Excerpts
 [...]                                        
   "Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov called here Monday for
a 'strategic triangle' between Russia, India and China to ensure
regional peace and stability.
 [...]
   "Following a formal welcoming ceremony by Indian Prime Minister  
Athal Behari Vajpayee, Primakov told reporters the regional
importance of Russia, India and China necessitated a strong
three-way relationship.
 [...]
   "Russia has already signed a "strategic partnership" with China,
while it has strong traditional ties with India, founded on decades
of military cooperation.
 [...] End of Excerpts
 - Agence France-Presse, Nayee Dillee, December 21, 1998

Jai Maharaj
Jyotishi, Vedic Astrologer
  "A king, though endowed with little prowess,
starting on an expedition at the proper time, in
view of the good positions of the planets, achieves
greatness that is eulogised in the scriptures."
 - Brhat Samhita, 104.60
http://www.flex.com/~jai
Om Shanti

On Tue, 22 Dec 1998 02:05:16 GMT, address.below...@web.site (Dr. Jai

Russia<>China?  YES, Russia<>India its already there
BUT Russia<>China<>India    NO, NO, NO. it won't work.
Reason, any country with common borders with India has a problem.

This pimp has finally lost it. This is what happens when you
start flagellating your head with butt-lifts facing Mecca.

And this dallal(pimp) of his didi in bombay has finally made it to the
club of pimps.  This is what happens when paindoos humb him and his
didi at the same time.  

Go easy on those butt-lifts facing Mecca otherwise you may have to relearn
Gurmukhi and search what "humb" means...

STRATEGIC TRIANGLE

By Shubha Singh
Editorial
The Pioneer
Thursday, December 24, 1998

A possible partnership between Russia, China and India seems to be
a favoured prospect which comes to the mind of Russian leaders when
they come avisiting India, whether it is President Boris Yeltsin,
Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, Secretary General of the Russian
Communist Party Zyuganov or assorted Russian parliamentarians.

On the face of it, no one can gain say the large areas of
commonality of interests between Russia, India and China which make
eminent sense to craft a partnership. But New Delhi has never
responded with any alacrity to such Russian suggestions in the
past. This may be due to the Indian aversion to participation in
any strategic or cooperative pact, or the shaky state of its
relations with China. But the suggestions have never taken a more
concrete shape.

The other factor is than no one is sure of what the Chinese
reaction would be to such a proposal. Also, although Russian
visitors may make high sounding claims and proposals while talking
to Indian audiences, they have not pursued their concept any
further, even with the Chinese. An important reason is that
different sections of the Russian government are still to adjust to
the strong gusts of the winds from America wafting through Moscow.
Till Andrei Kozyrev headed the Russian Foreign Ministry it was
firmly rooted to the West. It was only the imperatives of the
substantial trade and military ties with India that forced New
Delhi into the reckoning into Moscow's western influenced world
view. Kozyrev's departure ended the pro-West tilt in Russian
policy, but it is still to settle down after its rude shake-up.

President Yeltsin had said that a qualitative change had taken
place in Russia-China relations and in India-China relations.
"Based on the principles of mutual trust and good neigbourliness,
these three large countries -- Russia, China and India, could
become a major force in the region." While visiting Delhi Gennady
Zhuganov had said that good relations between the three countries
will assure stability of the Euro-Asian continent.

It was in the same context that Primakov responded to a specific
question, that a 'strategic triangle' would be a good idea since a
lot of what happens in the region depended on the policies and
decisions taken by Russia, India and China. But after a two-hour-
long discussion with his hosts through the day, the Russian Prime
Minister was quick to make amends later in the evening and clarify
that he had not made any formal proposal.

This was followed by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee terse
comment that India's relations with Russia were time-tested, they
were relations of traditional friendship. While with China, India
was trying to improve relations and go in a direction of
normalising them. It was a comment which said it all -- displaying
India's reluctance to look at any alliance between the three large
countries.

