Anti-empire Pro-Russian site features a Sandhya Jain article.
thesaker.is/rise-of-a-multi-polar-asia-a-view-from-india/
The article is not what's interesting. It's the comments that I saw there (didn't read all the way down, but read enough to further confirm conclusions. Archiving the above link for its comments.
1. The overall purpose of the article and present Russia's vision is that there should be resistance to take on the fascist Empire that US is creating day by day. Russia has made close ties with China to ward off the threat - so would I if I were Russia (but not if I were India).
Russia plans to grow the resistance by recruiting India and Iran. And Pakistan gets to tag along.
Russians repeatedly express the entirely unrealistic wish (and vision) that China and India should get along and India and Pak too. The Russians even go so far imagining that the greater interest will pull all of them together (doubt it) to put aside their differences, since Russia imagines that the differences between genocidal maniac jihadi Pakiland and Unfinished Business=heathen India is minor.
Presumably the Russians think that India will just have to give up yet more land to China in order to keep the peace in this new resistance formation. Uh, fat chance. No unity on those terms.
Can have common economic policies but - though Russia and India are not enemies and neither are India and Iran - China and Pakistan are most certainly enemies of India. (I don't mean the non-commie Chinese population, though I do mean the islamic Paki population.) And I don't see why the Russians are plugging for Hezbollah either. Geez. And what's with the invitation to TSP? People need to stop feeding islam.
Russia - for the greater interest - may try to impose a common code, and choose to overlook Chinese and Paki aggression against India in view of this "greater good", and perhaps Indian political leaders who come hereafter will ignore islamic genocides of Hindus and more Chinese land theft in India in order to keep the "peace" and maintain their place in the circle of resisting "friends". But India will only lose and lose again from the way Russia envisions the future of how this should play out.
Again: Ganging up economically against the US is one thing, but no aggression from CN and TSP should be tolerated - India need not look to Russia for dispute mediation in such a case (which is the role the US is currently playing and which India never benefited by either).
Except for Russia, the others on Russia's wishlist are useless. (India wants SE Asian nations included, which neither the Russians nor the Chinese think are useful. To India, they are of course very useful as friends.)
Russia and China WILL get along. They are both equally matched so will not threaten each other (though Russia may make some concessions throughout). While Indian soldiers are not cowards, our country and army is at present at a disadvantage w.r.t. China, which is on the offence (while India is on the defence), since China has deployed its armies on India's boundaries. Note that China's living space is in the east of China (with only 3 major cities in the centre), while most of China's central and almost all its western reaches are essentially wild. So China has made its army cross beyond that, to be deployed in/at India's boundaries. Contrary to Sandhya Jain's naive views (and the comments at the link show how naive she is), China is very much interested in prime real estate. It has too little agricultural land and wants/needs more.
2. Despite Sandhya in her article having totally undermined India's own interests by having totally underplayed* the actual situation of Chinese territorial aggression into Indian space*, the Chinese commenters at the link still pass off India as the aggressor AND still proclaim that they will settle their land disputes with India (next).
Look how the Chinese commenters give no inch (and keep their position), though Sandhya walked a mile in their direction (without anyone asking her to). The Chinese comments - clearly communists and brainwashed Chinese nationalists, since most Chinese don't care about acquiring yet more territory and the heathens certainly don't - the Chinese commenting there will merely take Sandhya's extreme concessions as proof that "even Indians admitted that 'it is all disputed -> it is all a matter of POV -> therefore India has no legitimate claims'". Whereas the Chinese side will hold strong to their position that Arunachal Pradesh "belongs to them" (and eventually they will publicly advance their claims on J&K too), and the Russians - who are understandably ignorant and disinterested (despite trying to be interested for "unity's sake") - and others will merely conclude that the Chinese claim must be more valid since they're more vocal about it while Indians (like Sandhya, but not exclusively) rolled over on their stance.
Very dangerous and foolish.
* Indians should learn Never to give an inch, but way too many Indians wanting to play with China always sell all our interests. And I'm not at all just talking about Sandhya Jain here.
3. Then there are of course the other commenters: the Pakistanis, rearing their ugly heads and lying as usual against history, to pretend their rewritten version is also a valid "POV". Russia will NOT care and will try to keep all happy/expect equally from all to fall in line. = More proof that a close interaction - beyond joint economic cooperation with Russia and China and Iran (not TSP) to limit the US/western hegemony - is Not in India's interest.
