India–United Kingdom relations : Updates

Team Anglo-phobia still trying to dampen any sign of improving relations. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 
Hopefully the _Anonymous_, randomradio and jetray types will stay out of their own way. Or if not, perhaps their fellow countrymen could tie them to a tree out of the way somewhere - dealer's choice as to how you tie them.

Bill Clinton ( 1993) - It's the economy , stupid.

Rishi Sunak ( 2023) - it's still the economy , stupid , with the FTA with India at the top of the list.
 
Hopefully the _Anonymous_, randomradio and jetray types will stay out of their own way. Or if not, perhaps their fellow countrymen could tie them to a tree out of the way somewhere - dealer's choice as to how you tie them.

Fair enough but this is a loose bone thrown our way. As far as I'm aware every permanent member except China supports permanent membership for India. China will never support this which makes any support from others ring hollow. As long as One permanent member can veto a resolution not in their favour/interest, the UN will always be ineffective.
 
Why is it that everytime _Anonymous_ posts he thinks he's countering but really he's just proving my point. His own quote:

The Democratic Socialist Coalition (Spanish: Coalición Socialista Democrática, CSD)[1] was a Cuban political coalition, led by Fulgencio Batista. The party was founded in 1939, and served for the 1940 general elections, won by Batista. The founding parties and members were four: the Liberal Party (liberal), the Nationalist Union Party (conservative), the Communist Revolutionary Union (communist), and the Democratic National Association (conservative).

Yeah, he banned the Communist Party because he recognised it as the complete and utter PoS it was and proved to be only 8 years later.

Castro was always a Communist, hence:
You know what Marxism is right? Karl Marx etc.



Rebellion and Marxism: 1947–1950​

I joined the people; I grabbed a rifle in a police station that collapsed when it was rushed by a crowd. I witnessed the spectacle of a totally spontaneous revolution ... [T]hat experience led me to identify myself even more with the cause of the people. My still incipient Marxist ideas had nothing to do with our conduct – it was a spontaneous reaction on our part, as young people with Martí-an, anti-imperialist, anti-colonialist and pro-democratic ideas.
– Fidel Castro on the Bogotazo, 2009[22]
In June 1947, Castro learned of a planned expedition to overthrow the right-wing government of Rafael Trujillo, a US ally, in the Dominican Republic.[23] Being President of the University Committee for Democracy in the Dominican Republic, Castro joined the expedition.[24] The military force consisted of around 1,200 troops, mostly Cubans and exiled Dominicans, and they intended to sail from Cuba in July 1947. Grau's government stopped the invasion under US pressure, although Castro and many of his comrades evaded arrest.[25] Returning to Havana, Castro took a leading role in student protests against the killing of a high school pupil by government bodyguards.[26] The protests, accompanied by a crackdown on those considered communists, led to violent clashes between activists and police in February 1948, in which Castro was badly beaten.[27] At this point, his public speeches took on a distinctly leftist slant by condemning social and economic inequality in Cuba. In contrast, his former public criticisms had centered on condemning corruption and US imperialism.[27]

Democracy was introduced in various stages in the UK.

Castro regime made zero attempts or progress in 64 years, lasting well into the 21st century, but did plenty killing of civilians in the meantime.

You have no answer to the rest of the post. Your 'anti-western hero' was simply a murderer of his own people, same as your other heroes like Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad and Putin.
Fair enough but this is a loose bone thrown our way. As far as I'm aware every permanent member except China supports permanent membership for India. China will never support this which makes any support from others ring hollow. As long as One permanent member can veto a resolution not in their favour/interest, the UN will always be ineffective.
IIRC China was a different country when it was given permanent membership, so perhaps there is a loophole there to rescind it, or make continued recognition conditional on them not vetoing India.
 
IIRC China was a different country when it was given permanent membership, so perhaps there is a loophole there to rescind it, or make continued recognition conditional on them not vetoing India.
This would invalidate every resolution passed and vetoed to date so I would say this is impossible. Likely India will never be a permanent member. Short of every member nation calling for reforms, nothing will change. Tbh, I don't think the Indian government cares anymore.
 