It is a concept far away in the realm of the future since there is
a qualitative difference in the bilateral relationships of the
three countries. Russia which has improved its relations with China
in the recent years, after resolving its border problem, still
terms the Sino-Russian relationship as a "partnership for strategic
interaction into the 21st century". With India, Russia is planning
to sign a "strategic partnership" document at the next Indo-Russian
summit. A strategic triangle is a far cry in the present context,
but the commonality of interests and perceptions can become a
strong binding factor if the equations change in this region.

The need for multipolarity in world politics has become more than
evident with the recent US strike at Iraq. But would China and
India, both in the process of building ties with Washington, be
willing to ruffle American feathers? Especially when Russia itself
is not the economic giant it used to be.

The political relations between India and Russia are traditionally
close. New Delhi has placed considerable emphasis on the fact that
Prime Minister Primakov's visit is the first one by a permanent
member of the UN Security Council after the nuclear tests at
Pokhran and the harsh response it evoked from the Security Council.
And then Primakov is from a different mould than those Russian
leaders who brought its economy to the brink of default.

Even during the great state of flux in Moscow, though there was a
sense of dislocation which naturally affected ties with New Delhi,
the underpinning of the bilateral bonds remained strong. Sections
in the Russia's foreign and economic departments found the
allurements of the western economies more attractive, but the
strong economic, political and defence ties could not be ignored
for too long. After all, India is the only country which is
repaying its Soviet-era debt in full, and on time. Also about 80
per cent of its military hardware requirement is sourced from
Russia.

Among the seven documents signed during Primakov's visit is the
long term defence and equipment agreement till 2010, which sets the
direction for the defence cooperation. A strategic partnership is
to be formalised early next year. The Russian share of the
international arms export market came down from 21 per cent in 1992
to 6 per cent in 1994, a period of barely two years. India,
however, was still willing to source a large part of its
requirements of military hardware from Russia. Last year the level
of Russia's international trade decreased but trade with India
remained steady.

The opening up of its economy has made the economic interaction
with India a tortuous one. However, things have been improving in
the past couple of years, with the two way trade going up to $2
billion, registering a growth of 14 per cent in 1997-98 over the
previous year's figures. As Primakov told Indian businessmen that
the two sides were "untying the knots which had prevented full
trade between us."

The utilisation of the $1 billion Indian debt repayment each year
has also picked up, with only $700 million remaining in the debt
repayment rupee account. The system of auctioning the funds to
different organisations has helped in its utilisation for purchases
from India. The Indian side has conveyed that it wanted the process
to be transparent, predictable and effective.

The Russians complained about the anti-dumping duty imposed on
steel from Russia. It was explained that the anti-dumping authority
in the Commerce Ministry looked into all complaints about dumping
before additional duty is imposed. The Indian Commerce Ministry
would provide assistance in case there was a misunderstanding on
the subject. Similarly, Indian businessmen complained about their
money stuck in Russian banks, the vast majority of whom are likely
to fail. Primakov asserted that money had been placed in Russian
banks to take advantage of the large difference in interest rates.
It was a purely commercial decision, he said, though he added that
his government would provide whatever assistance it could to Indian
businessmen in this matter.

Electronic goods are slowly being added to the traditional items
for trade like tea, tobacco, rice. Indian tea was losing out to the
more aggressive marketing of Shri Lankan tea, but this year Indian
tea is back in samovars of discerning Russian tea drinkers. A sign
of the resilience of Indo-Russian ties.

Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the
educational purposes of research and open discussion.

Jai Maharaj     http://www.flex.com/~jai     Om Shanti

A previous post:

Excerpts
 [...]                                        
   "Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov called here Monday for
a 'strategic triangle' between Russia, India and China to ensure
regional peace and stability.
 [...]
   "Following a formal welcoming ceremony by Indian Prime Minister  
Athal Behari Vajpayee, Primakov told reporters the regional
importance of Russia, India and China necessitated a strong
three-way relationship.
 [...]
   "Russia has already signed a "strategic partnership" with China,
while it has strong traditional ties with India, founded on decades
of military cooperation.
 [...] End of Excerpts
 - Agence France-Presse, Nayee Dillee, December 21, 1998