It's like that battle in was it Chanakya were the phrase "the friend of my friend is my enemy" is to have derived from.
I only came across a snippet about its origins, but the situation in Chanakya's scenario was way more complicated. It was about a king who is surrounded by multiple enemy kings. And if he wants to win, he will have to play them against each other. While Russia is no threat, being neutral to India (though under Chinese influence from the close Sino-Russian cooperation that has started, that may change), and Iran is not a neighbour and has enemies closer to home, China and TSP are indeed enemies. And if India won't play enemies against each other, it need not fear that China will be equally considerate: China is already using TSP against India.
4. Most interesting is to hear the communists, christians and pakis interact.
A faithful Paki regularly invoking islam/caliphate theories promised greater fealty to Russia than to China: he said that Pakistan and Russia were natural allies compared to Pakistan and China, on account of Russia's christianism being closer to TSP's islam and because of the great distance between China's Taoism and Buddhism, which he said islam didn't have commonality with.
Not too long after that, some Chinese communist caved - desperate to ensure Paki loyalty - by declaring that "Not true, Buddhism and Taoism have at least as much in common with islam" by quoting some E Asian islamic (?) inculturationist on Chinese Confucianism IIRC (I'm not aware of islamic inculturation on Buddhism and Taoism. In China, islam has repeatedly tried to hijack Confucianism as a precursor form of islam.) In any case, the point was, the Chinese communists will readily cave to islam on insistences concerning religion: Chinese atheists/'cultural' Chinese (as some communists doing lipservice to govt-hijacked Confucianism are) are not interested in religion and hence will make concessions to TSP/islam in this area to secure the greater prize for them: the use of TSP in its own plans and as a buffer against India/to undermine India with.*
In reciprocation, the Paki islamaniac inched towards the Chinese capitulation by saying that he didn't meant to totally dismiss them, but reaffirmed that muslims' friends/brothers are only christians and muslims will love only christians (and invoked some islamic prediction or other from the koran about this).
Nothing Indians there mentioned TSP helping Uighurs against Chinese or islamics killing Chinese engineers in TSP itself made a dent: the Chinese communists commenting - and they mirror their govt's position in this - are steadfast in their interest in maintaining their close ties (not natural, entirely opportunistic but hence definitely useful to China) with Pakistan.
+ Chinese are not under any delusions about Pakis being an islamic threat, but it is not one that is directed at itself (yet), so can be totally tolerated, even nurtured for all they care. [*Though feeding islam is a bad idea on China's part, as it is the greater threat to China. Recall islam destroying both the E Roman empire/Byzantinium and Persia, who were both too busy warring each other to measure up the enemy islam properly. China undermining India - via islamic TSP - will strengthen islam and this can easily backfire on China Tomorrow even if not Today.]
+ The Paki will speak honestly from his faith in declaring who his real friends are (christians), the Chinese communists will twist the Taoism and Buddhism (and Confucianism) of their land and civilisation to suit the moment if it will serve the purpose. The Chinese communists vocalising are not guided by any of these religions after all, and merely use them as a means to an end: that of securing Pakistan's loyalty, preferably over and above TSP's loyalty - pledged here by a Paki commenting - to Russia (in return for Paki's request that Russia adopt TSP in its plans and to its bosom too).
Russians, despite knowing jihad well, do not equate Pakistan with the Al-Qaeda that is ISI-controlled. I think the Russians are blinkered about this detail, and probably reason that a jihadi state of Pakistan is not the same as the Taliban they fought in Afghanistan or the Chechnyans within its borders. They probably reason about Pakistan as they do about Hezbollah. (Iran has the edge in civility being less belligerent, possibly/probably because all its neighbours are dar-ul-islams already.)
5. Except for the Russians commenting at that link - who were neutral towards India - and a Chinese American (citizen, i.e. not an activist), who was too far removed from China to know whether she needed to take an anti-Indian position (the day may come when we all have to stand by our own people/country, I fear)
Again: except for the Russians being neutral, everyone else commenting - the Chinese communist contingent who are always sent out on such occasions and islamic Pakis who always invite themselves into such discussions - were merely banging on India and trying to strengthen Chinese-TSP ties by mouthing off against their common enemy together. (So much for Sandhya meeting China more than half way in her article; which the Russians took as the Indian POV, whereas it is a 'concessionist' POV.)
