Time for Coffee with Friend

When things in your life seem almost too much to handle, when 24 hours in a day are not enough, remember the story of an empty jar and the 2 cups of coffee.

A professor stood before his philosophy class and had some items in front of him. When the class began, wordlessly, he picked up a very large empty jar and proceeded to fill it with rocks until the top of the jar.He then asked the students if the jar was full. They agreed that it was! So the professor then picked up a box of pebbles and poured them into the jar. He shook the jar lightly. The pebbles, of course, rolled into the open areas between the rocks. He then asked the students again if the jar was full. They agreed it was.

The professor next picked up a box of sand and poured it into the jar. Of course, the sand filled up everything else. He asked once more if the jar was full. The students responded with a unanimous "yes."

The professor then produced two cups of coffee from under the table and poured the entire contents into the jar, effectively filling the empty space between the sand. The students laughed."Now," said the professor, as the laughter subsided, " I want you to recognize that this jar represents your life. The rocks are the important things - your health, your family, your partner, your children, your friends, your favorite passions - things that if everything else was lost and only they remained, your life would still be full.The pebbles are the other things that matter like your job, your house, and your car. The sand is everything else - the small stuff.If you put the sand into the jar first, there is no room for the pebbles or the rocks. The same goes for life. If you spend all your time and energy on the small stuff, you will never have room for the things that are important to you.

Pay attention to the things that are critical to your happiness. Play with your children. Take time to get medical checkups. Take your partner out to dinner. Play another 18. There will always be time to go to work, clean the house, give a dinner party and fix the disposal"Take care of the rocks first, the things that really matter. Set your priorities. The rest is just sand."One of the students raised her hand and inquired what the coffee represented.The professor smiled. "I'm glad you asked.

It just goes to show you that no matter how full your life may seem, there's always room for a couple of cups of coffee with a friend."

Australianism means single-minded determination to win

5th Match of India-Australia ODI series 2007 has gone to Australia..

Congrats Australia, a team battered with injuries has hung on for a memorable win.. Sixty one years ago, at the end of a tour of England by Don Bradman's famous pack, John Arlott put it thus: "Australianism," wrote Arlott, "means single-minded determination to win - to win within the laws but, if necessary, to the last limit within them. It means where the 'impossible' is within the realm of what the human body can do, there are Australians who believe that they can do it - and who have succeeded often enough to make us wonder if anything is impossible to them. It means they have never lost a match - particularly a Test match - until the last run is scored or their last wicket down."

Spare a thought for Sachin Tendulkar. He seemed to have done everything possible but didn't last the final lap. That will really hurt him no doubt but that's that. Australia go ahead in the series.

Milan Beeka: "ODI no. 2923 will always be remembered for Sachin- 17 000 runs and a knock for the ages, Marsh's maiden century and the Australian spirit for winning against all odds! What a true spectacle.:

Hang on for the quotes from the post-match ceremony

Dhoni: "They got off to a good start and we never got into a postion to contain them. It was up to us to chase it. We got a good start and we came in the end due to Tendulkar and Raina. We lost it in our mental calculation, not because of our talent. It was one of the good ODI tracks we have seen in India, you have to be smart. Hopefully we will be up for the next two games."

Ponting " It was one of the amazing games and certainly one of the best innings ever from Sachin. You just have to keep hanging in there, you just have tell your bowlers to keep bowling to the plan. just one bad shot and we could come in but Sachin didn't play many bad shots today! Its really unbelievable how we have played, considering al the injuries. Marsh played realy well.:"

Man of the Match is Sachin Tendulkar: "I thought we started off really well then lost wickets. Suresh and I had a good partnership but in the end, it was disappointing. yeah It was one of my best knocks, the pressure to keep scoring runs was there and we took it very close. I thought Suresh has a terrific talent; he can play the big shots, so if we can get the partnership going, and with powerplay left, the game can go anyway. I care about playing for India, it's a passion and I have been absoloutely honoured to play for India so long."

Why do we refuse to learn from past?

Ruling class is united in downplaying recent chinese incursions despite SOS calls raised by Uttarakhand and Arunanchal Pradesh CMs. The same government started crying when Musharraf disclosed the Pakistan had modified and deployed the America-gifted aumminitions against India. These were exact scenarios and responses in 1962 vis-a-vis China and in 1965 vis-a-vis Pakistan. The question is why do we always behave as an ostrich keeping our head in sand?