Jai Maharaj
Jyotishi, Vedic Astrologer
  "A king, though endowed with little prowess,
starting on an expedition at the proper time, in
view of the good positions of the planets, achieves
greatness that is eulogised in the scriptures."
 - Brhat Samhita, 104.60
http://www.flex.com/~jai
Om Shanti

Comments by China's Emperor included in this article as amended:

Dr. Jai Maharaj (address.below...@web.site) wrote:
: STRATEGIC TRIANGLE

: By Shubha Singh
: Editorial
: The Pioneer
: Thursday, December 24, 1998

: A possible partnership between Russia, China and India seems to be
: a favoured prospect which comes to the mind of Russian leaders when
: they come avisiting India, whether it is President Boris Yeltsin,
: Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, Secretary General of the Russian
: Communist Party Zyuganov or assorted Russian parliamentarians.

Such a partnership is reasonable, based upon the common needs of these
three countries.  The idealogy of these three countries are compatible
enough, that such a strategic alliance for the security of the region is
possible.

: On the face of it, no one can gain say the large areas of
: commonality of interests between Russia, India and China which make
: eminent sense to craft a partnership. But New Delhi has never
: responded with any alacrity to such Russian suggestions in the
: past. This may be due to the Indian aversion to participation in
: any strategic or cooperative pact, or the shaky state of its
: relations with China. But the suggestions have never taken a more
: concrete shape.

: The other factor is than no one is sure of what the Chinese
: reaction would be to such a proposal. Also, although Russian
: visitors may make high sounding claims and proposals while talking
: to Indian audiences, they have not pursued their concept any
: further, even with the Chinese.

This is true!

: An important reason is that
: different sections of the Russian government are still to adjust to
: the strong gusts of the winds from America wafting through Moscow.
: Till Andrei Kozyrev headed the Russian Foreign Ministry it was
: firmly rooted to the West. It was only the imperatives of the
: substantial trade and military ties with India that forced New
: Delhi into the reckoning into Moscow's western influenced world
: view. Kozyrev's departure ended the pro-West tilt in Russian
: policy, but it is still to settle down after its rude shake-up.

While there are many fundamental differences between China and India,
India and Russia, these countries can find common ground for their own
security and mutual advantage.  What tends to bring these countries
together is the lies propagated by the Clinton administration, while
Americans REFUSE to believe that their government is errant.

Honest and upright behavior in international politics, AS I HAVE TOLD
Clinton, should be America's foremost concern...in effect, Clinton said
____ ___!  I have no gripes against Clinton and I know that America will
be paying for Clinton's unrighteousness.  I want to see a better and
strong America, but not one that acts corruptly in the international
political arena.  How many Americans are willing to impeach an errant
American President and how many are willing to support him.  What is most
wrong is that Congress and the media have NOT published all of Clintons
wrongs and treason.  We tend to want to punish him for midnight panty
raids or censure him, rather than take a hard look at his sins.  Cover up
and treason that have gone unpublished.

: President Yeltsin had said that a qualitative change had taken
: place in Russia-China relations and in India-China relations.
: "Based on the principles of mutual trust and good neigbourliness,
: these three large countries -- Russia, China and India, could
: become a major force in the region." While visiting Delhi Gennady
: Zhuganov had said that good relations between the three countries
: will assure stability of the Euro-Asian continent.

: It was in the same context that Primakov responded to a specific
: question, that a 'strategic triangle' would be a good idea since a
: lot of what happens in the region depended on the policies and
: decisions taken by Russia, India and China. But after a two-hour-
: long discussion with his hosts through the day, the Russian Prime
: Minister was quick to make amends later in the evening and clarify
: that he had not made any formal proposal.

: This was followed by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee terse
: comment that India's relations with Russia were time-tested, they
: were relations of traditional friendship. While with China, India
: was trying to improve relations and go in a direction of
: normalising them. It was a comment which said it all -- displaying
: India's reluctance to look at any alliance between the three large
: countries.

