as an Indian, whose father saw the pain of communism in the times when india was a soviet satellite and later became capitalist in the 1990s i hope the prime minister makes a good decision.

Ultimately, it will happen because the more war there is, the more crime will be revealed.

do you honestly think he will? after watching the BBC documentary it seems like he's an evil little fuck.

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 85%. (I'm a bot)

> NEW DELHI - German Chancellor Olaf Scholz sought assurances Saturday from India that it would support, or at least not block, Western efforts to isolate Russia for waging a devastating war against Ukraine.

> ADVERTISEMENT. Philipp Ackermann, the German ambassador to India, said he understands why India is buying large quantities of oil from Russia.

> Asked whether such a deal with India, which has been a major buyer of arms from Russia, could be struck, Scholz said he had "The impression that the quality of German technology enjoys great recognition and appreciate here."

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: India^#1 Scholz^#2 German^#3 Russia^#4 Modi^#5

it's true he may have some biases which are wrong. but he is the only capitalist leader we have had in 75 years of independence

soviet damage takes time to heal

[removed]

he committed genocide against Muslims. is that what you mean by biases?

actually i think it's more like a compromised computer, hardware level.

and more money for them to make, so they will suppress.

[deleted]

Well the point is whatever u feel he isn't going anywhere. It's almost a guarantee that he will win the next elections and can just hope it's by a smaller margin.

The opposition is complete and utter trash.

So we can at best wish that he tries to get away from Russia. India-western relations are at the highest point now than any other point of time since indian independence. It's a good time to strike the hammer and make sure that the US is completely allied with us and doesn't try to fuck around in Pakistan

and the INC , which is the opposition party was responsible for bringing tanks into the holiest temple in Sikhism in an attempt to arrest a terrorist, and then after the Prime Minister was assassinated by her Sikh guards, the resulting Anti-sikh riots killed 2,800 to 8000 Sikhs.

No one was really found accountable or arrested, as they were the ruling government at the time and stymied attempts to charge culprits. For some reason as well no one considers this to be a genocide. They also blocked films that were critical of them or talked about the riots as well as their role in the emergency.

So yes, when both sides have shit on their hands, it's not too dissimilar.

i appreciate the info, but i'm not too sure how aligned the west is with india. enemy of our enemy, yes.

for example, this week there was a bunch of protests from indians in Washington due to legislation being proposed that makes it illegal for people to discriminate against others because of the caste they belong to.

most Americans see the caste system as discrimination/classism (because it is) so it seems like indians who have fled their third world homeland to the US now want to employ the same hate tactics that has turned india into what it is (or has kept it as it is for as long as it has been that way).

i get the impression that indians are entirely unaware of the monster they have running their country.

i should also note that the legislation is proposed by an indian person, to be fair.

>illegal for people to discriminate against others because of the caste they belong to

Don't mind them. Castism is horrible. Our freedom fighters actively tried to denounce and stop castism but these fuckers would flee to the west in opportunities for better life and still think they are the kings everywhere. I mean u guys have MTG and Lauren bobert... I am sure u can understand that shitheads exist everywhere.

He is a turd but he’s a pretty predictable turd and will always resort to the decision that directly benefits the capitalist classes of India without regard to how much damage he does to his (or anybody’s) citizens.

India’s enduring shame.

oh yeah for sure. i actually am starting to think that all of these patterns of hypocrisy is God showing us how fucking dumb we are and it's ok to be both socially supportive of everyone without being a commie, and that competition inspires our greatness as one world nation. the lines are bullshit and we draw them for ourselves.

thanks for your input

you cannot compare modi and hitler. he hasn't directly killed anyone. obama has killed 100x more muslims than modi has

i honestly don't know how some countries can just be neutral and not give a shit.

if the war spills over to other countries they will soon start caring.

best thing to do is continue to supplying ukraine till russia decides to escalate beyond ukraine.

then it's go time.

Some countries aren’t able to just make a switch like that. For example, India’s military is made up mostly of Russian equipment and technology. The US (and India itself) is trying pretty hard to change that, and quickly, but it takes time. You can’t expect a country with two large, hostile, nuclear neighbours to give up its source of defence equipment.

Not only that, they are choosing to buy russian quality weapons over the latest western tech. Which is just.... stupid.

Shameful and stupid and... arrogant

They are also acting as if Russia would come to their aid next time they are attacked by China. Right now Russia is begging China for help and would gladly feed India to the Chinese in return for support.

They are playing dangerous games and bad politics.