^ BTW, that above configuration - neutral Russia and extremely inimical closely-tied China-Pak combine w.r.t. India (silent/absent Iran? just kidding) - is a perfect summary of how the interactions will be on the large scale of Russia-China-India-TSP (and Iran) relations when all are stuck together in the plans Russia has for the region. Russian plans for cooperation may benefit them, but by their expecting India to make peace with belligerent China and TSP, no benefits can be foreseen for India.
6. Russian commenters were not interested
+ in the plight of Balochis, who were briefly brought up. (Russia is looking for long term interests. That islam genocides Balochis does not concern the Russians, so - unlike the US, which will feign sympathy if it will serve its own foreign policy purposes - Russia naturally remains disinterested/apathetic.)
In contrast, Balochis - despite being islamic - are not inimical to Indian interests, since they are not neighbouring us and are a useful leverage on TSP. The way India is sandwiched by TSP and China, and China makes ties with TSP despite it being islamic.
Of course, Balochis may be temporary allies: being islamic any number of them may eventually fall for/get swept up by the caliphate. So Indians can't dream of a certain/eternal friendship with them while they are islamic and haven't reverted to ancestral heathenism.
+ Russians were similarly not interested in SE Asian countries, as mentioned before, whereas Sandhya did put forth the Indian govt's deep interest in pursuing a relationship with the non-belligerent SE Asian nations, which are natural allies (though I wouldn't include Malaysia which is jihadising fast).
Russians are not favourable because these SE Asian countries are not considered powerful and hence not considered meaningful. China is of immense value to Russia. China sees the use of Russia in jointly containing US. Everyone else is just a useful extension for them.
7. I think besides forging the Russia-China-India-Iran-(TSP) relationship to whatever extent will further India without sacrificing any of India and Hindus' interests, India must pursue forming deep ties with SE Asian unsaved heathen nations and Japan (as India is already doing)* and in the west pursue ties with Baloch and either Iran OR Israel. Don't know much about Azerbaijan and Tajikistan, but both have Zoroastrian communities and Mazdeanism is/was growing stronger there, so some deeper mutually-beneficial relationships may be forged there on the principle of being natural allies.
Both Israel and Iran can be problematic (and can't befriend both at the same time since they're sworn enemies; it's like Russia unrealistically wanting to befriend India AND China, and Indian AND Pakistan all in one big "happy" family - won't work). Reasons of why Iran and Israel can be problematic:
+ Israel is west-aligned and the west is not good for India. Close relationships with Israel will bring India under the ambit of US interests. Of course army workouts with the US can be useful as a deterrent against China: always a good thing to use one enemy to keep other enemies checkmated, and everyone else is already playing this game.
+ Iran is - while not as crazy as salafists - still extremely islamic, and helping Iran will be the same as helping islam. However, Iran is still better than many other islamic nations since Iran is not wahabi/sunni. And Iran is slowly being made an island of Shia islam by US machinations via ISIS, so they are in no condition to pick and choose friends. It is possible that a sense of belonging to islam is more powerful, except that Sunnis don't recognise Shias as muslim AND Shiitism is being attacked at present by Sunnis so the old enmities are burning strong again.
* Russia is ignoring Japan because despite JP being rich and economically powerful (but so is Russia, so Russia won't need JP for its wealth), JP is not numerically great or vast in land/resources, and no longer a nation with a large standing army, i.e. manpower for war. (In the past, the historical JP armies used to be 1 JP soldier=100 or even 1000 lions. That's not an exaggeration. But the US/west totally neutered JP into an impotent militantly-pacifist nation [until Abe], not at all for ethical reasons over WWII - which was only a small part of the history of JP's armed forces - but because JP was a huge Asian power, with an army to back it up and was a giant killer that all the west put together could not ignore. So the west destroyed JP and declawed it and allowed it to become an "economical superpower", i.e. a country that can't protect its wealth or territory without US "interventions", forcing it into vassal status.)
The news was:
Anti-empire Pro-Russian site features a Sandhya Jain article.
thesaker.is/rise-of-a-multi-polar-asia-a-view-from-india/
The article is not what's interesting. It's the comments that I saw there (didn't read all the way down, but read enough to know it confirmed a larger picture that Indians are already familiar with/would already have worked out).
thesaker.is/rise-of-a-multi-polar-asia-a-view-from-india/
The article is not what's interesting. It's the comments that I saw there (didn't read all the way down, but read enough to further confirm conclusions. Archiving the above link for its comments.
