Email from Nepal asking us for help. Please read.

I figured might as well start at the top so send first copy to the White House -- no response yet which somehow does not surprise me.
 
I corrected a few typos in the letter and added a preface. Perhaps someone can improve upon my efforts.

For your consideration:

Dear So-and-So X,

I would ask for your support of the free people of Nepal in their struggle against Terrorism perpetrated by so-called Maoist insurgents. I forward to you a letter from Nepal which is an open plea for assistance in this time of strife for the Nepali people (see below - LETTER FROM NEPAL).

Nepal has long supported the Free World against tyranny in the form of its elite soldiers, the Gurkhas, who fought bravely in many battles in both World Wars. I, for one, voice my commitment to repaying Nepal for the sacrifices its people have long made in support of freedom across the world by assisting them now in freeing themselves from the scourge of terrorism.

Sincere regards,

Joe Bloggs

----------------------------
LETTER FROM NEPAL
Subj: Please help Nepal from Maoist terrorists
Date: 4/11/02 5:36:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: ritakumari2002@yahoo.com (Rita k.c)

Help Nepal from Maoists terrorist

Maoists terrorist attack and kill hundreds of our
police, Army, teachers and public officials and caused
great damage and destruction, hurt business,
development and affected tourism industry.

The terrorist's targets are local bureaucrats,
government officials and politicians, policeman and
police stations. Army, teachers, Banks. Most of our
people and children are affected by the terrorist
and they are feeling insecure both economically and
psychologically. More than a thousand of our locals
have already fled their home for the capital for
fear of terrorist.

Terrorist Maoists are no different from Peru's
Shining Path rebels, the Philippines' Abu Sayyaf
Muslim separatist group, Cambodia's Khmer Rouge or the
al-Qaida terrorist network.

With the State of Emergency extended by another three
months, the security forces have been doing their part
to rout the terrorists but fighting against terrorism,
Nepal urgently needs military equipment, because of
geographical reason, finding a terrorist in the cave
and jungle is really difficult.

Terrorist are looting our money and sending their
children to the European countries, buying a house
in Katmandu and they have billions of rupees in the
bank.

Terrorist has links with a worldwide network of
communist guerrilla and terrorist groups including
Maoist Communist Centre, operating in the Indian
State of Bihar, and with the Peoples War Group,
active in other Indian states Maoists rebels are
believed to have obtained a large amount of
sophisticated weapons from India's People's War Group.
Terrorists are trying to force a one-party system
with the help of gun in place of democracy on the
people.

Nepal cannot be a republic; the King and democracy
are highly respected and their position is immensely
secure. Monarchy in Nepal has taken different forms
over three hundred thirty three years of history after
Prithvi Narayan Shah, the Great King, unified the
kingdom of Nepal on September 25, 1768.


Rita, Sadhana, Purnima, Sova.
Click to expand...

--Ben
 
Thanks for link, Beo. More mail sent this AM.

We better make a move fast or that buffer zone between India and China is going to disappear.
 
Can't recall many details of the swallowing up of Tibet. Just that nobody in the US seemed to know/care until it was far too late, and so any help went to supporting exiles instead of saving the country.

Maybe someone more knowledgable can comment on whether Tibet's fate is helpful to mention as an example of what should not be repeated.

EDIT

Also, the irony of Ghorkas essentially indentured (their own decision...no judgement) to fight for others all over the world while their own country is under attack is twisted enough that some scummy news program might be interested. Don't know if that would just turn into a revolting festival of chopping people up with khuks though. Want to avoid typecasting as a bunch of lawless maniacs with big knives that should just be allowed to kill each other, as has kinda happened with many less influential Middle Eastern countries. Sad when you fear to bring it to the attention of the most powerful and far-reaching media.:(
 
You'd think the atrocity of stripping, marching naked thru the street and then beheading 50 Nepal cops would get the attention of somebody.
 
The Yahoo headline banner on my homepage has had highlights on Nepal since the day after this thread started, so the crisis is being noticed internationally. Tonight's news, Sun.14 April; authorities fear as many as 300 now murdered.

munk
 
I sent off e-mail to both Rep. and Dem. politicians from SD this weekend. Of course, no response yet. .. but it is early in the week.

Good letter Ben. I wish I'd had it before I mailed my representatives. ...


Alan
 
I hope somebody makes a move soon or it may be too late. Since Nepal has supported the Brits for 200 years and through some very trying times (like a couple of World Wars!!!) and has very close ties I am wondering why the Brits don't send some Royal Marines in and pay back maybe 1 or 2 percent.

