How Advani has it wrong

LK Advani , Senior leader of the BJP , the main opposition party in India, has just quit in a fit of pique.
The object of his consternation is the elevation of former protege , Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi to Chairman of the Election Committee.
By choosing this moment to register his displeasure , Advani is playing the only card he thinks he had. Should the elections go in the favor of the BJP, Modi will no doubt corner the credit, and likely most Members of Parliament will also owe allegiance to Modi(since he is the one handing out the tickets)
But unfortunately the timing just makes Advani look petulant. I don't think anyone can make the case that that an 85 year old Advani is a candidate for Prime Minister or that he has the kind of personal pull anymore with the voters.
All Advani has to do is look back at history to see how he could have got a far more optimal result.
In the late 80's early 90's , as far as vote getting ability went and personal popularity went, LK Advani was probably worth more to the BJP than AB Vajpayee. That Vajpayee became Prime Minister probably had a lot more to do with how the allies felt about Advani vs Vajpayee, than the support each of them had in the BJP. To his credit , Advani was willing to play second fiddle to Vajpayee, so as to not derail the BJP's national ambitions.
Now juxtaposing that with the present times, its fairly obvious that the allies or potential allies will be a lot more at ease with anyone but Modi as PM. And what the allies want will count for a lot unless the BJP can approach the 240-250 mark by itself. You don't have to be a psephologist to conclude the chances of that happening are miniscule to none.

Treating the symptom and not the disease

On December 16th a 23rd student, boarded a bus with a male friend in Delhi. She was brutally gang raped by 6 men ,beaten and finally thrown off the bus naked; left to die.
This triggered off a massive wave of protests in Delhi as well as kicked up a firestorm in the media as well as social media.
The protestors have mostly been demanding more safety for women from the government.
I have read such  absurd slogans bandied about as "Don't tell your daughter not to wear a short skirt, teach your son not to rape".
In a sense, these protests are necessary. Since nothing in India seems to improve unless there is somebody protesting. But in another sense the protests are misguided. The anger is mostly directed at the government, but what happened is likely more a societal problem than a law enforcement one.
I am not a researcher, but I have read that rape is more about power than anything else. Men who are not used to showing respect to women, are probably more likely to react in the manner, when challenged by a woman. No government can teach and impose respect for women. That is something society does.
Brutal crimes such as these are not always restricted by geography, they have occurred in a host of countries.
 They cannot ever be completely prevented.
How do those countries deal with it?
Firstly there is an acknoledgement, that at the end of the day, a crime is committed by an indivdual, not a system, then there is a system in place, to render timely justice.
The larger question here and in millions of other cases, is how efficient is the Criminal Justice system in delivering justice? I know this is not on the minds of most people at this time.
But anything short of fixing that, would be treating the symptom and not the disease.

A Medley of Absurdity

The only surviving terrorist from the 26/11 attack on Mumbai has finally been executed.
The coverage in the Indian media has been breathless about 'Operation X'. Every detail of the execution is being laid out with pride, almost like this was the equivalent of the Operation to kill Osama Bin Laden.
As absurd as all this coverage might be, I guess it makes sense when you think about how low the perception of the present UPA government is. Sure this is something to crow about.
Another aspect of absurdity is people bursting crackers and distributing sweets, like this was some joyous occasion. He was always going to hang, the real culprits, the planners are still living their normal lives freely.
Talking heads will likely hold this up as a moment of pride for our democracy, which allowed even a terrorist the right to a free trial and due process. If anything it should be a matter of shame for us, that it took us nearly
4 years and 290 million rupees to convict a man where there was no dearth of evidence, or for that matter no doubt about his guilt.
Finally there are those who believe we should not have executed Kasab.
Here are the reasons advanced:

1. Capital Punishment is barbaric and abhored by world option.
 My Response: There are certain people, who through their acts, give up all right to be treated with humanity and compassion. Would life in prison be enough for Anders Behring Breivik? Other than a misplaced moral superiority , what else is to be gained, by not executing them. Rather than waste precious resources looking after these monster, in prison, I think it is in the interest of the public, to execute them.

2.The death penalty is hardly a deterrent for a jihadi, who is motivated to achieve martyrdom
My Response: True. But that is the law. We cannot cater the deterrent to the individual deviant.

