Whom do I vote for ? ( Only for Open Minded people ! )
The Hicorp allegation has not been proved. The allegation of bribing MPs to
switch is yet to be proved. No one has seen the so called "secret pact" with TNA. Therefore I will not consider them as strong enough reasons to vote against the General Fonseka.
I don't believe that it is rational to expect a "corruption free" government
any where in the world (having said that, the level we experience it here in
Sri Lanka some times is excessive, extreme and absurd). After all, the
definitions of "corruption" is very subjective and there is a lot of room
for people to manipulate how they want to interpret various decisions taken
by their opponents who had the power to make decisions.
Still there is one thing which needs no TV debates, which needs no voice
cuts or video evidence to prove. That is the General Fonseka did not win
the war single handed. He cannot claim the sole ownership of the war
victory.
1) It is the government who decided to wage war against terrorists in
the first place. That was the first time that policy decision was made by a
government in the last 30 years with no ambiguity.
2) It is the government who maintained political stability in south (a
cabinet of > 100 helped in that!) without which the camp who rallies around
the General today would have derailed the war effort, by destabilizing the
government and forcing a general election (everyone in the General's camp
except the General, tried their best to defeat the 2009 budget, when it was
presented in November 2008)
3) It is the Navy who blocked supplies, if those ships reached the shore
(which General Fonseka had no way of stopping) he may still be fighting the
war and the camp that rallies around him today would have forced the
government out of power claiming that the war is dragging without an end.
They would have stopped the war and sent the then "Major General" home.
4) It is the Air force who provided real time surveillance and
neutralized strong enemy positions. If not for that many more would have lost limbs and lives and the camp that rallies around the General today
would have capitalized on those losses to force the government out of power and stop the war.
5) It is the radical foreign policy of the government which found new
friends like China & Russia to balance off the international pressure,
making it possible for the economy to tick and fund the war when all
traditional friends including India, Britain, Japan and America either kept
their hand off or worked against the war. The camp that rallies around the
General was against our friends and was with the countries against us.
6) It is the government who re-organized the "intelligence units" which
had been forced to a near death by the very same camp, which now rallies
around the General, during the ceasefire. If not for that the LTTE would
have made south an utter mess (as they did many times before, when ever they lost in the north) and the camp that now rally around the general would have turned the government and stopped the war.
So, when ever I see and hear the attempts by the General to claim the sole ownership of the war victory, and when I see him making it the only reason for voting him in to the office, it proves me that he is not honest. It proves me that he does not believe in team work. It proves me that he is only good at commanding a regimental organization at most (which I believe he did well, very well in fact, and he is a great military man).
General was just one key player of a large team who achieved the victory.
He is just one element of the most effective strategy that the world has
ever seen in execution against terrorism. The government would have won the war without the General, but the General would have simply been added to the list of unsuccessful commanders if not for the great strategy formulation and execution of the government.
The country is too big and too complex to run like an army. The last 200
years of world history provides enough proof that a regimental government
does no good to people, and they have more often than not, ruined countries. I'm not a fool to believe that the "History will NOT repeat" and Sri Lanka will prove the history wrong. I will not take that risk at this moment.
So I have decided to vote for Mahinda. Simply because he is a much better political leader compared to the General Fonseka. I haven't forgotten that the upcoming election on the 26th is to elect a president for the country and it is NOT to elect the next commander of SL Army. And also because Mahinda has done many development projects in all parts of the country like Flyovers, Bridges, Roads, Power Plants, Air Port and Harbors.
I don't understand how the General who preaches Good governance, policy
based politics, patriotism & Unity, sits with such a policy less, corrupt
and opportunists camp of traitors who always wanted to divide this country, who always opposed every single effort to defeat terrorism over the last few decades. The General not only seeks the help of this camp but also openly commend and accept their "self before country" philosophy and even go to the extent of justifying some of their unacceptable past behaviours. This proves to me that the General is not clear about anything beyond the primitive need to take personal revenge from the president and his family. He is blind beyond that and I feel sorry for him. Such a great military leader not having the maturity to control emotions and resorting to "take revenge at any cost" is surprising, unbelievable and unfortunate. Still it is the SAD reality today.
by A Sri Lankan Citizen
The Hicorp allegation has not been proved. The allegation of bribing MPs to
switch is yet to be proved. No one has seen the so called "secret pact" with TNA. Therefore I will not consider them as strong enough reasons to vote against the General Fonseka.