This is from rediff -

A student of military history would be justified in feeling a sense of deja vu at recent happenings. Former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf [ Images ] disclosed that he used American aid not against terrorists but to bolster Pakistani capabilities against India. Our leaders then go ballistic and beseech the Americans!

Cut to April/May 1965 -- Pakistan used the Patton tanks against India in the Rann of Kutch -- we spend time and energy in taking photographs and again go to the Americans.

As in 1962, we seem to downplay Chinese intrusions -- not unlike the famous Nehruvian jibe about Aksai Chin that not a blade of grass grows there!

To cap it all is the recent disclosure by nuclear scientist Dr K Santhanam, that the May 1998 thermonuclear test was less than 100 percent successful has fuelled a much needed debate on our security and defence preparedness. Dr Santhanam is a scientist connected with India's nuclear programme and his views have to be taken seriously. Since 1998, India has openly shifted from 'defence' to 'deterrence' as cornerstone of its security policies.

India did not have much choice in the matter. In the decade of 1980s a reckless US supplied weapon systems to Pakistan (the F-16s) which in turn for the first time gave that country reach and bomb weight to pose a direct threat to Indian cities. Our nuclear reactors came under threat. Thus should Pakistan have so chosen it could target these and virtually 'nuke' India?

The critics of 1998 Pokhran II and an overt Indian nuclear posture to 'deter' this attack, ignore this reality. All that the 'Shakti' tests did was to go for overt in place of 'covert deterrence', itself a contradiction in terms. Ten years have passed and during this time these theories were severely tested and a comprehensive debate ought to be welcome.

While the attention of Indians and the world is focussed on the economic progress of our country, the age-old weakness of our civilisation -- the neglect of the security dimension, casts a long dark shadow on our future.

India is unique in several ways -- unlike other countries, in India ardent and idealist 'peace lobbies' are part of mainstream politics and not on the fringes as in all other countries of the world. In its 5,000-year-old history, India has produced treatises on virtually every subject on the earth, from astronomy, medicine to even sex, but we do not have a single major work on warfare or the art of war.

Time and again our use of war elephants was shown to be ineffective, yet we persisted in it.

We were the first to use war rockets in the 18th century, but never developed them to make them bigger, longer or more effective. Intellectuals stayed away from the war strategy and weapons.

We refused to change with the times.

In the nuclear age as well we seem to be repeating our dismal history. The new 'mantra' is minimum deterrence and second strike capability as panacea solution to face all threats. India went wrong in Kargil [ Images ] in 1999 when we realised that the proxy aggression 'used 'the nuclear umbrella while we lulled ourselves.

The 2002 Operation Parakaram in the wake of the attack on Parliament as well as our inability to react to the Mumbai [Images ] attacks on 26/11 showed the limits of our retaliatory capability.

Through successful use of rhetoric and threats, Pakistan neutralised our conventional response.

Now over the last 10 years it has become an established pattern of behaviour on our part. Our strategy of retaliation with surgical strikes or the new strategy of 'cold start' remains moribund and ineffective for the enemy believes and rightly so, that we lack the will and wherewithal to implement it.

Our conventional retaliation strategy lacks 'credibility' and therefore is no deterrent. The issue is not of mere 'will' either. India lacks the overwhelming technological/numerical superiority to implement this. For instance, Israel has been successfully employing 'threat of retaliation' as a deterrent to proxy or terrorist threats. Israeli technical prowess makes it a credible threat and its past behaviour has established its will to act.

In 1773, the small kingdom of Thanjavur was threatened by the combined forces of the Karnataka nawab and the British. As enemy troops massed outside the city, the high priests of the famed Thanjavur temple assured the king that their 'mantra' was powerful enough to defeat the invaders, and went on to sprinkle the water sanctified by the 'mantra' to stop the invasion! Of course the 'mantra' failed and the kingdom was annexed by the British.

Today we have the high priests of nuclear strategy in Delhi [ Images ] similarly chanting the 'mantra' of no first use and minimum deterrence! Will the result be any different than at Thanjavur in the 18th century?

An analysis of why 'we are like that only' is necessary so that we can rectify this fatal flaw in our national psyche.

The Diagnosis: What ails Indian thinking on defence?

We are a peculiar nation that is obsessed with the 'eternal truth' while we ignore the 'practical' or the realistic world. Carl Jung, the Swedish psychologist visiting India about a century ago, had remarked about this and felt (as a Westerner) as if the whole country lived in a trance or maya or illusion.