3.He would serve as a prosecution witness in any future trial of the LET chief and the planners of the 26/11 attacks.
My Response: So your argument is keep him around for a trial that will never happen? Short of coercive action on India's part or giving Pakistan Kashmir, these individuals are never going on trial in India or anywhere else. As with most of India's enemies, its best to wait for time to take its toll, on them.

In conclusion. We should not be patting ourselves on our backs for doing what should have been done.
If I may adress the professional bleeding heart liberal, guys, really , this was the worst possible moment to stick your neck out for your principles. Its not like you guys have terrible ideas all the time. Its just that your timing sucks. And you have terrible ideas most of the time. 

Take this quiz before you vote. The results will surprise you.

http://www.isidewith.com/presidential-election-quiz

No room on the ticket

As the Presidential Elections 2012 comes to its conclusion on Nov 6th, I am struck by how the choices being presented to the American people are so much fewer than they truly deserve.
As there are only 2 platforms, all manners of political opinion, are forced to choose just 2 sides.
So if you can't stomach President Obama's economic approach, you are stuck with the Tea Party loonies , and the "Rape is the will God", nut jobs.
I think President Obama is the more likable and relatable individual. I also don't believe Mitt Romney is severely conservative as he would like us to believe.
Since the minorities are always likely to vote democrat, the only way to win for the Republican's is to appeal to amongst others, the extreme right wing Tea party , no abortion types.
President Obama, on the other hand, seems to have sensed the disillusionment in his liberal base, and has focused his attentions there.
I didn't hear all of his speech accepting the nomination, but the one part the stuck was "We will leave nobody behind"
What is that but rhetoric, and coming to think of it, socialist rhetoric? If you believe this nation believes in the principle of personal responsibility,   do we really have a choice in the matter?   Each individual presumably makes his own fate.
I don't have the numbers to back me up, but there are a lot of people in this country who are liberal on social issues, and conservative on economic ones. Sadly these people are underrepresented on both tickets.
I don't envy the task of the American voter this November.

Reply to "Why India will remain a nation of losers"

When I first read the title , I assumed automatically it must be by a Pakistani. Surely no one else had that much against a nation of 1.2billion people, many of whom we can agree are not losers.
I have to admit reading such self loathing drivel, made we want to start writing, in response  without actually reading the whole thing.
Further reading made me realize, the author had suffered the embarrassment of watching Indian television that made a big deal about India winning a silver, along with some expat friends.
I don't know Shoban Saxena or anything about him, but since he took the liberty of labeling all people who call themselves Indian losers, I will take some liberties as well.
Shoban is likely one of those idiots who turned up for candle lit marches post 26/11, but then did not bother to vote, to actually change the government responsible.
Shoban, my easily embarrassed friend, your embarrassment was really no different from having to explain to an expat friend, why the hero and heroine in a hindi movie break into song and dance with a horde of extras at every given opportunity.
You have one thing right , that sporting glory does not make a nation great. But you have so many other things wrong.
Instead of providing any kind of cogent analysis on why India lags behind in sports, you just went off on a tangential rant , that encompassed some pop psychology with a liberal dose of socialism.
Dismissing Saina Nehwal's achievement as no achievement at all, is not just wrong , but entirely mean spirited.
Saina Nehwal, went into the games as world number 5. Which meant , she had a realistic shot at a medal, but to do that she would have to play above her current ranking. She lost in the semis to Wang Yihan, world number 1, someone she has not beaten in 6 previous meetings. I see no shame in that. Medal or no medal, Saina is a winner, for what she has achieved thus far. I suggest you peruse her wikipedia page.
As far as the rest of your rant related to Vijay Kumar. It seems you are pissed of at the media. Thats ok, the media like any other commercial venture, markets what sells. So if Sania Mirza, sells more than a Vijay Kumar, what can realistically be done about that?
Now to do what you should have been doing. Offering some boring but honest analysis of why India lags in sports.
To win in sport at the olympic level, you need
1. Money
2. Organization
3.Culture
4.In the absence of all these a totalitarian regimes , that can pull out all stops in pursuits of medals will do just fine.

