadres at the lower level."
"The Maoist insurgency has crippled Dalit communities into a state of constant fear and economic deterioration. Already living on the brink of starvation and destitution, Dalit community members have been further pushed into grinding poverty."
Qoute from a 19y/o mepali girl "Not only high-ranking leaders or activists, but sometime we have to fulfill the sexual desire of our own level’s activists and the militia. This is against the party rule and moral duty, but this is the fact of many women like me in this party. Sometimes this happens by chance…but, sometimes the party policy forces us. Most of the women like us are the temporary wives of male militia. Sometimes…the militia forces us to have sex with them. Sometimes we are forced to satisfy about a dozen per night. When I had gone to another region for party work, I had to have sex with seven militia [men] and this was the worst day of my life."

It goes on or you could just continue cherry picking quotes and half reading things. But hey, as long as you argee with the politics of a group it doesnt matter how they behave.

fishfingerer said:
How altruistic of you. Nothing like throwing a few shekels about to assuage one's useless liberal guilt.
Yes, Im so guilt ridden and having caused so much pain and poverty in an already troubled country. Oh wait, that was the Maoists. I also cry with guilt at night thinking about how greatful the nepalis where that people will risk coming there so that they can earn a living instead of not going and passing judgment on the country from halfway around the world saying the're getting fucked for their own good.

fishfingerer said:
This may come as something of a shock to you but....bad things happen in wars. :( And sometimes they're done by the side you'd like to see win or at least force some concessions and compromise. If you got your wish and the Indian army went into Nepal to shit on the maoists, do you really think there wouldn't be a telephone directory sized AI file after a month or two? That the root causes of the war would just vanish if enough suspected malcontents are killed or locked up? And will your kind ever understand that support for a cause is rarely, if ever, unconditional?

No shit bad things happen, but in this case many of the bad things are avoidable and the Maoists behaviour gives absolutely no indication that they will do much different from the king. This war is about power not class.

I never said India going in wouldnt present probelms, not that it would go in which you would know if you bothered to read my sources, but that many nepalis think it would be better than what they have now. Whats the shit about my kind what exactly is my kind, you're just a judgmental twat "go stack shelves, its all you good for". You know nothing about me but are quite happy to make shit up about me in a cowardly attempt to dismiss my opinion because its different from yours. The fact you have to demonise me rather than debate my points just shows your lack of understanding of the situation. And you and DUAF are the ones who are giving unconditional support to the Maoists based on the ideology of the Maoists rather than their behaviour, at no point has anyone here said a revolution wasnt needed but that they are turning out to be as bad as the current system.
 
fishfingerer said:
here.


I'll have to fucking repeat this I suppose: Will your kind ever understand that support for a cause is rarely, if ever, unconditional? Do you understand that just because one supports the broader aims of a cause, it does not automatically mean that one always agrees with the methods, ideology and tactics? Do you understand that? Yes or no will do.

Do you, like Macabre, believe an invasion by the Indian army would sort the maoists out good and proper? Typical smug bullshit colonial mentality. You never ever learn. :(


Didnt you just say you rarely believe what the presss and yet use a newspaper as a source? or was that DUAF? That report hardly goes into important details, it mentions things that the Maoists have done like the medical coops but doenst descibe how they function, how many there are, how effective they are. Its like the reporter has just been told they exist rather than has observed them. It also says a few uncomplamentary things;

The head clerk, visibly scared by the arrival of an unknown person (this correspondent), refused to talk. Another employee said: "We were scared of the Maoists and stopped coming to office as people also were not coming anymore. But Army men came to our homes and threatened us and our families that we would be arrested as Maoists if we did not report for work."
Sounds like a good situation to be in, do your job - get killed my Maoists, dont do your job - get killed by the army.

There is no democracy in the Maoist-controlled areas," said the human rights activist in Nepalgunj. "From their central committee member to the local cadre they all repeat the same words and give exactly the same answers and opinions," said the activist. Speaking one's mind can even get one a bullet in the head.

But what is of greater significance is that people in the rural areas are also turning against the Maoists. In Dullu village of Dailekh district, the women residents came out openly against the Maoists and informed the local RNA garrison about the whereabouts of senior Maoists in their area. Most of the leaders were captured and killed. Since then some of the villagers have been attacked by the Maoists and an uneasy calm prevails in the village at present.