Why is it that everytime _Anonymous_ posts he thinks he's countering but really he's just proving my point. His own quote:

This is the reason I mentioned why cognitive recognition is considered vital in behavioral sciences failing which there's little to distinguish humans from animals . Actually I stand corrected it's animals from inanimate objects. Which is why Paddys fail all such tests comprehensively & not a single Paddy finds himself in MENSA. Ok that's an exaggeration. Paddys are present in the building housing MENSA to cater to the needs of members there as menials just that they don't get to be members.

Batista was endorsed by the original Communist Party of Cuba (later known as the Popular Socialist Party), which at the time had little significance and no probability of an electoral victory



The party was founded in 1939, and served for the 1940 general elections, won by Batista. The founding parties and members were four: the Liberal Party (liberal), the Nationalist Union Party (conservative), the Communist Revolutionary Union (communist), and the Democratic National Association (conservative).


Following Fulgencio Batista's 1952 coup d'état, the party itself was banned, but it managed to continue publishing its newspaper.



Now read together what do these snippets indicate :

1.) Batista was supported by a coalition of parties of which the Communists were but one of the constituents yet it's most insignificant one as Batista initially supported labour laws favouring workers & labour unions earning their support for his first Presidential bid .

2.) When the Communist party was at it's weakest he didn't hesitate to ban it .

Does that make him a communist or an opportunist ?

Yeah, he banned the Communist Party because he recognised it as the complete and utter PoS it was and proved to be only 8 years later.


Castro was always a Communist, hence:

You know what Marxism is right? Karl Marx etc.

Consolidating leadership: 1959–1960

Main articles: Agrarian reforms in Cuba and La Coubre explosion
On 16 February 1959, Castro was sworn in as Prime Minister of Cuba.[136] In April, he visited the US on a charm offensive where President Dwight D. Eisenhower would not meet with him, but instead sent Vice President Richard Nixon, whom Castro instantly disliked.[137] After meeting Castro, Nixon described him to Eisenhower as: "The one fact we can be sure of is that Castro has those indefinable qualities which made him a leader of men. Whatever we may think of him he is going to be a great factor in the development of Cuba and very possibly in Latin American affairs generally. He seems to be sincere. He is either incredibly naive about Communism or under Communist discipline-my guess is the former...His ideas as to how to run a government or an economy are less developed than those of almost any world figure I have met in fifty countries. But because he has the power to lead...we have no choice but at least try to orient him in the right direction".[138]


This is Nixon's assessment of Castro. The US couldn't shed it's suspicion or hostility of Castro spurred on by an influential group of emigres from Cuba greatly affected by Castro's nationalization campaign & of course the mafia whose properties he'd seized .

To add to the confusion , Nixon lost a closely fought election & in came Kennedy whose father Joe Kennedy's ties to the mafia from his earlier days as a bootlegger during the prohibition which also helped his son win some key swing states thanks to mafia support who then it is alleged pushed his son to pursue a belligerent line pushed by the mafia as payback for their help which resulted in the Bay of Pigs invasion which was bankrolled , staffed & armed to a significant degree by the mafia.

It's another matter that both JFK & RFK later went after the Mafia in an act totally unconnected to this issue & both were assassinated allegedly by the mafia who felt betrayed by the Kennedys.

This was the tipping point & after this there was no prospect of peace & peaceful co existence with the US in Castro's worldview . He turned communist & towards the SU with a vengeance.

This is another very good instance of cognitive dissonance where Paddy blindly links articles here which he himself doesn't read & if he does , he can't comprehend it. We suspect the latter given the torturous yrs we've been putting up with it .


Read Nixon's assessment of Castro to understand the meaning of the difference between being influenced by Communist thoughts & becoming a committed Marxist Leninist. I can't find anybody who could've put it better & Nixon was as anti communist as they come.

Democracy was introduced in various stages in the UK.

Historians , constitutional historians , the legal profession & academics widely consider the birth of democracy in the UK to have occured on 15 June 1215. Why this date ? Good question. That was the date the Magna Carta was signed .

Magna Carta still forms an important symbol of liberty today, often cited by politicians and campaigners, and is held in great respect by the British and American legal communities, Lord Denning describing it as "the greatest constitutional document of all times—the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot"


You enacted women's suffrage thru an act of parliament in 1918 & universal adult suffrage in 1928 . In between you had the suffrage granted to Catholic citizens thru an act in 1791 which was denied them during their persecution by the Protestants who ofcourse lead the government & was represented by the Crown .