Does India remotely have a sporting culture? Cricket is a national embarrassment. Imagine being world champs in a sport contested by 12 other nations.
Michael Phelps did not happen in isolation, there was a Mark Spitz before him, and there will be many after him. Who are our sporting heroes?
Our Olympic level athletes likely have world class facilities. But what of the 5-10 year olds just taking up sport across the country(or not for the lack of equipment and facilities).
Comparing India to China in sport is plain stupid. I doubt any of us would approve of the State telling us what to do with our kids lives, which is what happens with kids identified for future sporting glory in China.

Don't be hating on me

In case you haven't heard, being a homophobic immature jerk, is now punishable with jail time. Not exactly, but that is the net result of guilty verdict , that been handed down in the case of Dharun Ravi, who turned on a web cam in his room and web cast the sexual encounter his room mate had with another man.
The learned jury found Ravi, guilty of a hate crime.
I am not sure how they came to that conclusion, it almost demeans  the victims of actual hate crimes.
Was Ravi homophobic? Yes he clearly was. But so are a lot of other people. Was Ravi an insensitive jerk, with no respect for some one's privacy? Yes he was, but so are a lot of people aged 19.
Was Tyler Clementi afraid of Ravi? I have no proof one way or another, but I am inclined to doubt it.
Did Ravi hate gay people? Again , nothing that's come out in the public domain , has given any indication of that.
In fact, would he be on trial for the crime he is accused of if Tyler Clementi had not committed suicide?
People commit suicide for any number of reasons. Is it justifiable to always seek an external reason to pin the blame on ? Should the victim and perpetrator of the suicide , not shoulder some responsibility for the act itself?
Now consider that the victim of the spycam was not Tyler Clementi, but 2 women making out in Ravi's room.
It would be despicable for Ravi to webcast such a session as well. Would we be accusing of committing a hate crime against lesbians? If not, why not? How is that any different?
Consider that the year was 1990(The first webcam was built in 1991).
Ravi, walks in on his college roommate Clementi having sex , with a man. Ravi, shares the information with a few friends, who do the same with others, and soon Clementi, against his will is out of the closet.
Distraught , Clementi jumps of the George Washington Bridge.
In this scenario, can you really prosecute Ravi of a hate crime? If not , why not? How is this scenario different from what happened in reality. The only difference is the addition of technology,in the form of the webcam.
A 19 year old is looking at spending the next 5-10 years of his life in prison, because we live in a time and age, where looking at someone wrong, might be classified a hate crime.

Flexing the Guns for the big guns

Usually I never post about anything that happened at work, but I will make an exception in this case.
I was on my way back with a friend from a coffee break. As we got into the elevator, we were joined my two gentlemen in suits. I paid no attention to them, since I work at a bank, and well everyone wears suits.
I dress down by bank standards, usually sticking to a polo and formal trousers.
I also have this rather unfortunate habit of stretching my arms out behind my head.
Unfortunate, since it gives of the impression I am flexing my biceps.
The 2 gentlemen got of on the second and we got off on the fourth floor.
My friend immediately turns around and mentions to me that those 2 gentlemen were the big bosses in our division. Guys I had  only ever seen on video.
So if I don't get a raise this year, at least I can say I tried everything.. Including flexing my guns at the top management(even if it was inadvertent).

A modest proposal to save the Indian cricket team

If you have any idea what cricket is, you probably know that the formerly first ranked Indian test team went over to England to be summarily thrashed 4-0 . This was a shockingly unexpected result to put it mildly.
The Indian side was beset with problems such as injuries to key players, an aging middle order and youngsters with neither the technique nor temparament for seaming conditions.
The culprit behind the Indian teams poor performance, even though the players might be to admit to it, is the IPL.
The way the IPL is set up, each team criscrosses the country playing 16  or so 20-20 games in little over a month and a half.
Whereas the test stars of other countries, in some cases have kept away from the IPL, the entire Indian side bar none, play for the entire tournament(fit or otherwise as Sehwag and Gambhir proved)..

Without further ado I am going to present my proposals to save Indian test cricket from the advent of the IPL.