: It is a concept far away in the realm of the future since there is
: a qualitative difference in the bilateral relationships of the
: three countries. Russia which has improved its relations with China
: in the recent years, after resolving its border problem, still
: terms the Sino-Russian relationship as a "partnership for strategic
: interaction into the 21st century". With India, Russia is planning
: to sign a "strategic partnership" document at the next Indo-Russian
: summit. A strategic triangle is a far cry in the present context,
: but the commonality of interests and perceptions can become a
: strong binding factor if the equations change in this region.

: The need for multipolarity in world politics has become more than
: evident with the recent US strike at Iraq. But would China and
: India, both in the process of building ties with Washington, be
: willing to ruffle American feathers? Especially when Russia itself
: is not the economic giant it used to be.

: The political relations between India and Russia are traditionally
: close. New Delhi has placed considerable emphasis on the fact that
: Prime Minister Primakov's visit is the first one by a permanent
: member of the UN Security Council after the nuclear tests at
: Pokhran and the harsh response it evoked from the Security Council.
: And then Primakov is from a different mould than those Russian
: leaders who brought its economy to the brink of default.

: Even during the great state of flux in Moscow, though there was a
: sense of dislocation which naturally affected ties with New Delhi,
: the underpinning of the bilateral bonds remained strong. Sections
: in the Russia's foreign and economic departments found the
: allurements of the western economies more attractive, but the
: strong economic, political and defence ties could not be ignored
: for too long. After all, India is the only country which is
: repaying its Soviet-era debt in full, and on time. Also about 80
: per cent of its military hardware requirement is sourced from
: Russia.

: Among the seven documents signed during Primakov's visit is the
: long term defence and equipment agreement till 2010, which sets the
: direction for the defence cooperation. A strategic partnership is
: to be formalised early next year. The Russian share of the
: international arms export market came down from 21 per cent in 1992
: to 6 per cent in 1994, a period of barely two years. India,
: however, was still willing to source a large part of its
: requirements of military hardware from Russia. Last year the level
: of Russia's international trade decreased but trade with India
: remained steady.

: The opening up of its economy has made the economic interaction
: with India a tortuous one. However, things have been improving in
: the past couple of years, with the two way trade going up to $2
: billion, registering a growth of 14 per cent in 1997-98 over the
: previous year's figures. As Primakov told Indian businessmen that
: the two sides were "untying the knots which had prevented full
: trade between us."

: The utilisation of the $1 billion Indian debt repayment each year
: has also picked up, with only $700 million remaining in the debt
: repayment rupee account. The system of auctioning the funds to
: different organisations has helped in its utilisation for purchases
: from India. The Indian side has conveyed that it wanted the process
: to be transparent, predictable and effective.

: The Russians complained about the anti-dumping duty imposed on
: steel from Russia. It was explained that the anti-dumping authority
: in the Commerce Ministry looked into all complaints about dumping
: before additional duty is imposed. The Indian Commerce Ministry
: would provide assistance in case there was a misunderstanding on
: the subject. Similarly, Indian businessmen complained about their
: money stuck in Russian banks, the vast majority of whom are likely
: to fail. Primakov asserted that money had been placed in Russian
: banks to take advantage of the large difference in interest rates.
: It was a purely commercial decision, he said, though he added that
: his government would provide whatever assistance it could to Indian
: businessmen in this matter.

: Electronic goods are slowly being added to the traditional items
: for trade like tea, tobacco, rice. Indian tea was losing out to the
: more aggressive marketing of Shri Lankan tea, but this year Indian
: tea is back in samovars of discerning Russian tea drinkers. A sign
: of the resilience of Indo-Russian ties.

His Imperial Majesty Yao Sui,
Emperor of China

In article <Bharat-1804.981...@news.mantra.com>,
  j...@mantra.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:

Anything India-China can't work because the USA won't allow it. International
relations between countries are based on balances of power. India+China = too
much for the USA to handle. Russia vs China vs India vs Pakistan is how the
Americans like it. This way they use the threat of favours to one country as a
way to make its imediate opponent behave according to their wishes. Obviously
Pakistan is the "bottom-feeder", literally, in all off this which is why the
Clinton dumps so much on it and they just have to take it all.

