Why is the southern part of South Asia more developed than the northern part of South Asia

[Saradiel]

The root cause is minority complex. Nothing else.

The student who are going to IUSF are people who has nothing to loose but everything to gain. They use IUSF as a cover for that.

I dont think any student gains anything by joining IUSF other than wasting their time in uni and in youth

 

[bronxbull]

saradiel,lets bomb those infidels,no pride at all.

bloody quitters.

 

[HeinzG]

I dont think any student gains anything by joining IUSF other than wasting their time in uni and in youth

Oh yeah.................... mainly they get junior level girl friends.... apart from that they gain power within the university premises to do almost any thing. They become famous within the university.

As I have observed many of those people with minority complex are the ones had done nothing during their school days or got bullied in schools.

 

[IND151]

Come to South India and see for yourself. South India is more developed than north in terms of human development. In fact if human development in north was similar to south, India would have been similar to Sri Lanka in terms of human development.

That is true.

However there are several reasons for it.

Maharashtra beats them all.
Marathi manoos sagylat cangla bhartiya

Lets not be too proud, we have long way to go.

 

[Foot12]

ow tikak hoyala balanna. ai eke news natte kialath hoyala balanna. krish project kianne ana gatta project ekak dan Lankan gov atha arapu. MR ge gon wada atharin ekak.



True that empires in india avoided (not deliberately) invasions into SL. but instead we had to face invasions from South india which were equally disastrous. Between SL faced a 30 year terrorism. So your logic is half baked

Loot at the condition of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a failed state. And one of the main reasons is the fact that Afghanistan
was ruled by Turkic rulers for several centuries. You should be grateful to the Emperors of the Vijayanagara Empire
and Maratha Empire like Krishna Devaraya, Shivaji Maharaj and Baji Rao I for saving Sri Lanka from the terrible Turks
and Mughals.

 

[Saradiel]

Loot at the condition of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a failed state. And one of the main reasons is the fact that Afghanistan
was ruled by Turkic rulers for several centuries. You should be grateful to the Emperors of the Vijayanagara Empire
and Maratha Empire like Krishna Devaraya, Shivaji Maharaj and Baji Rao I for saving Sri Lanka from the terrible Turks
and Mughals.

they didnt save SL. The position of these indian states served as a tactical use and advantage for SL state at that time. Indian empires didnt deliberately help us. Even if they faced invasions SL would have given a hard time for turks.

European forces faced extreme hardships in SL when trying to invade and it was in SL that imperialistic forces of Purtugese faced the biggest defeat.

Oh yeah.................... mainly they get junior level girl friends.... apart from that they gain power within the university premises to do almost any thing. They become famous within the university.

As I have observed many of those people with minority complex are the ones had done nothing during their school days or got bullied in schools.

Most senior students find girl friends in junior levels irrespective of whether they are in unions or not. being a part of union is not an added advantage in SL.
I have heard that the ones who bully others are the ones having minority complex and hating a whole system and an institution only because he could not enter it is also a part of minority complex.

Talking about SL unis with you is useless because you dont have an honest need to make SL unis better. There are many problems in SL unis. The biggest problem in SL unis is not unions, but less meagre funding by govern and politicisation of the management of unis.
You just hate them because you failed to enter it.

 

[HeinzG]

Most senior students find girl friends in junior levels irrespective of whether they are in unions or not. being a part of union is not an added advantage in SL.

So you say. Tell that to a person in university.

I have heard that the ones who bully others are the ones having minority complex and hating a whole system and an institution only because he could not enter it is also a part of minority complex.

May be. But that does not negate the fact that you cannot break my arguments.

Talking about SL unis with you is useless because you dont have an honest need to make SL unis better. There are many problems in SL unis. The biggest problem in SL unis is not unions, but less meagre funding by govern and politicisation of the management of unis.
You just hate them because you failed to enter it.

Well funding is low always. But the most troublesome factor is that even though general public spends there money on the gov. universities they do not even get the chance to see how the money is being spent. Is that also a government's fault?

Who manages universities? Politicians?

 

[Foot12]

they didnt save SL. The position of these indian states served as a tactical use and advantage for SL state at that time. Indian empires didnt deliberately help us. Even if they faced invasions SL would have given a hard time for turks.

European forces faced extreme hardships in SL when trying to invade and it was in SL that imperialistic forces of Purtugese faced the biggest defeat.
.

Its doubtful that SL would have stood a chance against the barbaric Turks or even the Arabs.
The Portuguese never had huge armies and thats why the Lankans were able to protect their island
against the Portuguese. But the Turks and the Arabs had much bigger armies than the Portuguese.
And unlike the Portuguese the uncivilized Turks and Arabs were more ruthless and were famous for
slaughtering the civilians of the defeated enemies. They would have turned Lanka into a graveyard.
Its because of the Pratihara Dynasty and Rashtrakuta Dynasty which protected whole India and Sri lanka
against the Arab invaders and the Vijayanagara Empire and the Maratha Empire which defeated the Turkic and
Mughal invaders that Sri Lanka never had to suffer unspeakable atrocities like Persia, Afghanistan and Pakistan
did in the past.

 

[Airboss786]

Well, southern India was lucky that it was only for a short period of time under Turkic rule and some parts of southern India and Sri Lanka were never under Turkic rule. Afghanistan and Pakistan were for a long time under Turkic rule and the Turkic
rulers completely destroyed these regions. The radicalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan has a lot to do with the Turkic rule in the past.

How about you 'back up' what your 'conviction of thoughts'!
Now don't start copying & pasting shit! Otherwise I'll call you a Bs'er!
Prove it!