1. Roster sizes are impractical. This needs to be trimmed.  Which will mean fewer players involved in the tournament. Hopefully , fewer Indian test cricketers will be picked(especially if they do not particularly suit the demands of T-20)

Teams should be allowed to cut and bring in new players at some pre-determined times in the season.

2. Travel with fewer players than the roster size... Its a 11man game.. how many reserves do you need while travelling? Why this matters... Players complain that more than the actual playing time , its the travel time that completely exhausts them.

3. Introduce a hard salary cap, and make sure if there is to be an auction, everyone can participate.
This can practically be achieved , by allowing every team to vote on wheter they would be insterested in seeing a player on auction... if more than 1 team shows interest, they end up in the auction...
If not the players get the minimum allowed, by whicher team actually showed the interest.
All this matters because, by allowing only certain players to appear in the auction, and posing limits on the number of overseas players allowed to play in a game... An effective caste system was created.. with the Indian test players on top and domestic players on the bottom, with overseas players in the middle.
This artificially inflated the price on Indian test players..above everyone else...
$900K, which is what Ishant Sharma got in his first contract, is hard to walk away from, but say the market determined his value was a lot lower... maybe its an offer he could refuse, just to play for country.

4. In case of injuries to Indian players... they have to be examined by BCCI appointed doctors... whose responsibility it will be to ensure , injured players fo not take the field.

5. Remove restrictions on the max overseas players per side per game.

Has Osama's death changed anything?

We call all agree that 9/11 fundamentally changed the world. At the very least it changed America, and in the last decade that virtually meant changing the world.
But did the the killing of the perpetrator in chief of 9-11 change anything?
Since I am from India and I live in the US, my focus is on these 2 countries.
The big hope is that Al-Quaeda, would disintegrate without Osama, and while that remains to be seen, even the most optimistic American, would agree, we cannot go back to our pre 9-11 ways.
America, still has many non state enemies, there is a vast pool of willing recruits to their cause, and as 9-11 showed us, it does not cost a lot, to unleash destruction of unimaginable proportions by a crazed few.
As far as India goes, the Osama killing has renewed calls for India , to go in Commando style, to neutralize the many Hall of fame enemies of the Indian state, that Pakistan, so lovingly hosts.
There have been warnings of how the Al Quaeda , will turn its anger and vengeance to 'soft' targets such as India.
The Indian political leadership, no doubt aware of the likelihood of Nuclear weapons being used in any conflict, have so far resisted such calls.
So futile talks will continue.
We will 'extract' a commitment from Pakistan to jointly fight terror.. and absolutely nothing will happen.
If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to see a repeat of it.
India , finds itself in exactly that situation.

Rage against the .....

Pick the object of your choice to complete my incomplete title. We have all felt rage and anger, and those we care about and those we don't care about. About those things in life we can't control and those things in life we wish we had done differently. But if you look at it closely enough, rage is all about yourself. Its a choice you make. You can chose to let things go, but you don't always.. Sometimes you let them linger, till they explode.
Why am I suddenly doing a Dr Phil, on rage?
I was at the gym the other day on the elliptical and watched a video of Chris Brown(Forever).
I absolutely loved the song when it came out. And watching the video, reminded me of the enormous potential the 19 yr old Chris Brown had as an entertainer.
Why do I talk about it in the past tense? He is probably only 22 and probably hasn't forgotten how to dance or sing.
He let a moment of rage label him forever, when he beat up Rihanna. And now anytime anyone thinks of him, it will be in that context.
Does he deserve a second chance ? Everybody does. How about anyone of us? Do we deserve second chances? Maybe. But it is a given , that we will get it? I think the awnser to that one is obvious.
So rage all you want against a punching bag in the gym, or how unfair the BCS ranking system is, but before you direct some of that rage at the people around you.. take a deep breathe.. and let it go..

