Its Recession!!!!

Recession At Play...

International Nuclear Disarmament: The Road Ahead

Obama’s regime might soon bring the next vital push to International Nuclear Disarmament and this might very well start with Iran and Syria being brought under confidence. This would be spearheaded by Senator Hillary Clinton, the ex First Lady of United States. The approach can involve of two strategies for such International peace initiatives. These are:

• Soft Power (Includes diplomacy, economic aid and commerce)
• Hard Power (Includes embargoes, trade barriers and use of lethal power)

The important question here arises that how will US gather International support for this when it itself holds the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. The second largest is by Russia and these two countries between them have enough power to destroy earth 5 times over if they enter Armageddon. Another concern is international peace diplomats expressing their concern on US using the Nuclear Disarmament platform as a means to pressurise Iran into giving up the thought of setting up a Euro based Oil Exchange. If Iran does go through with this, the only thing that might keep US from attacking it will be the nuclear arsenal it holds as a shield. An Iran stripped of nuclear power would be a much easier target than the one with a nuclear curtain.
The decades old Arab-Israeli conflict will be another major barrier and an atmosphere conducive to such talks would be when both nations are exercising a cease fire. This is highly unlikely to exist with the Palestinian group Hamas firing missiles into Israel.
Talks held before the Presidential elections in Tehran in June will hold the key to how actually the International Nuclear Disarmament strategy of the US chalks out. US understands that no major peace initiatives in Iran and Syria can be put into gear without it being a part of it.

Posted by Rahul

Born Liars!!!

From childhood we are taught that lying is a bad thing, a sin. Then all of a sudden, we all seem to master the ability to lie as we grow up. Some defend this by preaching us that lying is always not bad if its for some one's good. Anyways, not going into the controversy of ethical dilemma, let me tell you why I am talking about lying.

Science has proven that human beings are born liars. What I mean by this is that they don't have to be taught to lie and they do not necessarily learn it from others. Its conditioned into their genetic model. You can call it a subconscious reflex which eventually with practice turns into a conscious action.

An experiment involving several children who had just started speaking, was conducted to test whether lying comes naturally or is conditioned by the environment in which one lives. Children were left in a room with a hidden camera and a birthday cake on a table and asked not to eat the cake until the adults arrive. On observation it was seen that a few minutes later the children started eating the cake and behaving like children do (Messy and cute with food they like). When they were asked later, who ate the cake?, they said that they did not know and denied eating the cake.

A simple experiment that proved that we are born liars and that lying is not something that we learn as we grow up. I guess the ones who master this art as they grow up, turn out to become great lawyers and politicians (pun intended).

Posted by Rahul Gosain

Backing Down From A Skirmish

Insurance companies are not known for making multi-million dollar coverages easily available and very frankly if they keep doing so, then they would not be in the business. This is the reason I was shocked when I read that Tata AIG which is the main insurer for Taj Mumbai and New India Assurance Co., the key insurer for Trident Mumbai, had agreed not only to cover the damage caused by terrorists but also all losses including the ones caused by security agencies. Their argument was that they were unable to differentiate the damage caused. (Yeah Right!!!)

So what's the catch? Did they get "Enlightened" overnight? I don't think so. Its a simple logic of not entering a skirmish when you know that you won't win and would damage your image in the process, something similar to what Indira Gandhi did not realize during the 1970s.

If the case goes to the court for coverage of all losses, then the chances are that the case will be ruled in favour of the hotels. What might cause more damage for the insurance companies is that they may lose pubic confidence if they deny the coverage, especially when the Mumbai attacks have become a sensitive issue for the entire nation.

I am sure that the Insurance Companies are not happy to pay, especially when we are looking at a figure between Rs 750 - Rs 1300 crores. Ouch!!!!!! That's gotta hurt....

Posted by Rahul Gosain