1. The overall purpose of the article and present Russia's vision is that there should be resistance to take on the fascist Empire that US is creating day by day. Russia has made close ties with China to ward off the threat - so would I if I were Russia (but not if I were India).
Russia plans to grow the resistance by recruiting India and Iran. And Pakistan gets to tag along.
Russians repeatedly express the entirely unrealistic wish (and vision) that China and India should get along and India and Pak too. The Russians even go so far imagining that the greater interest will pull all of them together (doubt it) to put aside their differences, since Russia imagines that the differences between genocidal maniac jihadi Pakiland and Unfinished Business=heathen India is minor.
Presumably the Russians think that India will just have to give up yet more land to China in order to keep the peace in this new resistance formation. Uh, fat chance. No unity on those terms.
Can have common economic policies but - though Russia and India are not enemies and neither are India and Iran - China and Pakistan are most certainly enemies of India. (I don't mean the non-commie Chinese population, though I do mean the islamic Paki population.) And I don't see why the Russians are plugging for Hezbollah either. Geez. And what's with the invitation to TSP? People need to stop feeding islam.
Russia - for the greater interest - may try to impose a common code, and choose to overlook Chinese and Paki aggression against India in view of this "greater good", and perhaps Indian political leaders who come hereafter will ignore islamic genocides of Hindus and more Chinese land theft in India in order to keep the "peace" and maintain their place in the circle of resisting "friends". But India will only lose and lose again from the way Russia envisions the future of how this should play out.
Again: Ganging up economically against the US is one thing, but no aggression from CN and TSP should be tolerated - India need not look to Russia for dispute mediation in such a case (which is the role the US is currently playing and which India never benefited by either).
Except for Russia, the others on Russia's wishlist are useless. (India wants SE Asian nations included, which neither the Russians nor the Chinese think are useful. To India, they are of course very useful as friends.)
Russia and China WILL get along. They are both equally matched so will not threaten each other (though Russia may make some concessions throughout). While Indian soldiers are not cowards, our country and army is at present at a disadvantage w.r.t. China, which is on the offence (while India is on the defence), since China has deployed its armies on India's boundaries. Note that China's living space is in the east of China (with only 3 major cities in the centre), while most of China's central and almost all its western reaches are essentially wild. So China has made its army cross beyond that, to be deployed in/at India's boundaries. Contrary to Sandhya Jain's naive views (and the comments at the link show how naive she is), China is very much interested in prime real estate. It has too little agricultural land and wants/needs more.
2. Despite Sandhya in her article having totally undermined India's own interests by having totally underplayed* the actual situation of Chinese territorial aggression into Indian space*, the Chinese commenters at the link still pass off India as the aggressor AND still proclaim that they will settle their land disputes with India (next).
Look how the Chinese commenters give no inch (and keep their position), though Sandhya walked a mile in their direction (without anyone asking her to). The Chinese comments - clearly communists and brainwashed Chinese nationalists, since most Chinese don't care about acquiring yet more territory and the heathens certainly don't - the Chinese commenting there will merely take Sandhya's extreme concessions as proof that "even Indians admitted that 'it is all disputed -> it is all a matter of POV -> therefore India has no legitimate claims'". Whereas the Chinese side will hold strong to their position that Arunachal Pradesh "belongs to them" (and eventually they will publicly advance their claims on J&K too), and the Russians - who are understandably ignorant and disinterested (despite trying to be interested for "unity's sake") - and others will merely conclude that the Chinese claim must be more valid since they're more vocal about it while Indians (like Sandhya, but not exclusively) rolled over on their stance.
Very dangerous and foolish.
* Indians should learn Never to give an inch, but way too many Indians wanting to play with China always sell all our interests. And I'm not at all just talking about Sandhya Jain here.
3. Then there are of course the other commenters: the Pakistanis, rearing their ugly heads and lying as usual against history, to pretend their rewritten version is also a valid "POV". Russia will NOT care and will try to keep all happy/expect equally from all to fall in line. = More proof that a close interaction - beyond joint economic cooperation with Russia and China and Iran (not TSP) to limit the US/western hegemony - is Not in India's interest.