Japan's nuclear predicament

The recent Tsunami and earthquake that struck Japan recently, brought along with them another disaster, potentially even more devastating , the radiation leaks at multiple reactors. The full extent of the damage is not known (or at least known in the public domain).
On cue commentators of 2 types have leaped up to kick Japan while its down. The environment activists who view Nuclear energy as evil, at least have some intellectual honesty , when they go about criticising Japan for suffering the consequences of its pursuit of harnessing nuclear energy.  The second kind of critic , I find far more annoying and plain, mean spirited, are the type of critic , who points out how Japan, as a nation was so confident of its technology , but even their technology was no match for Mother Nature.
There is an undercurrent of glee in that observation, I cannot palate.
But I am going to address both , categories of critics..
With the invention of the internal combustion engine, and almost simultaneously that electricity..before the commencement of the 20th century, the world had been divided into the Haves and Have Not's of energy. With the end of the second world war , having your colonies supply your energy needs was no longer an option.
So for the last 70 years, countries like Japan, with no real energy resources, have been shipping over the money they earn by being amongst the most hard working and innovative people in the world, to countries like Saudi Arabia, so that they can keep their economies running..
Are the Japanese , not justified in at least trying to seek an alternative?
Especially in times, where  we fear the World Oil production has peaked..
What alternatives did Japan really have?
Go back to the stone ages?
They use a lot less energy per capita , when compared to America... (I haven't looked at the figures but anecdotal evidence, does bear out my assertion).
And as far as misplaced pride in their technology goes.. Why should they not be proud, they have certainly showed the world the way.. in many technologies endeavours, while there are many nations, whose only contribution to the world has been suicide bombers and child soldiers.
All this doesn't mean the Japanese are above criticism, but before you criticise , step back for a second, imagine that their compulsions are your compulsions and their circumstances are your circumstances.. Could anyone else have done a better job?
        

Donating to Japan

I recently donated to the Tsunami relief in Japan.. It got me thinking, since I had made no donation to Haiti. Haiti was clearly less capable than Japan, to take care of its own. So why did I donate to Japan and not Haiti?
 I don't know if I came up with the the right reasons, but here is what I have so far.
I have visited Japan, and feel a connection to the place, which I do not feel to Haiti. I have a great respect for Japan and the Japanese for the manner they powered themselves to the number 2 economy(until very recently) from the devastation of World War II.    
How many civilizations  have done so much with so little? 

The Turkish Getup

When Gray Cook mentions the Turkish Getup as the one free weight exercise he would recommend over any other, you pay attention. The mechanics of the move are best explained by the man himself. I have been dying to do this in the gym, but have been holding myself back, since I only had knee surgery a little over 2 months back..
Also this move has a lot of parts so after much youtube repeats, I finally tried it out at the gym... And though I topped out at the 18lb kettlebell, I can say I do not feel any ill effects.. I am definitely adding this to my routine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-MMnltV1h8      

The absurdity of complaining about US action in Libya

While the World watched, Col. Gaddafi, the despot who has ruled Oil rich Libya for close to 40 years, used an iron fist, and by some accounts , mercenaries, to crack down on dissidents, who threatended his hold over the North African nation.
Finally under the aegis of the UN , a no fly zone was finally imposed, so that Gadaffi , could not atleast use war planes against the over-matched rebels . As part of the effort to impose the no fly zone, it has been estimated, this would cost close to $800 million.
 Such spending has come in for criticism at home , where there is a new conciousness of the state of the deficit..
All this consternation, is at the very least perplexing and in my opinion misplaced.
Firstly, the reason why America, spends as much as it does on the military is to protect and project American interests abroad. If this was not the objective, America can get by spending the same as Canada and Mexico.
Some of the media attention on spending on the hostilities in Libya , has focused on the Tomahawk missiles (hundreds are being used).
I also saw an estimate on how much it cost to operate a military aircraft for an hour..
A couple of points need to be made here. Missiles have a shelf life.. If they are not used in a certain time frame, they will eventually have to be scrapped.
So firing off a tomahawk, is closer to using an egg once you have bought it , before it spoils.
Also what exactly do you believe the military does in peace time? They train and practice.Would anyone question the cost of operating military aircraft for such purposes in peace time?
Coming to think of it In have never heard a single protestation of the pointless fly pasts during the Superbowl.. Do you believe the NFL pays for that?