So from 1215 to 1928 represents a journey of 700 + yrs . If you took 7 centuries to realise democracy in the form it is found in the UK today with all the upheavals in between like for instance the Commonwealth under "Lord Protector " Oliver Cromwell who launched his own murderous wars on the Royalists , his opponents & of course every Englishman's favourite ethnicity the Paddys , how much time will you afford to other societies / nations to fully develop their democracies ?

Incidentally Cromwell is hailed by many today as one of the foremost champions of democracy ,his wars & excesses against the Paddys notwithstanding.


Castro regime made zero attempts or progress in 64 years, lasting well into the 21st century, but did plenty killing of civilians in the meantime.

You have no answer to the rest of the post. Your 'anti-western hero' was simply a murderer of his own people, same as your other heroes like Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad and Putin.

IIRC China was a different country when it was given permanent membership, so perhaps there is a loophole there to rescind it, or make continued recognition conditional on them not vetoing India.

See Castro as the "Lord Protector " of the Cuban people - the Cuban Cromwell if you like & everything will fall in place.

You may also want to check on Batista's bloody second presidency which sparked the Cuban Revolution in the first place & the many reprisal killings that followed in the wake of his departure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
So was every historical empire of that period and before, including India's own Chola Empire. India had several such empires before Britain had one.

So Britain's invasions are justified as there were historical precedents but Moscow's actions aren't? That's some logic there, Paddy.

Russia justifies it's actions citing the Western realignment of Ukraine that threatened Russia's neighborhood security.

Brits meanwhile want to threaten India with whatever feeble military capability they have, because they feel "uneasy" about our rise.

That's when we don't even give many damns about you- the files of your much vaunted trade deal are gathering dust in some Delhi office.

I would consider the Russia argument to be more credible, Paddy.

. I guess you don't have to worry about that though, given that you can't actually make your own weapons.

Hilarious coming from a country that depends upon borrowed SLBMs for it's nuclear deterrent & needs a multi-national JV to make a short range SAM.

It's one thing being anti-British but collaborating with those running gas chambers

Your national hero once commented that he is "strongly in favour of using poisoned gas" against "uncivilised" Indian tribes, Paddy. SCB being an Indian would feel it's more pertinent to oust such genocide perpetrators from home rather than bothering about gas chambers elsewhere.

The moral high-ground you're claiming doesn't exist, Paddy.

He also wanted to use M Devices against the rebellious tribes of northern India. "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes," he declared in one secret memorandum. He criticised his colleagues for their "squeamishness", declaring that "the objections of the India Office to the use of gas against natives are unreasonable. Gas is a more merciful weapon than [the] high explosive shell, and compels an enemy to accept a decision with less loss of life than any other agency of war."

He ended his memo on a note of ill-placed black humour: "Why is it not fair for a British artilleryman to fire a shell which makes the said native sneeze?" he asked. "It is really too silly."

Well it's simply ridiculous to hold a weapons vendor accountable for their use

If India were to export a few units of guided rocket artillery & short range BMs to Russia right now, we wouldn't see a great hue & cry from the "Western Bloc". Right, Paddy?

Let's see if the BAe survives this decade under British ownership

It's absolutely comical that they had to merge all of their defense companies into one, to make it even self sustaining.

British Aerospace. We also make ships. :LOL:
 
Last edited:
This would invalidate every resolution passed and vetoed to date so I would say this is impossible. Likely India will never be a permanent member. Short of every member nation calling for reforms, nothing will change. Tbh, I don't think the Indian government cares anymore.
I would be happy to remove unilateral vetoes wrt modern day invasions. I.e. no country should be veto a resolution to declare their invasion illegal unilaterally. For historical stuff I would keep the veto though. For new members, I would say 80% support from a GA vote (not counting abstentions in the total) and no more than one veto should cut it.
 
Yes Anonymous, Battista was a Communist originally, says so in plain English. His massive support for unions for instance.