The problem is that by explicitly increasing their purchases of russian weapons and oil etc they are not neutral, they are actively increasing the amount of money they send to Russia.

Yea as if west was giving them all and they rejected it.

Agreed. Russia will stab India in the back as soon as it sees advantage.

I admit that I don’t stay on top of Indian news, but I do pay attention.

I understand the short term desire for cheap oil & gas and cheap Russian arms. This thinking is short sighted. India is doing lasting damage to its relationships with western democracies.

When push comes to shove, which countries might actually come to India’s defense. It’s the west.

Modi’s government takes the relations with the west for granted.

Many in the west are paying attention and aren’t happy with Indian selfishness.

> I do pay attention.

​

>When push comes to shove, which countries might actually come to India’s defense. It’s the west.

Hmm?

>When push comes to shove, which countries might actually come to India’s defense. It’s the west.

Not trying to sound like an asshole here, but this line tells me you have absolutely no idea about the geopolitics in the South Asia region and the history of relations between the West and India. It's almost a laughably bad take.

You also seem to think that a non Modi govt would not maintain a relationship with Russia, which is also wildly incorrect.

Swing and a miss. I have a deep understanding of Asian and Indian history.

Resorting to ad hominem attacks reveals much.

You are probably embarrassed by Modi’s actions and can’t admit it.

The point is, for whatever rationale Modi thinks it’s a good idea to side with Russia, it’s a morally bankrupt position.

Democracies must aid democracies. It’s not complicated.

It's easy to pull demographic polling data for demographic groups, and I see that the majority of Indians in American don't even identify with caste.

Unfortunately, most white people voted for Trump, a man who is explicitly racist and misogynist, among other things. It almost seems like those third world immigrants people might be better integrated into our society that doesn't like discrimination/classism than people who have roots here going back multiple generations.

>Swing and a miss. I have a deep understanding of Asian and Indian history.

I mean, both of your claims which I highlighted in my previous comment are completely untrue and can be disproven with a couple of google searches.

Because countries(especially ones which struggle with poverty, constant terrorist attacks, constant fighting with multiple hostile nations bordering it, and a billion+ mouths to feed) can't change their entire foreign policy in a single day just to virtue signal to look good to the west. Especially when the west has historically always turned a blind eye to India's troubles in the past, or worse, actively supported India's enemies. Pakistan, Srilanka, Bangladesh also abstained btw, and tbh it's kind of understandable given that they also have their own issues to deal with.

Also, it is untrue that India don't give a shit about Ukraine. They've been sending aid.

i've worked in data science and understand data, i know how polling can work and where it fails. were you not surprised when Trump won? if you say yes it shows the holes in your logic. if you say no then you probably can acknowledge the depths of the shit we have created and the probability that indians are just better at playing the "we are all Gods children" wolf in sheep clothing thing that the rest of "us" ddo

also you're right about the misogyny stuff for sure, he's sickening and there's plenty just like him in the rest of the country but india will never be celebrated for the way they treat women at all.

Their relationships with Western democracies are at an all-time high right now. Also, they might be closer to and care more about democracies like Japan, Israel, and in Southeast Asia than us in North America or Europe. There's a significant overlap with their BFFs and at least America's BFFs.

I've been reading more about them after Reddit has become filled with extreme rants about them, and I have to disagree that the countries that might actually come to India's defense would be any sort of collective West. Just off the top of my head:

• They fought the British Empire for their independence and beat them to practice democracy, and lost over 100 million lives in that process. We didn't help them.
• They fought against a Portuguese dictatorship and beat them. We didn't help them.
• They've fought 3 or 4 wars with Pakistan and beat them. We didn't help them.
• They fought a war with China and lost. We didn't help them.

They've been recovering from a civilization-scale apocalypse following the departure of the British Empire, fought in multiple wars in such a short time against despotic regimes. Yet they're still around. We have to give them some credit instead of pretending that the West is some savior when they've been left on their own and deal with so much in the short history of their country.

Ah yes, those devious brown people. Certainly not any animus on your end going on!

? i've worked with plenty of indopak people that were incredible people. my kid is literally african american.

u r dum

Dumb take. The world was neutral during kargil war. USA even helped Pakistan by blocking access to GPS in India. Why should India care about Ukraine. They were active Pakistan supporter. Before you try to talk morality look at the number of people died due to war and terrorist attacks in India by Pakistani aggression. India owes nothing to Ukraine.

Here’s how you get indian support: stop assisting Pakistan

Here’s how you get Pakistans support: stop assisting India.