The $10.6 billion dollar question

For most of this decade, India has been  in the process of acquiring a 'Medium' Fighter aircraft in large numbers(approx 126). The size of this deal makes it the most eagerly anticipated decision(for the manufacturers in the fray)
But there are no easy options. Here are the drawbacks of each aircraft as I see it.
1. Eurofighter : at $100 million a piece, this might be too expensive.
2. Rafael: No way Rafael, wins this over the Eurofighter.
3. Saab Gripen: This might be a good solution, but Sweden is a politcial light weight
4. MIG-35: Does not find place in the Home Airforce (Russia)
5. and 6: F-16 and F-18: If we buy American and America turns around and supplies Pakistan with free airplanes to 'fight the taiban', I am not sure How we will live down that one.


      

No democracy for you

For the last month or so America has been captivated by the many pro-democracy demonstrations taking place in much of the middle east. For a region thats been battered by dictatorships for so long, such a transition is long overdue. I imagine most freedom loving and fundamentally democratic individuals would agree.
To a large extent, it would appear popular sentiment in America has backed the demonstrators in Egypt and the the other Arab nations.
This has however left many in Israel, and many Israeli backers in America squirming.
Since 1973 , there have been no wars launched by the Arabs against the Israeli's in large part due to the pro-American dictators in power.
So any regime change seems to be threatening he very security of Israel.
Lets set that aside for a second.
Go back to the second gulf war and 9-11. When the question was asked , whether America was paying too high a price for backing Israel over the Arabs, we were told , that we had to back the only democracy in a neighborhood filled with autocratic regimes. Nobody mentioned that the autocrats were in power partially due to America's backing..
 Now that those very same autocrats have been overthrown, and these Arab nations take their first tentative steps towards democracy, how can we not back them?
 How are one kind of people capable of democracy and another kind are not?
Backers of the theory, that democracy is good for us and not for them, will throw Hitler in your face, by saying  "Wasn't Hitler elected democratically? Look how that turned out.."
Yes Hitler won some 30% seats in parliamentary elections. But he was no democrat.. He violated every principle of democracy and used decidedly undemocratic methods on his opponents.
He was destined to lead Germany down the path of destruction, one way or another.
Will these Arab nations elect governments hostile to Israel?
I imagine that is not outside the realm of the possible. But a lot of the anger on the streets is for economic reasons too... That economies thrive in peace times, is no secret. How the Arab street will behave after this transformation is compete , I cannot predict, but I think there will be enough of breathing space, for work to commence on a two state solution , thereby ending the Arab-Israeli conflict..
Yes we are a long way off... but democracy in the arab world is not necessarily a bad thing.  
   

Don't hate on the crunch

Anytime you see an informercial, for a product that purports to solving your flabby abs woes.. the recurring theme seems to be , why that piece of equipment is better than the crunch.. Invariably the the explanation veers around to how crunches hurt your neck... and how the equipment in question(unimaginatively named Abs something)
does not hurt your neck.  I am no fitness expert, but I have done my share of crunches.. and done right, they really shred your abs.. Not once have I felt any discomfort in my neck.
So people the next time you pull your credit card out to buy the Ab thingamajig.. remember , don't buy it because its safer than a crunch.. (in all likelihood thats not true)...
   

How Bush was half right

When Bush invaded Iraq , the motives attributed to the invasion kept changing. First it was that Iraq was on its way to assembling a nuke... that was proved to be incorrect.. The term WMD was introduced into our lexicon, and also meant chemical and biological weapons(The same kind that Iraq used in the Iran Iraq war...).
That bogey was also disproved. And finally we were offered the Bush vision of a democratic Mideast, which would then not be such a hotbed of disgruntlement and extremism.
Its too early to tell, but the events in Tunisia and Egypt, might have set the ball rolling for a democratization of the mideast.  
But this is how it was always meant to be , the masses revolting against the rulers... Not democracy imposed from the outside by Uncle Sam.
How things will play out in both Tunisia and Egypt is not clear... What is , clear, there is a belief amongst the populace that by not accepting status quo they can change things..
That belief might have been missing or lacking upto this point.
Solutions imposed from th outside are typically resented by all parties.
Ask the Indian government who brokered peace between the LTTE and the Lankan government in the late 80's. How did that end? With the Lankan government supplying arms to the LTTE to take on the Indian Peace keeping force.
So in conclusion, Bush had one right idea (manybe in a thousand).. but he sure went about it the wrong way.