Read it, but it doesn't change the fact that Castro was idealistically a Marxist-Leninist from the start. I've heard lots of leftists defend Castro but never found anyone dumb enough to declare that he wasn't a Communist.:ROFLMAO:

Oh wow, JFK was killed by the mafia now? :ROFLMAO:

Comparing time 700 years ago with time in the late 20th century is a non-starter, and following an example is easy. Making the example isn't. E.g. it took mathematicians thousands of years to come up with differentiation, I learned it inside a year, so I must be a genius right?:ROFLMAO:

Castro as Lord Protector? I guess Mao was too huh?:ROFLMAO:


15 The Overall Death Count​


Fidel Castro has killed or ordered the deaths of so many people that there isn’t even an exact death toll. The number can only be guessed and is said to be in the high thousands. Professor Armando Lago believes that this number could be in the 10,000s but is more likely to be closer to 100,000. Armando Lago is a Harvard-trained economist who spent many years studying exactly what the revolution cost the Cuban people. Lago equated that 78,000 people died trying to flee dictatorship while 5300 are known to have lost their lives fighting for communism in the Bay of Pigs and Escambray Mountains. Adding onto these already astronomical numbers, 14,000 were killed in Fidel Castro’s revolutionary adventures abroad and he ordered 50,000 soldiers to fight alongside a 1980s Soviet-backed regime in Angola. Despite these huge numbers people are still mourning the death of Fidel Castro, their reason is understandably complicated.

14 Appointing Raul Castro​


One of the crappiest things that Fidel Castro did was leave the world with Raul Castro leading the nation of Cuba. Raul Castro has served as President of the Council of State of Cuba and the President of the Council of Ministers of Cuba since 2008. Raul Castro was close with Che Guevara and was most well known for carrying forth high-profile kidnappings of US and Canadian nationals. He assumed presidential duties on July 31, 2006 after it was announced by Fidel Castro’s personal secretary of state-run television. Though he was responsible for some despicable human rights violations himself, Raul Castro continues to be the leader of rebuilding a tattered relationship with the United States. Despite being of blood relation to Fidel Castro there might be some hope that Raul is cut from a different cloth. After a visit to the Vatican in 2015 Raul Castro stated that he might consider returning to the Roman Catholic Church, a statement that would probably make his brother’s blood boil.

13 The Canimar River Massacre​


Three young people seized a somewhat full tourism boat that was carrying about 60-100 people near Matanzas Bay in the ‘70s. During their heroic attempt to escape from Cuban revolutionaries the young people were taken out by rapid machine gun fire and left to drown. The exact death toll isn’t known but there were approximately 50 men, women, and children on board that day. Of all of those people 10 survived and only 11 bodies were pulled from the water. On the boat were children aged 3, 9, 11, and 17 years old among other innocent civilians. Despite being a horrific display of power and violence the Canimar River Massacre also marks another milestone in the Castro dictatorship. This awful event also marks proof that Cuban people were not permitted to leave their nation, a direct violation of human liberties and rights. These sorts of displays attribute to Cuba having one of the highest suicide rates in the world.

12 The Execution Of Children​


There are a total of 95 minors documented that were killed by the order of Fidel Castro. Of these teens and children 22 died by firing squad and 32 were killed in extrajudicial assassination. The family of 15 year old Owen Delgado Temprana took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy before Cuban revolutionaries stormed in and beat him to death. There were also many people who died while incarcerated, often times the guards would mark the death “heart attack” but witness statements tell us another tale. There were a total of 2199 reported prison deaths during this Socialist regime, one of which was a 17 year old denied medical attention. The young boy was found deceased in a pool of his own blood and vomit. Three children also died in 1971 when a Cuban navy boat sunk the ship by ramming the boat, to make it all the more horrific, their mother was eaten by sharks in front of them.

11 Killing To Sell The Blood​


A total number of 166 Cubans, members of the military and civilians, were rounded up on May 27, 1966 and executed after a total of seven pints of their blood could be harvested. The blood sold for $50 per pint in Communist Vietnam to obtain hard currency while also contributing to the Vietcong Communist aggression. Extracting the amount of blood Castro desired to be sold in Vietcong would always result in a person suffering from cerebral anemia. Cerebral anemia causes someone to go through paralysis and unconsciousness. In this blatant disregard for human rights the subjects were first drained of their blood to the point of cerebral anemia before being carried on a stretcher down a long hall where they would be killed. This was reported by the InterAmerican Human Rights Commission almost an entire year later on April 7, 1967. These kind of deaths were nothing at the hands of gleeful murderer Che Guevara in these hard times for Cubans.