I don't believe that it is rational to expect a "corruption free" government
any where in the world (having said that, the level we experience it here in
Sri Lanka some times is excessive, extreme and absurd). After all, the
definitions of "corruption" is very subjective and there is a lot of room
for people to manipulate how they want to interpret various decisions taken
by their opponents who had the power to make decisions.
Still there is one thing which needs no TV debates, which needs no voice
cuts or video evidence to prove. That is the General Fonseka did not win
the war single handed. He cannot claim the sole ownership of the war
victory.
1) It is the government who decided to wage war against terrorists in
the first place. That was the first time that policy decision was made by a
government in the last 30 years with no ambiguity.
2) It is the government who maintained political stability in south (a
cabinet of > 100 helped in that!) without which the camp who rallies around
the General today would have derailed the war effort, by destabilizing the
government and forcing a general election (everyone in the General's camp
except the General, tried their best to defeat the 2009 budget, when it was
presented in November 2008)
3) It is the Navy who blocked supplies, if those ships reached the shore
(which General Fonseka had no way of stopping) he may still be fighting the
war and the camp that rallies around him today would have forced the
government out of power claiming that the war is dragging without an end.
They would have stopped the war and sent the then "Major General" home.
4) It is the Air force who provided real time surveillance and
neutralized strong enemy positions. If not for that many more would have lost limbs and lives and the camp that rallies around the General today
would have capitalized on those losses to force the government out of power and stop the war.
5) It is the radical foreign policy of the government which found new
friends like China & Russia to balance off the international pressure,
making it possible for the economy to tick and fund the war when all
traditional friends including India, Britain, Japan and America either kept
their hand off or worked against the war. The camp that rallies around the
General was against our friends and was with the countries against us.
6) It is the government who re-organized the "intelligence units" which
had been forced to a near death by the very same camp, which now rallies
around the General, during the ceasefire. If not for that the LTTE would
have made south an utter mess (as they did many times before, when ever they lost in the north) and the camp that now rally around the general would have turned the government and stopped the war.
So, when ever I see and hear the attempts by the General to claim the sole ownership of the war victory, and when I see him making it the only reason for voting him in to the office, it proves me that he is not honest. It proves me that he does not believe in team work. It proves me that he is only good at commanding a regimental organization at most (which I believe he did well, very well in fact, and he is a great military man).
General was just one key player of a large team who achieved the victory.
He is just one element of the most effective strategy that the world has
ever seen in execution against terrorism. The government would have won the war without the General, but the General would have simply been added to the list of unsuccessful commanders if not for the great strategy formulation and execution of the government.
The country is too big and too complex to run like an army. The last 200
years of world history provides enough proof that a regimental government
does no good to people, and they have more often than not, ruined countries. I'm not a fool to believe that the "History will NOT repeat" and Sri Lanka will prove the history wrong. I will not take that risk at this moment.
So I have decided to vote for Mahinda. Simply because he is a much better political leader compared to the General Fonseka. I haven't forgotten that the upcoming election on the 26th is to elect a president for the country and it is NOT to elect the next commander of SL Army. And also because Mahinda has done many development projects in all parts of the country like Flyovers, Bridges, Roads, Power Plants, Air Port and Harbors.
I don't understand how the General who preaches Good governance, policy
based politics, patriotism & Unity, sits with such a policy less, corrupt
and opportunists camp of traitors who always wanted to divide this country, who always opposed every single effort to defeat terrorism over the last few decades. The General not only seeks the help of this camp but also openly commend and accept their "self before country" philosophy and even go to the extent of justifying some of their unacceptable past behaviours. This proves to me that the General is not clear about anything beyond the primitive need to take personal revenge from the president and his family. He is blind beyond that and I feel sorry for him. Such a great military leader not having the maturity to control emotions and resorting to "take revenge at any cost" is surprising, unbelievable and unfortunate. Still it is the SAD reality today.
by A Sri Lankan Citizen