--
Jag Sharma
**********

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

: Anything India-China can't work because the USA won't allow it. International
: relations between countries are based on balances of power. India+China = too
: much for the USA to handle. Russia vs China vs India vs Pakistan is how the
: Americans like it. This way they use the threat of favours to one country as a
: way to make its imediate opponent behave according to their wishes. Obviously
: Pakistan is the "bottom-feeder", literally, in all off this which is why the
: Clinton dumps so much on it and they just have to take it all.

And how is that exactly "the USA won't allow it"? Bomb all three
countries or what? The presumed omnipotence of the USA is a joke,
just ask any Somalian rifleman.

Igor

 Hmm, why wouldn't we try to change it?

--
Andrey Nikolaev                                 Ulm university,
Department of Biophysics.                       Germany.
                Email: Andrey.Nikolaev@!get-lost-spammer!.uni-ulm.de
                Substitute physik instead of !*! .                      

In article <3687e6e...@news.uni-ulm.de>,

How will you when you need Uncle Sam to bail you out. Uncle Sam is needed to
Bail Pakistan out, Uncle sam is needed for huge Chinese export market, uncle
sam is needed for Indian industries too.

Uncle Sam is got too many strings to control unlike China, Russia, India &
Pakistan. The best thing for India is to use Uncle Sam than vice versa. I
think we can do it better than anyone because we will never have a misile
aimed at LA vs Chian and Russia, and we will never be an Islamic tinderbox
like pakistan. We have everything US needs. Democracy, Stability, Open
market, huge potential for a level playing field. We should use our potential
to extarct the maximum out of US by playing the right cards.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Igor V Litvinyuk (i...@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:

: : Anything India-China can't work because the USA won't allow it. International
: : relations between countries are based on balances of power. India+China = too
: : much for the USA to handle. Russia vs China vs India vs Pakistan is how the
: : Americans like it. This way they use the threat of favours to one country as a
: : way to make its imediate opponent behave according to their wishes. Obviously
: : Pakistan is the "bottom-feeder", literally, in all off this which is why the
: : Clinton dumps so much on it and they just have to take it all.

: And how is that exactly "the USA won't allow it"? Bomb all three
: countries or what? The presumed omnipotence of the USA is a joke,
: just ask any Somalian rifleman.

  And the Russians were a smashing success in both Chechnya and Afghanistan, right?
And the so-called Indian Peace Keeping Force were highly successful in Sri Lanka,
right?  So successful, in fact, that it cost a PM his life.  Give me a break.

--
Niraj Agarwalla -- ni...@shore.net -- http://www.shore.net/~niraj

: Igor V Litvinyuk (i...@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:

: : And how is that exactly "the USA won't allow it"? Bomb all three
: : countries or what? The presumed omnipotence of the USA is a joke,
: : just ask any Somalian rifleman.

:   And the Russians were a smashing success in both Chechnya and Afghanistan, right?
: And the so-called Indian Peace Keeping Force were highly successful in Sri Lanka,
: right?  So successful, in fact, that it cost a PM his life.  Give me a break.

So? What's your point? Is it supposed to prove that USA is not a joke?

Igor

Niraj, and was your American peace keeping force succesfull? Perhaps you forgot you
messed up on Somalia... Bosnia.... didn't do a thing to stop Croatian ehtnic cleansing...
hmm..... BRAVO!

 It is selfboosted need. In 1985 we didn't need Uncle Sam for sure.
 As for bailing out - uncle Sam bails out only himself it is proven fact.
F.e. read about last "food bail out".

 Wishful thinking mostly. First will go out your airspace companies. What
for do you need to produce planes if you can buy Boeings? They will provide
you bail out to refit your aircraft park in accordance with the "world
standards" (shhhh, TWA 800 was just a chance!). Then it will come closer in
agriculture - what for to produce agricultural machines if you can buy them
in US? And so it will go. In the moment your country will start to protect
itself on economical ground it will appear suddenly that somehow Pakistan got
something new and wants to send new guerlas to the north of India.

 But go on, why not.