[removed]

India should chuck the entire E.U. in the trash like the dumpster fire that it is after the history of colonization. The UK backed out of the union and so should India after all it has its independence now and should flex on the rest of Europe instead of cowtowing to their problems.

Latest western tech, is not even offered to India. F35 e.g. India gets latest Russian tech though via collaboration brahmos e.g.

What has Germany (or France) done for India in the past?

India has had close and strong diplomatic, economic, military and political ties with Russia (and its predecessor the Soviet Union) for EIGHTY YEARS. They are like old buddies.

Germany and France or just most any European country, which have never really had any sort of close relations with India, now wants India to turns its back on an old buddy for something that happens between Russia and Europe, i.e., none of India's business.

Another sign of the lack of self-awareness of the West: America and Europe - which have themselves committed illegal invasions, occupations and war crimes, and committed them far more frequently and far longer - are not exactly in the moral position to lecture to others about illegal invasions and war crimes. Yet America and Europe love to lecture to India (or China) about Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine but refuse to talk about their own illegal invasions and wars. That just reeks of self-serving hypocrisy.

Anyway, back to the to point:

What exactly has Germany done for India that warrants India throwing away eight years of close and warm buddy relations with Russia? France, which also has never had a close relations with India, is also asking India for the same favor. Germany or France is not exactly on that level of relations with India. Is it the lack of self-awareness or just the stereotypical European arrogance and habit of ordering other (brown and color) people to do this and do that?

France and India are so often described as being close that even the Wikipedia entry for France-India relations has mentions of them as having a "special relationship". France worked with India to de-colonize its assets in modern-day India without the violence that was associated with the UK or Portugal, so it has a different path for a Western European country.

France is basically taking over some of Russia's role with India after the 2014 annexation of Crimea led to Russia accepting China's rapprochement. An example is France's recent support for India in the UN, which has historically been Russia's role.

Germany is close with China and has been balancing both Russia and China as geopolitical counterweights to the US (at least before it lost control with the recent invasion), so I imagine they haven't done much but I will let others contribute there.

Countries can be neutral in foreign wars because not every country is Denmark or Switzerland. Most countries in the world face every day poverty, hunger, terrorist attacks, crime, homicides, natural disasters and many other problems, and they can't just suddenly stop taking care of this and focus on wars from another countries.

Not as close as India and Russia.

Germany actually occupied and colonized part of China, and that is not yet forgotten nor completely forgiven.

Obviously Russia had also invaded China and stolen large swathes of lands from China in the 1800s, (stolen lands that Russia still keeps, like Siberia.) so China actually does not and would NEVER think of Russia as a "real friend". When it comes to White people in general, pretty much they all have invaded, looted, pillaged and occupied China at one time or another. So China has no friends among White people, and China would NEVER trust any White people including Russians. When dealing with White people, China would do whatever that serve China's own interests for the time being.

FYI:

China agreed to entered World War I and joined the Allies on the condition that, if the Allies won the war, the German-held colony in China (Qingdao) would be returned to China. The United States, which brokered that agreement with China, actually made a double deal behind China's back: the US also convinced Japan to join the Allies and enter the war... and one of the condition offered to Japan: when the Allies won the war, Japan would given control of the same German colony in China. (Today Qingdao is an interesting place in China: it has both German and Japanese influences.)

Also FYI:

Ryukyu used to be a Chinese tributary territories, but the US deceived China and stole it from China and gave it to Japan. You know Ryukyu as Okinawa.

How it happened: in the 1800s Japan invaded Ryukyu, which was a tributary state under the protection of China. China was about go to war with Japan, but the US (which was still mostly a new and unknown entity to China at the time) stepped in and volunteered to mediate between China and Japan. Unbeknown to China, the US also secretly cut a deal with Japan: Japan would open some ports to trade with the US if the US would give Ryukyu to Japan in the mediation. And that was how China lost Ryukyu to Japan.

Do you see a pattern here?

I could be wrong but I'd say there are many more Indians living in the West/NATO countries than living in Russia so there should be some significant ties.

That is not how international relations work.

More Indians are safe if Europe is safe than if Russia is safe. A large amount of Indian people live well and hold well established positions of power in Politics and Business in the West. There are strong ties that matter.

That's not how it works.

British, French, Dutch and Portuguese - all of them European - have invaded and occupied India.

On the other hand, Russians have never invaded India.

History matters. The history of what Europeans did to India, it still matters to India, and it influences how India behaves and reacts to Europeans today.