Here we'll discuss it in Washington for ten of fifteen years playing every political angle that can be drummed up and then discover that once again we have waited too long.
 
Originally posted by Bill Martino
I hope somebody makes a move soon or it may be too late. Since Nepal has supported the Brits for 200 years and through some very trying times (like a couple of World Wars!!!) and has very close ties I am wondering why the Brits don't send some Royal Marines in and pay back maybe 1 or 2 percent.
Click to expand...

Problem is Labour has such a large majority that they can sit and do whatever they like...and I don't think Blair is the most history-cognisant person in the world :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Bill Martino
Like I said, let's talk about it for 10 or 15 years and see if we can't find some solution.
Click to expand...

Well, when there are important issues like whether or not to ban fox-hunting....less important things naturally are put aside....
 
There was an article about Nepals trouble's in yesterday's paper. Quite an extensive article so the news is available. I didn't think to look if it was AP or another news service though.
The story told about the atrocities committed upon the police too.
Barb was telling me about the article, I had already seen it, but of course read about it here first.

As to sending some troops from anywhere I think I read somewhere that the king didn't want foriegn troops on Nepal's soil and if that's true I think it's pretty stupid considering the troubles, but with GB's past history of colonization perhaps that's why the king feels that way, but with the world view today I don't think that would be an option for GB or am I not thinking right about that?
I can't see why he wouldn't allow USSF or SO troops in there
though.:confused: :(
 
As to sending some troops from anywhere I think I read somewhere that the king didn't want foriegn troops on Nepal's soil and if that's true I think it's pretty stupid considering the troubles, but with GB's past history of colonization perhaps that's why the king feels that way, but with the world view today I don't think that would be an option for GB or am I not thinking right about that?
I can't see why he wouldn't allow USSF or SO troops in there
though. >>

Maybe his own people would reject his rule if he turned to outsiders. I often argue with intellectual critics of the US foreign policies. As blundered as they are, and as good as Britain was and is, the US has been the best world power in history in my view. But this decade we've given China a pass. We don't offend them because our homes are filled with chinese goods. Aid to Nepal confronts China.
Who will help Nepal?

munk



munk
 
Originally posted by munk

Maybe his own people would reject his rule if he turned to outsiders. I often argue with intellectual critics of the US foreign policies. As blundered as they are, and as good as Britain was and is, the US has been the best world power in history in my view. But this decade we've given China a pass. We don't offend them because our homes are filled with chinese goods. Aid to Nepal confronts China.[/B]
Click to expand...

was going to comment on this, but thought better of it ;)
 
Originally posted by Yvsa
As to sending some troops from anywhere I think I read somewhere that the king didn't want foriegn troops on Nepal's soil and if that's true I think it's pretty stupid considering the troubles, but with GB's past history of colonization perhaps that's why the king feels that way, but with the world view today I don't think that would be an option for GB or am I not thinking right about that?
I can't see why he wouldn't allow USSF or SO troops in there
though.:confused: :(
Click to expand...

The UK is hardly in the colonisation game anymore...(the US is a different matter, but in that case the colonisation is economic, and doesn't require any obvious foreign presence).

I think one must respect the King's position on foreign troops - it would be easy for Nepal to be swallowed up, either overtly (say, by India or China) or covertly (by the US establishing some sort of long-term 'presence') and even though either the India or US 'options' might be benign (though economic gain on the part of the stronger always seems to take precedence), Nepal doesn't want to lose her sovereignity....e.g. a theoretic 'Canadian rule' of the USA might even bring some advantages (health care - though the postal system leaves something to be desired), but I don't imagine Americans would be too keen on it. Once troops are stationed somewhere...sometimes it's hard to 'uninvite' guests.

--B.
 
The UK is hardly in the colonisation game anymore...(the US is a different matter, but in that case the colonisation is economic, and doesn't require any obvious foreign presence).

I think one must respect the King's position on foreign troops - it would be easy for Nepal to be swallowed up, either overtly (say, by India or China) or covertly (by the US establishing some sort of long-term 'presence') and even though either the India or US 'options' might be benign (though economic gain on the part of the stronger always seems to take precedence), Nepal doesn't want to lose her sovereignity....>>

Every era there is the 'other war', the one (s) we don't pay attention to.

(BTW, I wasn't trying to knock GB. It is naive of me to think the US different from past powers for any reason other than timing. )


How is the 'shop' going to feel about being in India?
munk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top