10 Fidel Castro And Gay Rights​


In some of his earliest records Fidel Castro has spoken about his absolute hate of homosexuals. He even believed that the “deviancy” of homosexuality makes them unable to be true revolutionaries and as such all homosexuals were sent away to UMAPS camps alongside Jehovah’s Witnesses and vagrants. In 1965 police began rounding up gay men which sparked one of the first gay rights protests in history. The persecution of gay Cubans inspired the United States activist group the Mattachine society to hold protests for two straight days in front of the White House and the United Nations, these were the very first gay rights protests to date. This was one of a couple practices that Fidel Castro brought over to Cuba from Nazi Germany. Even after UMAPS closed homosexual people were generally fired from their jobs and treated like beasts instead of men. Fidel Castro has even referred to homosexual men as “worms” in his time in power.

9 Persecution Of Catholics​


Almost immediately after being elected Fidel Castro released propaganda citing Catholics as “social scum.” By the 1960’s Fidel Castro had banned Christmas from being celebrated on the island. He made sure to shut down churches, silence priests and parishioners, and monitored all church activities that could possibly be going on in Cuba at the time. Before his time in office Cuba was 90% Roman Catholic, it was even found to be a pilgrimage center at one time. Cuban Catholics were vigorous lovers of their faith and practiced with an almost severe passion before Castro’s persecution. With that in mind it’s hard to believe that in the last 50 years not one church has been built, although there have been some papal visits to the island. Now that Fidel has passed away we still can’t be sure that religious freedom will be granted, but the Cuban people may be on their way back to Winters with Christmas and Springs filled with Easter celebrations once more.

8 Violent Media For Shock Value​


Fidel Castro has always utilized the mainstream media to expand his domineering presence over the people of Cuba. The Cuba Archive documents the deaths and executions of Fidel Castro since he took over power in Cuba in 1959 and the total deaths by Firing Squad are documented at 3615.

To establish fear in the hearts of those that didn’t believe in their revolution Fidel Castro and Ernesto “Che” Guevara took photos and videos of these brutal executions of men, women, and children. Che once said that judicial proof was unnecessary before being sent to the firing squad. Che considered these practices were for the archaic bourgeois and that what they were doing was creating a revolution. As the quote from Che himself reads, “And a revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate.” To add onto this blatant disregard for human life there were 1253 extrajudicial killings attributed to the Castro regime.

7 The Treatment Of Dr. Hilda Molina​


Doctor Hilda Molina is the former chief neurosurgeon for Cuba who also served in the Cuban National Assembly. She founded the neurosurgery center in Cuba in 1987, and by 1991 the scientific center was the most important in the nation. 1991 was also the year that Julio Teja Perez, the former Cuban Minister of Health, said that she would cease helping Cuban nationals and only serve those paying in U.S. dollars. Molina's answer to this change was to resign immediately and renounce her seat in the Cuban National Assembly.

Despite stepping away, Molina was still continuously subject to a mob like retaliation from the government. On top of the abuse Molina suffered, she was forbidden to travel outside of Cuba to see her family. After decades of being denied transport, Dr. Hilda Molina was finally granted a visa to visit Argentina and see her family in 2009.

6 Restricting The Movement Of Cubans To Havana​

It was in a public address in the Spring of 1997 that Fidel Castro announced the government would be halting all movement to Havana. The justification for this disgraceful slashing of civil liberties was that free movement to and from the capital would endanger the security of those that resided in the capital. He also made note that there was overpopulation and overcrowding inhibiting the happiness of Havana residents. Fidel Castro gathered police and assigned them to identifying and indexing all of those that lived in Havana. Cubans were permitted to visit on day trips to Havana but police frequently patrolled the streets checking IDs. If anyone was found living in Havana illegally they were fined and sent back to their home country. With Decree 217 Castro’s regime evicted 1600 residents of Havana back to their home countries and one month after the initial purge many more residents were told that they had 48 hours to relocate to their place of origin.