 

[HeinzG]

Its doubtful that SL would have stood a chance against the barbaric Turks or even the Arabs.
The Portuguese never had huge armies and thats why the Lankans were able to protect their island
against the Portuguese. But the Turks and the Arabs had much bigger armies than the Portuguese.

Turks and Arabs fought on flat terrains with their cavalry. They wouldn't have had the ability to fight in Sri Lankan jungles and flood plains just as easily as in flat terrain in Northern India and ME belt.

Portuguese, Dutch and British all fell victims to the Sri Lankan geography. Even the Cholas who share similar living conditions like Sri Lankans couldn't broke the Sinhalese resistance in southern portions of Sri Lanka.

So it is not about how big your army is or how much technologically better you are.

And unlike the Portuguese the uncivilized Turks and Arabs were more ruthless and were famous for
slaughtering the civilians of the defeated enemies. They would have turned Lanka into a graveyard.

The Kalinga Magha were equally ruthless for Sri Lankans but failed to wipe us out of the picture.

Its because of the Pratihara Dynasty and Rashtrakuta Dynasty which protected whole India and Sri lanka
against the Arab invaders and the Vijayanagara Empire and the Maratha Empire which defeated the Turkic and
Mughal invaders that Sri Lanka never had to suffer unspeakable atrocities like Persia, Afghanistan and Pakistan
did in the past.

This part of your is correct and I would like to also add the warring tribes of the Rajasthan to your list.

 

[Saradiel]

Its doubtful that SL would have stood a chance against the barbaric Turks or even the Arabs.
The Portuguese never had huge armies and thats why the Lankans were able to protect their island
against the Portuguese. But the Turks and the Arabs had much bigger armies than the Portuguese.
And unlike the Portuguese the uncivilized Turks and Arabs were more ruthless and were famous for
slaughtering the civilians of the defeated enemies. They would have turned Lanka into a graveyard.
Its because of the Pratihara Dynasty and Rashtrakuta Dynasty which protected whole India and Sri lanka
against the Arab invaders and the Vijayanagara Empire and the Maratha Empire which defeated the Turkic and
Mughal invaders that Sri Lanka never had to suffer unspeakable atrocities like Persia, Afghanistan and Pakistan
did in the past.

The socalled empires in india didnt protect SL rather they served as a tactical advantage for SL. Though you didnt know Sinhala kings had developed relationships with Mugal kings.

Portugese were not a small army and they faced death and destruction because of guerilla type attacks by Lankan forces. And it wasnt only the portugese they defeated, but including dutch and brits as well.

 

[egodoc222]

because south indians give more importance to education social and economic securities are more important... than fighting for religions...

 

[Saradiel]

So you say. Tell that to a person in university.

Why should I say that a uni student they already know ne. We say that to ones who couldn’t enter a uni.

May be. But that does not negate the fact that you cannot break my arguments.

Did you really bring an argument here? Your arguments are like that of government. When obviously you have nothing to say, keep on repeating the same even if you were proven wrong on many fronts. That is exactly why this govern is facing difficulties in its foreign relationships and made a mess of the things. This government is run by idiots like you voted by idiots like you.

Well funding is low always. But the most troublesome factor is that even though general public spends there money on the gov. universities they do not even get the chance to see how the money is being spent. Is that also a government's fault?
Who manages universities? Politicians?

With low funding how can you expect good universities?. Good universities make good professionals and make the country technologically competent. With lack of investment on state unis we LOSE idiot. And idiot grants and funds for universities are documented and admins know very well where they are spent if existing norms are used. Why don’t you worry how public money is spent on wastages like hamba ports, mihin, mattala? Aney palayan ban yanna! Thamuseta public money ganama thama kakkuma! Thopi wage gon yakku tikka thawa hitiyoth lankawa kohe nawatheeda danne na. Gon yaka!
Universities are managed by a management board. In Sl these management boards are politicized by the government politicians.

 

[HeinzG]

Why should I say that a uni student they already know ne. We say that to ones who couldn’t enter a uni.

So

With low funding how can you expect good universities?.

Low funding doesn't mean that the local unis cannot function as a coherent system. Do you know how much facilities these local universities offer and how many students are taking advantage of them such as the sport facilities.

Your argument on funding breaks down when many African countries who are poorer than us doing better in QS ranking than Sri Lankan universities.

Good universities make good professionals and make the country technologically competent. With lack of investment on state unis we LOSE idiot.

So now you saying local unis do not produce good professionals? That is an severe insult from you.

And idiot grants and funds for universities are documented and admins know very well where they are spent if existing norms are used.

OK I have no issue with that. But do we get to see how are they spent on? How much salary and allowances are paid to university lecturers and working staff, how much money is spent on ancillaries such as university vehicles etc.

Do not the public have the privilege to see the balance sheets of universities?

Why don’t you worry how public money is spent on wastages like hamba ports, mihin, mattala? Aney palayan ban yanna! Thamuseta public money ganama thama kakkuma! Thopi wage gon yakku tikka thawa hitiyoth lankawa kohe nawatheeda danne na. Gon yaka!

Well my friend politicians we can change time to time and their corruption is exposed time to time. But we cannot change the staff in universities. Do you get it. We spend money on these universities but have no power even to see the universities' account balance sheets.

That is why university staff especially the lecturers are differ from politicians. That is why we should hold the university people accountable for what they do. Rather than just barking on wrong trees.

Universities are managed by a management board. In Sl these management boards are politicized by the government politicians.

If so FUTA should take action IUSF should take action. They can go berserk on how much percentage is spent on education but have no moral feeling about the politicized management boards of universities.

Hypocrisy?

 

[Foot12]

because south indians give more importance to education social and economic securities are more important... than fighting for religions...

North Indians do not fight for religion. Only Afghans and Pakistanis do that because of tribalism and radicalism.