--
Andrey Nikolaev                                 Ulm university,
Department of Biophysics.                       Germany.
                Email: Andrey.Nikolaev@!get-lost-spammer!.uni-ulm.de
                Substitute physik instead of !*! .                      

In article <368a592...@news.uni-ulm.de>,

What a Hoot!!  Some behavior patterns take
a _long_ time dying, it seems, they just shift
from one place to another for a while.

Andrey, here, does sound like so many of the
good ol' boys who used to tell me that "them
damn Japanese are going to be shipping their
cheap cars here, till there ain't no more cars
the US can make, cause our factories will close,
if'n the Congress don't 'do sumpthin' about it".

 Of course, _Andrey_ won't be the one to pay
more for the consumer and industrial goods _he_
purchases, if Indian import restrictions are raised
to keep industries under the control of Indian pols in
business.  The truth is that the aerospace companies
are going international at a rapid rate.  This shouldn't
surprise anyone here.  The grief nationalists have with
that is that they are no longer soley under the thumb
of any one set of politicians.

We're already getting complaints here that Boeing is
laying off people to allow work to go to the countries
where they have partnerships with other countries
firms.  At some point, Indian aerospace will probably
do likewise, or will innovate so well on their own that
they have unique products where Boeing and Lock/Mart
aren't competing.  Several US companies are doing just
that, and may yet leave Boeing in the dust in the new
markets opened up.  

For an example, see: www.rotaryrocket.com

Economic "protectionism" only protects the elites of
an industrializing nation, while subtly undercutting
the advance of those in society who still need cheaper
goods and cann't afford the higher prices that the
nationalistic "protectionism" brings.  Using the US
as a bogeyman is as idiotic as using the Japanese for
it in the 1970s-80s was, here.  Of course, to someone
ensconced in a european academic milieu, that may
seem not even part of the same world.  It is, and to
the extent that the socialism of Europe isolates it
from the networks of industrialization around the
world, even Andrey will be able to feel the pinch of it,
eventually.  What was the average wait for new jobs in
Germany this year for graduates, Andrey?

Regards,

Tom Billings

--
Oregon L5 Society

Another freeloading russian who thinks he can get something for nothing. The 97dm is
a token payment, the major cost of health services are borne by the taxpayer.

THE RUSSIA<CHINA AND INDIA CAN WORK PERFECT TOGETER> THEY ARE BIG COUNTRIES,
THEY DON'T NEED A UNCLE SAM.RUSSIA ,INDIA AND CHINE HAS MANY SCIENTISTS.
. THEY HAVE MORE SCIENTISTS HOW UNCLE SAM. ALL THE SCIENTISTS IN US ARE
FOREIGNERS.PLUS RUSSIA HAS RESOURCES
BIG LAND.RUSSIA NEED GOOD LEADER< THAT ALL WHAT RUSSIA NEEDS, AND PARTNERS
LIKE CHINA AND INDIA.

In soc.culture.russian Tom Billings <it...@teleport.com> wrote:

 No, man, I never used to use this pattern until
late 1995 when I read papers about American "help"
to Russia.

 I don't care about Congress, America, US citizens.
I see what is going on in Russia. I see relations,
certain people, US policy in Russia and raw data.
BTW there are now trade wars inbetween US and Japan
and US and EU and all about US putting very high
tax on imported goods. Of course you are not the
one who'll pay more for goods because of that.
 Some people in Russia complining about high tarifs
on a US steel market, and of course it is not you
who are paying more for American steel when you can
use Russian of the same quality but cheaper.

 Man I was one who paid more for dropping down all
protection of Russian and Ukrainian market in respect
to  import from US and EU. So save me from your hollow
rethorics. You can't fool me, but you can hope to
succeed in brainwashing of somebody from India or China.
 Last case is extremily hard, my condolence. They put US
as far as possible from their economy in the beginning
of 90s and it was wise decision as time has shown us.

 Only American ones and _may_ be French but they operate
mostly in EU.

 I'm not grief nationalist, you have missed but neither
I'm pro american.

 Your problems.

