George, You have used a very interesting technique in this post, my friend. You have re-written a complete sentence that is NOT in a news report, in order, you say, to "translate" what a reporter had written, not in some foreign language, but in English. Thus you have created an entire issue that was not in the report and fitted it neatly into a preconceived opinion, which your ingenious "translation" made possible.
Wow! Isn't this how conflict can be created out of whole cloth, by someone saying "Don't believe what someone has said or done, but believe what I say he has said and done, because I can read between the lines, and you simpletons cannot"? Since you have alluded before to the US's sole interest in geopolitics being control of oil, etc. which you are again hinting at in this post, I wonder what you saw "between the lines" when the US left all that mid-east oil they had total control of in 1991 after chasing Saddam out of Kuwait, and went home? With all due respect, why would we want to forget about all that "world peace, common good" stuff, especially when it's beginning to happen, even in Palestine, unless you are either against the concept, or have a better idea of how to achieve this? I have a more plausible theory for you to consider without "reading between any lines" or re-writing my simple prose. I think the US has a strategic interest in helping India become a world power. First, because they have a common history as secular democracies. Second, because India provides the US with an unlimited source of brainpower and initiative, and the US, which essentially belongs to the world, has achieved great economic success in using the brains of its unending source of immigrants, by providing the high achievers with an encouraging environment. Third, since India is moving in that direction anyway, why not develop stronger bonds with India as a balance weight against the other evolving giant, China, whose communist philosophy and leadership may regress in the future from the positive strides they have made recently. --- George Pinto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me translate the report below as follows: > > "Bush, acting on behalf of Enron and his Texan energy connections, met with the External Affairs Minister K. Natwar Singh in the Oval Office and pressed for payment on the Enron plant in Maharashtra. The non-payment and delay by India has caused considerable angst among Enron's creditors and investors in Texas." > > One has to read between the lines and through diplomatic press releases. The hint of "energy sectors" mentioned in the report tells us what was really discussed and what the meeting was about. Forget all the "world peace, common good" fluff, that is for beauty pageants. > > --- Mario Goveia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > India a global power: President Bush > > > > Press Trust Of India > > Posted online: Thursday, April 14, 2005 at 2206 > hours IST > > Washington, April 14: Signaling a new warmth in > bilateral ties, President George W. Bush today > said US held India as a "global power" and wanted to > work together for mutual economic benefit and > cooperate in the civilian nuclear and other energy > sectors. > > During the 30-minute meeting with External Affairs > Minister K. Natwar Singh at the Oval Office, > Bush said US regarded India as a global power with > which the US wants to work very closely for the > common good, for world peace and for mutual economic > benefit. > > Bush told Singh that India and the US need to work > together in the energy sector that would > include cooperation in civilian nuclear energy. > Terming Indo-US relations as the "best we have had > for a very long time", Singh said India was > interested in having a "much closer relationship" > during Bush's second term in office. > > Briefing reporters after the meeting, Foreign > Secretary Shyam Saran said Bush told Singh that he > was looking forward to his trip to India, hopefully > within this year. The US President said he > "very much looks forward" to receiving Prime > Minister Manmohan Singh in Washington in the near > future. > > >
