Nepal's 'tyrant' king isolated by Maoist deal

Telegraph.co.uk ^ | 11/23/2005 | Thomas Bell

[Tailgunner Joe]

Dictatorship under the King or under the reds, either way its going to be a genocidal one.

Thanks for the moral equivalence argument. It show the weakness of your position. All you can hope to do is suggest that the king is no better than the communists, which is ridiculous of course.

India would condemn Nepal to a Khmer Rouge style slaughter and for what? To appease their own traitorous pro-Chinese commies.

[Heatseeker]

I disagree - I think it's a good deal and the Indian government deserves some kudos for making it happen. Remember Prince Sihanouk of Cambodia - these despots always seem to wind up in the arms of other despots, which means China in this case.

[Tailgunner Joe]

The Maoists demand a republic, just like the parties. They know that the worthless democRATS will lack the ruthlessness required to stand up to communist terror, just like the Indian democracy has no will to fight their own Maoist Naxalites.

[Tailgunner Joe]

Sure, the Khmer Rouge was preferable to Sihanouk. Just like Castro is better than Batista. Just like Mao was better than Chiang. Just like Lenin was better than the Czar.

[Gengis Khan]

"All you can hope to do is suggest that the king is no better than the communists, which is ridiculous of course. "

 

Should read as: "All you can hope to do is suggest that [a Pol Pot style dictator] is no better than the communists "

Yup thats right.

 

India would condemn Nepal to a Khmer Rouge style slaughter and for what? To appease their own traitorous pro-Chinese commies.

 

The states worst affected India due to Maoist terror are the ones ruled by the commies i.e West Bengal and Socialist ruled Bihar. The Commies and Socialists have lost the largest number of  their cadres to the Maoists and Naxals. And its the Commies that have wiped out the Maoists/Naxals in West Bengal. This can happen only in a democracy.

 

Neither dictatorship nor communism can replace democracy or can even be thought of as a temporary alternative untill conditions are "favourable for democracy to grow".

[Tailgunner Joe]

Drunk on Bhang milkshakes again?

[Tailgunner Joe]

Let India get it's way and you'll really see a Pol Pot style dictator. Pol Pot was the fourth greatest mass murderer in all of history you know.

Gyanendra is more like Pinochet. The more commies he kills, the better.

[Gengis Khan]

Let India get it's way there will be democracy.

The more commies he kills, the better.

How do you know they are all commies. Becoz the dictator sez so? They could be just about anybody opposed to dictatorship.

"The more commies he kills, the better."

That way he will surely end up bettering even Pol Pot. No point choosing one scumbag over another.

[Heatseeker]

If i understand you correctly, your premise is that if we support the King, he'll stay anticommunist and somehow morph into someone supportive of a democratic government.

I just don't see that happening, and moreover, if the UN can be made to disarm the Maoists (the idea of the UN making anybody do anything is a bit of a giggle, I'll grant you) and if they enter the political process, they will be swamped by the other parties.

[Tailgunner Joe]

The Nepalese people cannot be denied democracy for the fear that they may not makethe right choice.

Thank God the USA is a Republic and not a Democracy, so the people can't decide to throw their freedom away. In a country ruled by law instead of the will of the mob, rights are inalienable and cannot be sacrificed even voluntarily.

[Tailgunner Joe]

If the Maoists can be give a seat at the table, it can also be taken away.

How naive.

[Tailgunner Joe]

No I think if we support the king he'll kill commies. That is my concern, not spreading democracy. It's not America's job to fight for everyone else's democracy, but it is our responsibility to stop communism.

If the maoists are destroyed then the king will have no need to continue to suppress the political parties.

[Gengis Khan]

Ever tried one?

[Tailgunner Joe]

No point choosing one scumbag over another.

Then why do you choose Prachanda?

I'll take Pinochet over Allende. I'll take Fujimori over the Shining Path.

[Gengis Khan]

Thank God the USA is a Republic and not a Democracy, so the people can't decide to throw their freedom away. In a country ruled by law instead of the will of the mob, rights are inalienable and cannot be sacrificed even voluntarily.

India is a Republic and also a Democracy, and thank God for that. Here one individual does not decide the law, and yet ones rights are as much inalienable and there is still as much freedom.

[Gengis Khan]

"Then why do you choose Prachanda?"

I didnt.

"I'll take Pinochet over Allende. I'll take Fujimori over the Shining Path."

There are better examples to find than any of those you cited if only Nepal choose to look at India.

Personally I prefer a progressive pro-reforms (preferably a Hindu) party to come to power.

[Tailgunner Joe]

"Democracy is the road to socialism." - Karl Marx

"Communism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen." – Leon Trotsky

"Democracy is indispensable to socialism. The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin

“You can never have a revolution, in order to establish a democracy. You must have a democracy in order to have a revolution.” - G. K. Chesterton

[Tailgunner Joe]

If you support the overthrow of the king, then you want what the maoists want and are on their side.

[Tailgunner Joe]

Nepal is the only officially Hindu state in the world and the king is a Hindu god.

[Gengis Khan]

"If you support the overthrow of the king, then you want what the maoists want and are on their side."

Thats like saying if you dont want British rule over India then you want the Japs and Nazis to take over and are on their side.

Weak argument.