 Personally my experience of communication with Russian
space agency people says that they have nothing but
frustration about their RSA-NASA paratnership. Of course
you can say that they are thiefs incompetenet or whatever,
I met here one guy who said it, but I'd like to point your
attention that thiefs are in command of RSA now and are
just happy with this partnership selling on a bargain prices
everything they know about in RSA to NASA. NASA does like
it of course. Same goes in Kurchatov institute of atomic
energy and in a few other places I know about.

 Lie. Take a look on last food "help". Russia can buy
unnecessary food for price which is 3 times higher then
on the market. Such a partnership.

 Plenty if you have necessary skills.

 Tom, it is just about my curiosity.
 I'm in Germany 11 monthes. I'm not immigrant, I'm not
German, I don't know for how long I'll stay here after my
PhD etc etc etc.
 I've full health insurance for 97 DM/month and I've to
admit I used help of dantist many times.
Do you have health insurance yourself in your God Blessed
US?

 BTW, Tom looks like I was very near to be right and it
explains your verbal explosion in my direction. Save your
US propaganda for someone else, please.

--
Andrey Nikolaev                                 Ulm university,
Department of Biophysics.                       Germany.
                Email: Andrey.Nikolaev@!get-lost-spammer!.uni-ulm.de
                Substitute physik instead of !*! .                      

In soc.culture.russian noone <no...@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:

 Exactly noone, by taxpayer. And I'm taxpayer too. But that means I know
and I'm sure in state which can help me when I need and to which I'll help
in my turn.
 And you, small shithole, have the same conditions in Canada. So shud up.

--
Andrey Nikolaev                                 Ulm university,
Department of Biophysics.                       Germany.
                Email: Andrey.Nikolaev@!get-lost-spammer!.uni-ulm.de
                Substitute physik instead of !*! .                      

 Little blowhard russian with a head full of rotten teeth... you have to have a job to pay
taxes.

Very well said.

: In article <Bharat-1804.981...@news.mantra.com>,
:   j...@mantra.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:
: > Excerpts
: >  [...]
: >    "Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov called here Monday for
: > a 'strategic triangle' between Russia, India and China to ensure
: > regional peace and stability.
: >  [...]
: >    "Following a formal welcoming ceremony by Indian Prime Minister
: > Athal Behari Vajpayee, Primakov told reporters the regional
: > importance of Russia, India and China necessitated a strong
: > three-way relationship.
: >  [...]
: >    "Russia has already signed a "strategic partnership" with China,
: > while it has strong traditional ties with India, founded on decades
: > of military cooperation.
: >  [...] End of Excerpts
: >  - Agence France-Presse, Nayee Dillee, December 21, 1998
: >
: > Jai Maharaj

: Anything India-China can't work because the USA won't allow it. International
: relations between countries are based on balances of power. India+China = too
: much for the USA to handle. Russia vs China vs India vs Pakistan is how the
: Americans like it. This way they use the threat of favours to one country as a
: way to make its imediate opponent behave according to their wishes. Obviously
: Pakistan is the "bottom-feeder", literally, in all off this which is why the
: Clinton dumps so much on it and they just have to take it all.

: --
: Jag Sharma
: **********

: -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
: http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Igor V Litvinyuk (i...@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:

: : Anything India-China can't work because the USA won't allow it. International
: : relations between countries are based on balances of power. India+China = too
: : much for the USA to handle. Russia vs China vs India vs Pakistan is how the
: : Americans like it. This way they use the threat of favours to one country as a
: : way to make its imediate opponent behave according to their wishes. Obviously
: : Pakistan is the "bottom-feeder", literally, in all off this which is why the
: : Clinton dumps so much on it and they just have to take it all.

: And how is that exactly "the USA won't allow it"? Bomb all three

Ok correct it to 'Would NOT LIKE to allow it" ;-)

: countries or what? The presumed omnipotence of the USA is a joke,
: just ask any Somalian rifleman.

: Igor

Do y ou think that:
     1. India and China (who helps Pakistan) can reconsile their differences so
that Russia can act out thir fantasies about the military alliance?
     2. Will Russia, which would be the smallest country with the poorest
economy, be willing to take orders from China is such an alliance?