I'm not sure why White people think the history of them invading, occupying, colonizing, looting, pillaging, plundering other countries no longer matters in current international politics. It's like Americans and Europeans keep telling Africans to not make deals with China. They keep saying how China is bad and dangerous, how Chinese want to colonize Africa. Yet they keep ignoring the important history (or just pretend it did not happen or it does not matter): why are Americans and Europeans ignoring what they have done in Africa and to Africans for centuries? Do white people think Blacks are just gonna listen to them on anything about "colonization" and "dangerous foreigners", after everything that they have done in Africa and to Africans for centuries??

It just boggles my mind that white people think that the history (of what they have done to India, Africa and other people) does not factor into the current international politics. White people do not even preface their demands with the historical context of they did in India or Africa, or even try to offer an apology/excuse/explanation/recognition for the history before making all kinds of demands from the people they have victimized. They just get right into making more new demands, as if other people have completely forgotten (and forgiven) what they did.

There is a huge disconnect here between white people and other people on international politics. The history between whites and non-whites continues - and will continue - to play huge parts on what and how India, China, Africa, and other non-white people would work or not work with white people on all kinds of issues. That is just the reality that white people do not seem to get. Unless you guys take that reality into consideration, you ain't getting what you want from India, China, Africa, etc., just by making demands and telling them what to do.

[deleted]

White people this, white people that. What's up with the racism? I'm not even white and that has nothing to do with this invasion of Ukraine.

If you disapprove of old western imperialism like freaking everyone does, it should be because it was imperialism, not because it was western. Right now Russia is doing the imperialism, by invading a sovereign country to annex territories and population to restablish borders from an old empire. If that doesn't sound wrong to you I don't know what to tell you. You seem more focused on personal issues you have against white people.

[deleted]

Geo politics is a complicated affair

Boring mostly tbh

By india renouncing russia and the benefits that russia brings to the country, the war WILL spill over to india.

I think India does care about people dying and all that, but why would they get involved and then have another billion+ people affected? Indians affected.

Modi is right to keep neutral.

We can't stop assisting Pakistan (as the USA) because they're nuclear.

I wonder how they got nuclear ☢️ it’s almost a mystery.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/060198pakistan-nuke-history.html

Doesn't matter how, the USA spends hundreds of millions to keep it secure.

I recall playing war games with Pakistan and India that were declassified by the CIA dealing with the 70s India VS Pakistan.

It would be a nightmare if some group like the Taliban got a hold of Pakistan's nukes.

India ain't paying for that shit. So we, the USA, do. It's why the ISI is effective.

A nuke sent into India would trigger a nuclear exchange, and China would freak the fuck out.

[removed]

It is complicated but not in all areas. Some places has pretty straight forward answers and some don't

Not an expert but isn’t there a NATO expansion angle to that argument? Provoking Russia wasn’t a good move. I don’t know why we can’t look at all sides of this issue.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

That's why we pay them, lol.

[removed]

And that’s why the soviets supported India during those times, because the ISI and all of Pakistan and western powers had shared interests in Afghanistan.

War brings us close to people we may not normally be close to

Agreed

To keep their nukes secured. Imagine terrorists getting hold of nukes... hitting India and freaking China out....

[removed]

> Ukraine won’t join NATO

So the appropriate response to a neighbouring sovereign country wanting to make its own decisions for its own benefit is to attempt to murder the whole population and claim the country for your own?

If Pakistan invaded Kashmir and lays waste to Punjab you’d be ok with that so long as it’s in response to BRICS expansionism?

[removed]

So…. You demonise imperialism against India but then use imperialist mentality to justify Russian invasion…..

India got colonised by Europe because India couldn’t safeguard its people against Europe. Sorry my guy, that’s the facts. Would you want foreign aid helping you defend your country? Or would you accept being colonised again by a stronger force?

It's a crazy game of poker.

Worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

[removed]

> it’s about power

And Ukraine has a lot of power, it doesn’t matter where that power comes from. Russia should concede.

The reason why most of those Indians fled their homeland is because they were discriminated against by the govt. for belonging to the "high castes". The constitution of India was authored by a person belonging to the lowest caste. Modi is literally low caste.

What do you even know about India's caste system? And you say you work in data science as well. Yet you cannot even do your own research?

> Modi is literally low caste.

The fact that you think castes are a real thing at all shows that you are brainwashed and classist. Hate has no polarity. Your logic is the same as privileged people who think 'pedigree' is a real thing.

Why would it spill over? There are many countries who renounce russia and the war did not spill over to them. Neither are people dying in these countries because of that.