This article hardly counters any of the gross abuses documented in my sources by the Maoists. All the positives it gives read like rhetoric the journalist has been told rather rather than seen and the parts of the article that are direct observations dont seem to be complimentary.

And its still you and DUAF that are giving unconditional support for a group that is well documented in being as bad as the king. If the Maoists had been true to their word this thread would not excists as no one here would have a probelm with it but the havent. The have broken the conditions we and many international human rights organisations have for what constitutes a just cause, at what point would they do the same for you? Raping female soldiers, murder, kidnapping, using child soldiers, using Dalits as connon fodder, putting ordinary people in the impossible situtations of choosing a side then to get killed by the other, maintaining the caste system while preaching its evilness all seem to gain your support.
 
Macabre said:
Where did I say that I would like to see the indian army shit on the Maoists,
Here maybe? The bit where you say "I would like to see them get shat on by the Indian army."

So you read the first few pages then stopped, did you go on to read pages 37-42?
"Although the Maoists claim political empowerment of Dalits and women as a central tenet of their agenda, within the Maoist leadership, all three principals are men and none are Dalit.
The dalit literacy rates of 10% for men and 3.2% for women can't possibly have anything to do with it? If you knew anything about peasant revolutions you'd note that leadership positions are often held by relatively well off types and this situation isn't likely to be any different. Daniel O'Connell, Charles Stewart Parnell and the French revolution guys were not exactly paupers.

Yes, Im so guilt ridden and having caused so much pain and poverty in an already troubled country. Oh wait, that was the Maoists. I also cry with guilt at night thinking about how greatful the nepalis where that people will risk coming there so that they can earn a living instead of not going and passing judgment on the country from halfway around the world saying the're getting fucked for their own good.
Where next? Burma?

No shit bad things happen, but in this case many of the bad things are avoidable and the Maoists behaviour gives absolutely no indication that they will do much different from the king. This war is about power not class.
You're entitled to your opinion.

Whats the shit about my kind what exactly is my kind,
Spoilt arrogant patronising hypocritical prick with no understanding of the nature of revolutions or civil war, as your posts demonstrate. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if you're a public schoolboy either. Have you relinquished your self appointed position as expert on Nepal since DUAF revealed he'd been there for longer than you? That was the basis of your pseudo-authoritative bullshitting in the first instance wasn't it.

For the last fucking time, the maoists represent the least worst option in a shitty situation and the sooner the king gives in the better.
 
fishfingerer said:
Here maybe? The bit where you say "I would like to see them get shat on by the Indian army."
You picked up on a typo, in the context of the whole sentence its quite obvious there should be a 'dont' in there.

fishfingerer said:
The dalit literacy rates of 10% for men and 3.2% for women can't possibly have anything to do with it? If you knew anything about peasant revolutions you'd note that leadership positions are often held by relatively well off types and this situation isn't likely to be any different. Daniel O'Connell, Charles Stewart Parnell and the French revolution guys were not exactly paupers.
so a few of them being taught how to read in exchange for being used as cannon fodder, raped, etc is a good trade off?


fishfingerer said:
Where next? Burma?
No, although the AI head for nepal said they didnt want to create another Burma were the touist industry colapsed and many innocents suffered by telling people not to go there when no known threats to tourists had been made. That was in 2003 though.




fishfingerer said:
Spoilt arrogant patronising hypocritical prick with no understanding of the nature of revolutions or civil war, as your posts demonstrate. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if you're a public schoolboy either. Have you relinquished your self appointed position as expert on Nepal since DUAF revealed he'd been there for longer than you? That was the basis of your pseudo-authoritative bullshitting in the first instance wasn't it.

For the last fucking time, the maoists represent the least worst option in a shitty situation and the sooner the king gives in the better.

More personal attacks with no foundation rather than providing a source which discredits mine. Whats your understanding of revolutions or civil war? Reading about them in books and watching them on TV? DUAF may have been there longer than me, but not by anything substancially more form the sounds of it and going be how long you can stay there with a tourist visa. Also it seems he was there a while ago and the situation has changed.

For the last fucking time just because the Maoists are the least worse of either them or the king doesnt mean they are worth backing by default. There has been no indication that what they offer is any better than what the King does.
 
Back
Top Bottom