Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Y2K" data-source="post: 6431641" data-attributes="member: 35049">Let’s not make the same mistake as the Tamil people did. Out of profound dissatisfaction, they abandoned, turned their backs on their civilian lawyer-politician leaders and opted for a warrior-warlord as their “national leader”.  This has led them to the brink of destruction as a community. Do the Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims collectively wish to make the same disastrous choice or its equivalent? We needed a tough, ruthless, driven, army commander to beat an enemy as ruthless as the Tigers but do we need him to lead us and rule us?If you wish to change the analogy, the end of the Tamil nationalist cause commenced with the Karuna breakaway and the challenge to his leader. Karuna has proved his point about being the match winning commander for the Tigers: they lost the only war in which he did not fight and indeed fought on the other side. Is Sarath Fonseka our Karuna equivalent? Karuna is good for Sri Lanka as a whole but that was because he went up against Prabhakaran, not a democratically elected nationalist leader. What would be the effect on the national interest of a Karuna rebellion on our side? Do we wish to reward it with electoral success?Gen Fonseka claims that the military victory was his, while he acknowledges the “support” extended by President Rajapakse. History however, rightly credits Lincoln over Grant and Sherman, Lenin over Trotsky, Stalin over Zhukhov, Churchill over Montgomery, Roosevelt over Patton and MacArthur, Mao over Zhu Deh and Lin Biao, and Ho Chi Minh over Gen Giap.  This is because the role of overall political leadership and the necessary political will is the most vital single element in the conduct of war.</blockquote>

Verification: Asuwa dahayen wadi kalama keeyada?

Top Bottom