It's like that battle in was it Chanakya were the phrase "the friend of my friend is my enemy" is to have derived from.
I only came across a snippet about its origins, but the situation in Chanakya's scenario was way more complicated. It was about a king who is surrounded by multiple enemy kings. And if he wants to win, he will have to play them against each other. While Russia is no threat, being neutral to India (though under Chinese influence from the close Sino-Russian cooperation that has started, that may change), and Iran is not a neighbour and has enemies closer to home, China and TSP are indeed enemies. And if India won't play enemies against each other, it need not fear that China will be equally considerate: China is already using TSP against India.
4. Most interesting is to hear the communists, christians and pakis interact.
A faithful Paki regularly invoking islam/caliphate theories promised greater fealty to Russia than to China: he said that Pakistan and Russia were natural allies compared to Pakistan and China, on account of Russia's christianism being closer to TSP's islam and because of the great distance between China's Taoism and Buddhism, which he said islam didn't have commonality with.
Not too long after that, some Chinese communist caved - desperate to ensure Paki loyalty - by declaring that "Not true, Buddhism and Taoism have at least as much in common with islam" by quoting some E Asian islamic (?) inculturationist on Chinese Confucianism IIRC (I'm not aware of islamic inculturation on Buddhism and Taoism. In China, islam has repeatedly tried to hijack Confucianism as a precursor form of islam.) In any case, the point was, the Chinese communists will readily cave to islam on insistences concerning religion: Chinese atheists/'cultural' Chinese (as some communists doing lipservice to govt-hijacked Confucianism are) are not interested in religion and hence will make concessions to TSP/islam in this area to secure the greater prize for them: the use of TSP in its own plans and as a buffer against India/to undermine India with.*
In reciprocation, the Paki islamaniac inched towards the Chinese capitulation by saying that he didn't meant to totally dismiss them, but reaffirmed that muslims' friends/brothers are only christians and muslims will love only christians (and invoked some islamic prediction or other from the koran about this).
Nothing Indians there mentioned TSP helping Uighurs against Chinese or islamics killing Chinese engineers in TSP itself made a dent: the Chinese communists commenting - and they mirror their govt's position in this - are steadfast in their interest in maintaining their close ties (not natural, entirely opportunistic but hence definitely useful to China) with Pakistan.
+ Chinese are not under any delusions about Pakis being an islamic threat, but it is not one that is directed at itself (yet), so can be totally tolerated, even nurtured for all they care. [*Though feeding islam is a bad idea on China's part, as it is the greater threat to China. Recall islam destroying both the E Roman empire/Byzantinium and Persia, who were both too busy warring each other to measure up the enemy islam properly. China undermining India - via islamic TSP - will strengthen islam and this can easily backfire on China Tomorrow even if not Today.]
+ The Paki will speak honestly from his faith in declaring who his real friends are (christians), the Chinese communists will twist the Taoism and Buddhism (and Confucianism) of their land and civilisation to suit the moment if it will serve the purpose. The Chinese communists vocalising are not guided by any of these religions after all, and merely use them as a means to an end: that of securing Pakistan's loyalty, preferably over and above TSP's loyalty - pledged here by a Paki commenting - to Russia (in return for Paki's request that Russia adopt TSP in its plans and to its bosom too).
Russians, despite knowing jihad well, do not equate Pakistan with the Al-Qaeda that is ISI-controlled. I think the Russians are blinkered about this detail, and probably reason that a jihadi state of Pakistan is not the same as the Taliban they fought in Afghanistan or the Chechnyans within its borders. They probably reason about Pakistan as they do about Hezbollah. (Iran has the edge in civility being less belligerent, possibly/probably because all its neighbours are dar-ul-islams already.)
5. Except for the Russians commenting at that link - who were neutral towards India - and a Chinese American (citizen, i.e. not an activist), who was too far removed from China to know whether she needed to take an anti-Indian position (the day may come when we all have to stand by our own people/country, I fear)
Again: except for the Russians being neutral, everyone else commenting - the Chinese communist contingent who are always sent out on such occasions and islamic Pakis who always invite themselves into such discussions - were merely banging on India and trying to strengthen Chinese-TSP ties by mouthing off against their common enemy together. (So much for Sandhya meeting China more than half way in her article; which the Russians took as the Indian POV, whereas it is a 'concessionist' POV.)