5 Military Units To Aid Production​


Due to the Spanish translation these camps are colloquially referred to as UMAPS to Cubans and Cuban-Americans. These agricultural labor camps were reserved for anyone who could not serve in the military because they were conscientious objectors, homosexuals, or political enemies of the revolution. It has always been rumored that UMAPS were ordered by Fidel Castro and carried out by his brother Raul Castro, the current leader of Cuba. Often times people were kidnapped into UMAPS with a false letter to report for military service and then put into a truck, bus, or train on an eight-hour journey straight to the UMAPS agricultural camp. Each camp held about 120 internees split into units of 10, everyone wore identical uniforms, weren’t permitted to carry firearms, and received no military training.

Gay men were split up from everyone else, most of the anger and violence was directed towards the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the camps. These peaceful people were often beaten, had their mouths stuffed with dirt, threatened, and even tied up naked outside without food or water. Many guards were executed for their immense torture of inmates at UMAPS.

4 Persecution Of Jehovah’s Witnesses​


Once Fidel Castro came into power in Cuba Jehovah’s Witnesses were considered “social deviants” alongside vagrants and homosexuals. During a portion of the 1960’s all Jehovah’s Witnesses were sent to UMAPS camps to be “re-educated”. By July 1, 1974 all Jehovah’s Witnesses were officially banned and every church was closed. Many Jehovah’s Witnesses across Cuba began to rebel against Castro after their religion was banned by the revolutionary. Those that celebrated the faith refused to serve in the military, thus being jailed for up to two years. It is also reported that the children of many Jehovah’s Witnesses refused to salute the flag, causing sometimes violent repercussions. This religious sect is often persecuted and Jehovah’s Witnesses in Benin, Bulgaria, Canada, Eritrea, Germany, India, and more places tended to find suffering at every turn. Fidel Castro did not appreciate the celebration of religion in his state, whether it was Catholicism or Jehovah’s Witnesses.

3 Brothers To The Rescue Aircraft Shot Down​


In the Winter of 1996 two small passenger airplanes were shot down by Cuban Air Force Mikoyan MiG-29UB. The International Civil Aviation Organization investigated the event and reported that Cuban authorities notified the United States of multiple airspace violations for two years before this incident. Although Cuban officials and the American government had issued warnings of flying in this airspace the pilots went along anyways to release pamphlets for the Brothers to the Rescue. This activist group was started by Cuban exiles and is widely known for their opposition to the Cuban government. The pilots were on a mission to free more Cuban people and many reports showed that the use of force against them by the Cuban government verged on cruelty. After the event, many Cuban Americans called upon non-Cuban Americans to rise up against this dictator. A documentary on this subject, entitled Shoot Down, was released in 2006 and was later updated and rereleased two years later.

2 13 De Marzo Tugboat Massacre​


This is the name that Cuban-Americans have given the event that occurred on the 13th of March in 1994. On this day about 72 Cuban men, women, and children were attempting to escape dictator Fidel Castro’s reign of terror on a hijacked tugboat. At that time all water vessels were owned by the state so it was illegal for these people to occupy the boat, illegal or not what happened next was a tragedy and a crime. Only seven miles from the coast of Havana at about three in the morning the Cuban coast guard maliciously rammed the tugboat repeatedly until it starting sinking. As the boat sunk Cuban officials were spraying those on the tugboat with firehoses. Only 31 survivors were pulled from the water after reports that Cuban officials refused help to some of the survivors in the water. 41 Cubans died in the water that day at the hand of Fidel Castro’s officials.

1 Fidel Castro Firing Squads​


These infamous firing squads are referred to as “el paredon” or “the wall” and every type of person, young or old, was sent to the firing squad. Fidel and his compadres would simply execute any person that disagreed with their betrayal of the Revolution. For more than 50 years people were sent to “el paredon” but being executed wasn’t the worst part of the experience. Prisoners were forced to wait in line in view of the executioner so that they had to witness each person before them be gunned down. 1961 was the height of Castro’s firing squads with Time Magazine entitling an article “Cuba: Year of the Firing Squad” in the February issue of their publication. Time only took this monicker from Cuba’s Agrarian Reform Chief at the time Antonio Nunez Jimenez, he coined the term while addressing a group of his armed militia. It was their goal to create the most formidable execution wall that has ever existed, and many Cuban Americans would tell you that they unfortunately succeeded.

