Unfettered Blather

Detailed Story on the Mumbai Attacks

I tried really hard to enjoy myself over the holiday, but the attacks on Mumbai is not as easy for me to abstract as just more conflict on some other part of the world. I am very fond of India and very fond of the Indian people. I have worked with many of them extensively over the past decade and even visited the country. They are, in my opinion, a trade partner we should be pursuing much more than China or Japan.

While we were enjoying our holiday and preparing for the next, over 150 people were killed while just 10 men spread terror throughout the city. India is no stranger to terrorist attacks, but the brutality and fear these handful of men were able to spread was great enough to make the international news.

Of course, this is causing some introspection inside their country. My heart goes out to them and my prayers with them.

“Why is this a big deal, these girls are talented so why the fuss?”

I’ve seen this tossed about frequently in the debate over China’s underaged gymnasts.

Let me clarify a point first so we can move forward with the heart of the issue.

The gymnists are not old enough to compete. To continue to perpetuate this farce based on conjecture is disrespectful to the collective intelligence of the sports community and everyone’s common sense. We’ve seen the pictures (I thought 13 was a stretch) and given the effort made to hide the story by the state media is only further evidence. They are underaged, get over it folks. Stop trying to save the face of people that do not deserve it.

A little primer of sportsmanship

I have to ask, are there no talented Chinese gymnasts within the age bracket that the rules define? This is an important question because it means the Chinese chose those they felt had the best chance of winning as their only consideration. While winning is the goal, how you win is more important especially in such an organized and officiated event.

Winning at any cost defines a bad winner and unsportsmanlike behavior. When you seek to break a rule to give yourself an advantage, then what rules are important? You have now entered a realm where rules are subjective as you can pick and choose to follow. More importantly it is dishonest. When you agree to abide by a set of rules and then refuse to do so it makes you little better than a common liar. It disrespects the other nations who abide by the rules because it makes it clear that being a good sport is of no concern to you. In order to offer a better chance at victory the Chinese have sacrificed credibility.

Then again, thats to be expected isn’t it? Winning allows them a propaganda opportunity to their public. The Chinese aren’t concerned with competition and show the true nature of their goals. Russia and the East Bloc countries routinely broke this rule during the cold war era and I see no reason to let China off the hook here either. I also fail to understand the logic of the apologists that seem determined to give China a free pass when they corrupt the games for state purposes. This clearly goes against what the Olympics were supposed to represent.

Naturally the IOC is launching and investigation but this boils down to little more than asking those perpetuating the lie to tell the truth so they can revoke the medals the state worked so hard to win at any cost. Anyone see a problem here?

“Annan wants Syria to enforce arms embargo”

What are today’s other headlines going to be?

“Bank robbers asked to provide lobby security.”

“A fox is expected to guard the henhouse.”

“Meth junkie gets a job at the pharmacy.”

“Hugh Hefner to teach at women’s college.”

The list goes on.

James C. Bennet over at Albion’s Seedlings writes that “Given current realities, India’s relationship with the Anglosphere will be one of the defining factors of the 21st century.” No offense to Mr. Bennet or his excellently written entry, but “DUH!”

Bush’s trip to India and many of his comments, the comments of the media, and the comments of the non-technology blogosphere are full of wonder and hope concerning the US and India’s relation. The problem is that they are all about 3 years too late. Anyone involved in the technology profession has been dealing with India or at least Indians for some time now. If you work in technology, chances are you’ve already talked to a tech support specialist in India, worked as part of a project that is largely being developed in India, or at the very least probably had at least one Indian immigrant on your team.

India is a good partner. I can say that with a great deal of confidence because India has something that many countries in its neck of the woods do not. India has freedoms, India gives its people a voice, India is a democracy. Is it perfect? No, of course not! Then again, what system is? When the British left India to self rule, they didn’t fall in on themselves but rather became quite self sufficient. We still have some trade imbalances to discuss, but for the most part I think they’re one of the best global partners we could hope for.

The influence of India on the US has been felt for some time now, and not just in the technology field. Let’s face it though, politicians are often late to the party, even in the Executive Branch. It’s funny to be defending off-shoring at a time when so many companies are thinking of scaling back their operations or doing away with it altogether. The off-shoring trend is dying, which will hopefully be replaced with a sane off-shoring practice. It will not go away entirely, and it shouldn’t go away.

I’m not approaching India with rose-colored glasses. There are challenges and hurdles that must be overcome. There are disadvantages to doing business with them. I am not blind to any of that. However, they’ve been working in this country before I started my IT career in 1999. I somehow doubt they’d be going anywhere even if Bush hadn’t made his big to-do in India.