Sure india has many benefits from russia and it is kinda obvious that the indians only want what is best for them. But efforts are made to help india and strengthen relationships so they can condemn this genocide and atrocities. They do not need to send weapons. The first step would be to tell russia and the world that what russia is doing should stop and retreat. Actualy not that big of a deal for them. Russia needs india to buy their stuff.

Actualy many countries did that and did not have any disadvantages despite condeming them. Russia is still trading with them.

Still haven't done your research, you dodo? The caste definitions need to exist because only then the govt can provide "reservations" (or affirmative action, as you call it) for the historically underprivileged castes. That is one of the biggest reasons why India cannot get rid of castes. If I said "Obama is black", are you going to call me racist? You insufferable moron. I myself am from a lower caste. And I have benefited from the affirmative action policies due to my caste. Are you going to say we shouldn't have affirmative action? The ones that you saw protesting in WA state are high castes who have lost opportunities because of these affirmative action. Now you are siding with them? Actually I'd too, after seeing how it's unfair to them. But you otoh talking about something you know nothing about, and ending up looking like a clown is pathetic. And then you complain when Indians think you don't deserve our sympathy or support.

[removed]

Lots of indian with victim mentality here man. Hating europeans because they got colonized so hard. The irony is today russian would be way more racist against brown people than europeans would, and if russia had the chance back then they would colonize the fuck out of india too

[removed]

Exact India doesn’t really care. You can offer to give India the F-35 and they’ll take it and still support Russia. Their relationships with Russia data back to the Soviet Union. If India chose to be a friend of a literally regime of communist oppression, then I highly doubt they will break from Russia now.

Why does their relationship with Russia date back to the Soviet Union? Let’s answer that. The USA supported Pakistan over India many times in the 20th century, so the only ally left was Soviet Union for India.

You have the U.S.A. to thank for it all

You realize that the Soviets were first to establish relations with India? The US attempted to establish good relations as well, it India was already firmly within the Soviet sphere. Pakistan was the 2nd choice.

Because the USA didn’t deem India important enough, or of any note.

The Soviets grabbed their closest allies that’s only natural, the USA chose only western Europeans as of importance due to history and disregarded Asia for the most part

[deleted]

No there isn't. A sovereign nation can decide to enter any military alliance it wants. Especially if it feels threatened by its neighbour. That is no justification for an invasion. Stop that propaganda.

In the multiverse?

At this point anything that doesn’t agree with a certain point of view is propaganda. Stop looking at it through a one dimensional filter!!!

Let me repeat it slowly for you. Ukraine is doing nothing else than defending itself from Russian aggression. There is no "both sides" argument here. If you get robbed on the street, it isn't your fault just because you had a wallet with you. That kind of thinking is completely insane. And yes, it is textbook propaganda. The same kind nazi germany used to justify its attack on czecho-slovakia back then, for example.

Thank you for repeating slowly. I read your comment very slowly. There are always 2 sides to an argument. Just saying it loudly and in unison doesn’t make it different. When governments communicate we get to hear 1% of the real communication. Can any rational being base their opinions on that little information? No. That’s why we can draw no solid conclusions unless we know both sides of the story. Denial doesn’t make it go away. What you are saying can also be classified as propaganda.

And I also feel that the 2 involved countries should sort it between themselves

Stop beating around the bush and say it clearly: in your opinion, what justification does russia have? Because ukraine isn't invading russia. In fact, ukraine has been doing nothing but defending itself for 9 years now. Ever since the invasion of crimea in 2014. Meanwhile, russia has been waging war on its neighbours for the past 30 years. Georgia, Moldova, Chechnya, Dagestan, Ukraine etc. It has been nothing but the aggressor.

So tell me, what righteous reason does russia have? What has ukraine done that justifies this invasion?

Btw, russia just renounced china's peace proposal, claiming there will be no peace talks unless russia is controlling the ukrainian territories. So like we all knew already, this is just another land grab by putin and all his excuses were nothing but lies.

[removed]

Supplying more ammunition and weapons isn’t making the situation better for anyone except those who benefit from the money. Ultimately wars are not good for anyone else. People with fixed mindset are scary and incorrigible. I rest my case.

Ah so you don't just have no justification for russias warmongering, you actively support it. After all supplying weapons and ammunition does make the situation better by allowing ukraine to defend itself. Taking that away from them means helping russia. Not intervening means supporting russia. It's that simple.

But what did I expect from a 1 month old account with like 8 comments or whatever.