As yourself the honest question, if The Bay of Pigs had succeeded, or Battista remained in power, could Cuba have ended up any worse?
 
No historical empires were acceptable but after WWII a system of law was put into place, and invading a country with an elected leader in the 21st century is something very different to historical empires. Ukraine chose to realign itself, same as all the other Eastern European states that got the choice.

The 1925 Geneva Protocol banned the use of such, Britain has no used it since. Both Russia and Russian backed groups have.
Anyway, back on ignore for you two. Several years have passed, and nothing but hollow arguments, false equivalents and selective responses. Same as several years ago. Nobody needs all that typing.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Amal
Fair enough but this is a loose bone thrown our way. As far as I'm aware every permanent member except China supports permanent membership for India. China will never support this which makes any support from others ring hollow. As long as One permanent member can veto a resolution not in their favour/interest, the UN will always be ineffective.

It's how the US and UK operate. They promised Ukraine NATO membership knowing fully well that France and Germany will veto it anyway. There's always someone ready to pull the rug.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: D68 and Rajput Lion
So Britain's invasions are justified as there were historical precedents but Moscow's actions aren't? That's some logic there, Paddy.

Russia justifies it's actions citing the Western realignment of Ukraine that threatened Russia's neighborhood security.

Brits meanwhile want to threaten India with whatever feeble military capability they have, because they feel "uneasy" about our rise.

That's when we don't even give many damns about you- the files of your much vaunted trade deal are gathering dust in some Delhi office.

I would consider the Russia argument to be more credible, Paddy.



Hilarious coming from a country that depends upon borrowed SLBMs for it's nuclear deterrent & needs a multi-national JV to make a short range SAM.



Your national hero once commented that he is "strongly in favour of using poisoned gas" against "uncivilised" Indian tribes, Paddy. SCB being an Indian would feel it's more pertinent to oust such genocide perpetrators from home rather than bothering about gas chambers elsewhere.

The moral high-ground you're claiming doesn't exist, Paddy.

He also wanted to use M Devices against the rebellious tribes of northern India. "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes," he declared in one secret memorandum. He criticised his colleagues for their "squeamishness", declaring that "the objections of the India Office to the use of gas against natives are unreasonable. Gas is a more merciful weapon than [the] high explosive shell, and compels an enemy to accept a decision with less loss of life than any other agency of war."

He ended his memo on a note of ill-placed black humour: "Why is it not fair for a British artilleryman to fire a shell which makes the said native sneeze?" he asked. "It is really too silly."



If India were to export a few units of guided rocket artillery & short range BMs to Russia right now, we wouldn't see a great hue & cry from the "Western Bloc". Right, Paddy?



It's absolutely comical that they had to merge all of their defense companies into one, to make it even self sustaining.

British Aerospace. We also make ships. :LOL:

Churchill was more screwed up than Hitler. At least Hitler used his hate as a means to an end, where he believed he was doing it for the good of the people. But Churchill hated for the sake of hate.
 
OMG the ability of people on this forum to empathise with every mass murderer who happens to be anti-Westerm is incredible. Rattling on about Jallianwala Bagh in 1919, when Russia has perpetrated several Jallianwala Baghs in the last 12 months alone. Now we're on to defending Hitler. Next up, Chairman Mao's benevolent reign.
 
OMG the ability of people on this forum to empathise with every mass murderer who happens to be anti-Westerm is incredible. Rattling on about Jallianwala Bagh in 1919, when Russia has perpetrated several Jallianwala Baghs in the last 12 months alone. Now we're on to defending Hitler. Next up, Chairman Mao's benevolent reign.
In all the Famines perpetrated by the British in India from 1757 onwards it's estimated that ~ 100 million people died with the Great Bengal Famine the last of the lot engineered by the invalid stutterer who died in his own waste , taking 3-4 million lives . What had that to do with Stalin Mao or Hitler?

As far as Ukraine goes, there's the Yemen conflict going on since 2014 with it's roots in earlier conflicts , fairly unnoticed by the world which's claimed a few thousands of lives , then there's the civil War in Somalia, Sudan, the Sahel, West Africa, etc going on since a few decades. I haven't even brought up Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq etc where the death toll runs into millions .