^ BTW, that above configuration - neutral Russia and extremely inimical closely-tied China-Pak combine w.r.t. India (silent/absent Iran? just kidding) - is a perfect summary of how the interactions will be on the large scale of Russia-China-India-TSP (and Iran) relations when all are stuck together in the plans Russia has for the region. Russian plans for cooperation may benefit them, but by their expecting India to make peace with belligerent China and TSP, no benefits can be foreseen for India.
6. Russian commenters were not interested
+ in the plight of Balochis, who were briefly brought up. (Russia is looking for long term interests. That islam genocides Balochis does not concern the Russians, so - unlike the US, which will feign sympathy if it will serve its own foreign policy purposes - Russia naturally remains disinterested/apathetic.)
In contrast, Balochis - despite being islamic - are not inimical to Indian interests, since they are not neighbouring us and are a useful leverage on TSP. The way India is sandwiched by TSP and China, and China makes ties with TSP despite it being islamic.
Of course, Balochis may be temporary allies: being islamic any number of them may eventually fall for/get swept up by the caliphate. So Indians can't dream of a certain/eternal friendship with them while they are islamic and haven't reverted to ancestral heathenism.
+ Russians were similarly not interested in SE Asian countries, as mentioned before, whereas Sandhya did put forth the Indian govt's deep interest in pursuing a relationship with the non-belligerent SE Asian nations, which are natural allies (though I wouldn't include Malaysia which is jihadising fast).
Russians are not favourable because these SE Asian countries are not considered powerful and hence not considered meaningful. China is of immense value to Russia. China sees the use of Russia in jointly containing US. Everyone else is just a useful extension for them.
7. I think besides forging the Russia-China-India-Iran-(TSP) relationship to whatever extent will further India without sacrificing any of India and Hindus' interests, India must pursue forming deep ties with SE Asian unsaved heathen nations and Japan (as India is already doing)* and in the west pursue ties with Baloch and either Iran OR Israel. Don't know much about Azerbaijan and Tajikistan, but both have Zoroastrian communities and Mazdeanism is/was growing stronger there, so some deeper mutually-beneficial relationships may be forged there on the principle of being natural allies.
Both Israel and Iran can be problematic (and can't befriend both at the same time since they're sworn enemies; it's like Russia unrealistically wanting to befriend India AND China, and Indian AND Pakistan all in one big "happy" family - won't work). Reasons of why Iran and Israel can be problematic:
+ Israel is west-aligned and the west is not good for India. Close relationships with Israel will bring India under the ambit of US interests. Of course army workouts with the US can be useful as a deterrent against China: always a good thing to use one enemy to keep other enemies checkmated, and everyone else is already playing this game.
+ Iran is - while not as crazy as salafists - still extremely islamic, and helping Iran will be the same as helping islam. However, Iran is still better than many other islamic nations since Iran is not wahabi/sunni. And Iran is slowly being made an island of Shia islam by US machinations via ISIS, so they are in no condition to pick and choose friends. It is possible that a sense of belonging to islam is more powerful, except that Sunnis don't recognise Shias as muslim AND Shiitism is being attacked at present by Sunnis so the old enmities are burning strong again.
* Russia is ignoring Japan because despite JP being rich and economically powerful (but so is Russia, so Russia won't need JP for its wealth), JP is not numerically great or vast in land/resources, and no longer a nation with a large standing army, i.e. manpower for war. (In the past, the historical JP armies used to be 1 JP soldier=100 or even 1000 lions. That's not an exaggeration. But the US/west totally neutered JP into an impotent militantly-pacifist nation [until Abe], not at all for ethical reasons over WWII - which was only a small part of the history of JP's armed forces - but because JP was a huge Asian power, with an army to back it up and was a giant killer that all the west put together could not ignore. So the west destroyed JP and declawed it and allowed it to become an "economical superpower", i.e. a country that can't protect its wealth or territory without US "interventions", forcing it into vassal status.)
The news was:
Anti-empire Pro-Russian site features a Sandhya Jain article.
thesaker.is/rise-of-a-multi-polar-asia-a-view-from-india/
The article is not what's interesting. It's the comments that I saw there (didn't read all the way down, but read enough to know it confirmed a larger picture that Indians are already familiar with/would already have worked out).