Let me illustrate. It is a fundamental belief of Indians that there are no evil beings only evil deeds and fundamentally theatman or the soul is universal and part of the divine in all of us.

While this is so, yet there are evil individuals, for instance the terrorists who mercilessly killed hundreds in Mumbai or have been planting bombs in busy trains and markets. We have to deal with this evil ruthlessly. But what do the Indians do? We question every action of the police/armed forces, we have karuna or pity for the Mumbai terrorists.

The list of our foundational weaknesses is a long one. Here I would just mention it and leave the rest to the reader's imagination.

• We tend to think that security is the sole prerogative of the armed forces and police.
• Divorce between theorists and practitioners -- it is politically incorrect to think of national security in academia -- the British implanted a colonial mindset whereby Indians were kept out of this vital area. Even 62 years after independence this persists.
• The lack of strategic culture -- in case of nuclear strategy we have scientists as strategists -- like asking chemist to prescribe medicines (as many Indians do).
• Segmented approach to security -- armed forces kept away from decision making on the nuclear issue.
• Treating low intensity, conventional and nuclear conflicts in isolation and denying the linkages between them.
• Isolating defence industry/research from mainstream and colossal inefficiency of the bureaucratic structure of the Defence Research and Development Organisation empire.

Colonel Anil A Athale is the Chhattrapati Shivaji Fellow at the United Services Institution and coordinator of the Pune-based think-tank Inpad.

Travels of cuisines

Where all our indian cuisine has travelled? One of my friend in Charlotte sampled Ethiopian themed lunch last week and had a dish called  Sambussa sounding like Samosa which we get in India. That started me on the thought that how does the cuisine gets popularised in far-flung places and what form the cusine takes in its adopted land. Essentially, If a cuisine is adopted even 50 kms away from its origin, you can expect it it be quite different than origin...sample Chat in B'lore vs. chat in delhi...Dosa in B'lore vs Dosa in Delhi..And North Indian food in Bangalore and Bay area vs North Indian food in .well..north india..

The sordid saga of Bangalore Airport

The new BIAL airport seems to attract controversy with every passing day. Now, people of all shaeds and characters want HAL airport in bangalore to remain open. Now, this HAL airport is fit to be used only for 5 landings-and-take-offs-a-day routine of Indian AirForce jets and not for any commecial service. Everybody knew that BIAL is going to come-up from 01-APR-08 and nobody created a furore that we need better access to BIAL which is 40 kms from nearest city border. Our Coomie Friends now are putting their weight behind this with only interest that Airport Authority employess don't need to be relocated. This is just nuts.

Are Indians losing Humility Trait in their personality?

Very thought-provoking article - http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/332989.html by Sambit Bal.
One one side, we see a study in masala news paper supplement called "Bangalore Times" about how being agressive is good for your carrier. On the other-side, it is really the skill that matter, probably.
Unlike Australians, Indian way of living life has always focussed on humility. Whatever you achieve, it is due to the almighty who was delighted at your efforts in achieving your targets. It is not solely due to your efforts. Now, some people might come back and say - that's the reason why we lag in sports, Finance, economy, innovation behing major powers in world? I think, it is a matter of interpretation. There are three major steps in achieving success -
1. You are motivated to make effort. I believe almighty has major role to play here since only certain people make effort. A whole lot are satisfied with status quo.
2. You make the best and honest effort to the best of your capability. Again, I believe, luck favours those why try hardest.
3. You achieve the results. believe me when I say that it is all due to almighty. There are tons of souls out there who are putting better efforts than you but you are one who achieve success.
So, there it go...Try you hardest, be honest and be humble in your achievements and be gracious in your defeats.

Australian way of Playing Cricket

Second test between India and Australia has finished and India would be ruing bad umpiring decisions and their failure to correct their batting line-up. It was depressing to see them losing after they have almost saved the match. However this post is not about India's in-ability to save the match. Rather, it is opposition, in this case Mighty Australia, whose way of playing Cricket is nauseating.
Now, there is no doubt Australia is a strong team. Good bowling Strength, Couple of Great Batsmen and to top it all, ferocious fielding...this pretty much sums -up Australian teams of last decade. So, it seems amusing that they would want to rely on extraneous means to get to Winning post. The way Michael Clarke didn't walk after he had thick-edged the ball to first slip and the way ponting would apear after "grossing" the ball of Dhoni's pads, was disgusting to say the least. I am not sure why they do it? They are pretty smart cricketers, skilled and smart. Why will they want to win like weak men?