What about at least acknowledging them Paddy knowing you won't be sympathizing with them partly coz they aren't white nor European, you perpetrated a good deal of those conflicts & they don't involve Russia ?

pls note @Lolwa
 
Brits meanwhile want to threaten India with whatever feeble military capability they have, because they feel "uneasy" about our rise.

Here's a German getting schooled.

The West are rapidly losing their influence in the Global South.
OMG the ability of people on this forum to empathise with every mass murderer who happens to be anti-Westerm is incredible. Rattling on about Jallianwala Bagh in 1919, when Russia has perpetrated several Jallianwala Baghs in the last 12 months alone. Now we're on to defending Hitler. Next up, Chairman Mao's benevolent reign.

British rule killed more Indians than Mao killed Chinese. But they don't teach you that in your schools.
 
I would be happy to remove unilateral vetoes wrt modern day invasions. I.e. no country should be veto a resolution to declare their invasion illegal unilaterally. For historical stuff I would keep the veto though. For new members, I would say 80% support from a GA vote (not counting abstentions in the total) and no more than one veto should cut it.
Veto ban on invasions sounds like you are basing this idea off of the current Ukraine situation... You and Westerners collectively need to realise that the war in Ukraine means nothing to the rest of the World outside of Europe, I would even wager that the Americans aren't as enraged as they might appear as it is weakening Russia to breaking point. It will take them a decade to recover from this. And re-armement of EU powers benifits the US as they can concentrate on the Indo-Pacific which is now the main theater of contention between the two largest powers, USA and PRC.

Anyway, in terms of the UN; as it is it's an ineffective organisation where the five permanent members essentially fill the role of mob bosses. It's just a cartel. Short of a complete overhaul, nothing will change and none of the permanent members are willing to have their power diluted.
 
Veto ban on invasions sounds like you are basing this idea off of the current Ukraine situation... You and Westerners collectively need to realise that the war in Ukraine means nothing to the rest of the World outside of Europe, I would even wager that the Americans aren't as enraged as they might appear as it is weakening Russia to breaking point. It will take them a decade to recover from this. And re-armement of EU powers benifits the US as they can concentrate on the Indo-Pacific which is now the main theater of contention between the two largest powers, USA and PRC.

Anyway, in terms of the UN; as it is it's an ineffective organisation where the five permanent members essentially fill the role of mob bosses. It's just a cartel. Short of a complete overhaul, nothing will change and none of the permanent members are willing to have their power diluted.
A veto ban on singular unaccompanied vetoes by aggressors would prevent lunatics vetoing rulings against their lunacy.
 
Here's a German getting schooled.

The West are rapidly losing their influence in the Global South.
Can't even understand what he's saying.
British rule killed more Indians than Mao killed Chinese. But they don't teach you that in your schools.
Bullshit. Given that 7000 Indians per day were dying from famine/malnutrition even in the early 21st century in peacetime with the advantages of modern technology and aid, it's ridiculous for you to even try equate every single death as the sole responsibility of Britain. More people died from famine in China than in India between 1751 and 1947. Famine in India existed since the Cholas (and likely before).


Your famines were down to monsoons and generally poor/erratic weather. Try reading:


In the 19th century there was a global famine due to climate conditions. Was that Britain's fault too?

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Domobran7
Castro was no communist either. In the beginning he made no attempt to contact the SU nor did he respond to their overtures . He was keen to patch up with the US but he had antagonized a very small set of powerful people thru the revolution , nationalization of resources & redistribution of land namely the American mafia & the landed elite the ones who profited the most in Batista's regime & now stood to lose the most. They pressurized Kennedy & the US administration into sponsoring the Bay of Pigs invasion which sent a panicked Castro into the hands of the USSR . The rest is history . @Domobran7
I have found both said:

It is difficult to know, because what Castro himself said cannot be trusted. Communists are, by their very nature, liars. So if Castro was not a Communist, he will have said he was not a Communist. If Castro was a Communist, he still will have said he was not a Communist if he believed it brought him advantage. As for reporting, some saw Castro as Communist and others did not - yet thet is questionable by itself, as American journalists were often very sympathetic towards Communist revolutionaries.

Still, fact is that once he gained power, Castro definitely supported Communist policies to a T.