Suddenly AP govt. is in a hurry to arrest MIM leaders

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:10 am

Looks like Kiran Kumar Reddy (the assistant in AP of the High Command in Delhi) suddenly woke up and is frantically trying to put all MIM leaders in jail! Is it because they can't live away from their Owaisi mians or is the High Command worried about violence when an announcement is made on Telangana (Owaisi's party is for united AP)? These leaders have cases against them pending for years - some related to murder, intimidation, physical violence, corruption, etc. Why did the govt. keep quiet until now? What is happening to the ministers in govt. who are being charged with corruption - are they going to go to jail as well? What will happen to the vote-bank if MIM leaders are put in jail?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Police-out-to-nail-leaders-of-All-India-Majlis-e-Ittehadul-Muslimeen/articleshow/18152011.cms

by Guest Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:40 am

Whatever the reason, I am glad the govt is showing some nerve to arrest those leaders. No one had the guts to do so before. One reason is losing the MIM alliance and the muslim vote bank elsewhere. Second reason is that they were scared of a communal backlash.

MIM is no longer friends with the Congress and is leaning more towards Jagan. Hence the cong govt's revenge against them. Also, Telanagana may be declared soon. With the govt's stern action and cases against them becoming active again, the muslim leaders will be too pre-occupied or too apprehensive to raise their voices against telangana.

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:14 pm

Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

by Propagandhi711 Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:54 pm

indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

those are very good points that arent on the radar of anyone, atleast publicly acknowledged. there are two ways this might go, once telangana is declared - the TRS heavy govt will tone down their rhetoric and behave like sane administrators and everything will be on somewhat even keel and the area will settle into an underachieving mediocrity, albeit with advanced hyderabad as it's crown jewel with locals staying put, MIM with more influence than before....or they'll go overboard, make life miserable for "non-locals" starting at property ownership, representation in govt etc and the area will see a slow but sure drain, both industrial and human resources to rest of andhra and in addition to the water sharing conflict, this will turn out to be a generational mistake that former AP and particularly telangana area will not recover from in our lifetime, with MIM becoming another leftwing/muslim headache like the naxals.

I dont purport to know what'll happen, but extrapolating from recent events and current leaders that are coming up in the area, am guessing the latter is more of a possibility.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:21 pm

indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

Very valid points. I agree with Propa's analysis as well. Apparently, the High-Command is considering all these possibilities. I can't believe that KCR will be quiet for long if Telangan'sa economy doesn't do well under a separate state. In a few years, he and his goons will be active again against Kosta people in Hyd. River water issue will be huge for Kosta. Overall, splitting the state will be disastrous for all AP. This morning, the news is that they won't make a decision before the 28th deadline. God knows what that means. The goons may be on the streets again and the uncertainty will continue. I wonder why Telangana fellows are opposed to making Hyderabad a union territory - the area around Hyderabad will develop if the city becomes an important hub and hence, Telangana guys will benefit significantly. There was another suggestion (not from the govt), to combine Delhi and Hyderabad into a capital state with Hyd as the alternate capital. This will bring enormous benefits to the Telangana region and Seemandhra won't be opposed to such a move. The whole SI will benefit if the capital is moved closer. Let us hope that the govt. won't waste time and make a prompt decision.

by Propagandhi711 Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:28 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

Very valid points. I agree with Propa's analysis as well. Apparently, the High-Command is considering all these possibilities. I can't believe that KCR will be quiet for long if Telangan'sa economy doesn't do well under a separate state. In a few years, he and his goons will be active again against Kosta people in Hyd. River water issue will be huge for Kosta. Overall, splitting the state will be disastrous for all AP. This morning, the news is that they won't make a decision before the 28th deadline. God knows what that means. The goons may be on the streets again and the uncertainty will continue. I wonder why Telangana fellows are opposed to making Hyderabad a union territory - the area around Hyderabad will develop if the city becomes an important hub and hence, Telangana guys will benefit significantly. There was another suggestion (not from the govt), to combine Delhi and Hyderabad into a capital state with Hyd as the alternate capital. This will bring enormous benefits to the Telangana region and Seemandhra won't be opposed to such a move. The whole SI will benefit if the capital is moved closer. Let us hope that the govt. won't waste time and make a prompt decision.

they dont care about development. they care about "influence". the same as majority of the "leaders" we have.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:34 pm

indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana?

I don't understand it myself. Perhaps they are worried about the status of Hyderabad -- their stronghold -- dwindling, impacting their overall influence. But within Telangana, their influence will be stronger than it is in a united AP. Are they taking a more strategic, long-term view by opposing separate Telangana? Or are they worried that in a separate Telangana, people will eventually revert to the post-liberation dynamic, when the people who suffered under the Razakars limited the MIM's influence? I don't know.

indophile wrote:Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

The only reason for the central government to wish to declare separate Telangana is short-term electoral calculus. If they "give" the people of Telangana the state that they seek, Congress will win many MP seats from the state. If they don't, their chances are much weaker. They are not considering the long-term aspects of this at all.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:46 pm

Indo & PP: Recently, Owaisi made statements suggesting that his party might agree to the creation of Telangana state. He even said that if Telangana is separated, Hyderabad should be its capital. I think he is unsure whether to go with CONs or Jagan. Just in case Jagan's popularity wanes (quite possible), MIM is waiting to jump the other way.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:13 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
Very valid points. I agree with Propa's analysis as well. Apparently, the High-Command is considering all these possibilities. I can't believe that KCR will be quiet for long if Telangan'sa economy doesn't do well under a separate state. In a few years, he and his goons will be active again against Kosta people in Hyd. River water issue will be huge for Kosta. Overall, splitting the state will be disastrous for all AP. This morning, the news is that they won't make a decision before the 28th deadline. God knows what that means. The goons may be on the streets again and the uncertainty will continue. I wonder why Telangana fellows are opposed to making Hyderabad a union territory - the area around Hyderabad will develop if the city becomes an important hub and hence, Telangana guys will benefit significantly. There was another suggestion (not from the govt), to combine Delhi and Hyderabad into a capital state with Hyd as the alternate capital. This will bring enormous benefits to the Telangana region and Seemandhra won't be opposed to such a move. The whole SI will benefit if the capital is moved closer. Let us hope that the govt. won't waste time and make a prompt decision.

KCR will become irrelevant the minute T state was awarded, and TRS won't sustain for much long either, will be gobbled up by the Congress in no time. As for making Hyd an UT, both sides will suffer for long term, as it will take long time to develop a capital city on either side. In IMO, better solution is to leave Hyd as a part of T state, but make it joint capital until the other region(s) can identify & develop their capital cities.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:15 pm

The Union Territory idea is a very bad idea. It amounts to, "if I can't have it, I will make sure you can't have it either." If there is a Telangana state -- and I hope there isn't -- Hyderabad should be the capital of that state. It can serve as the interim capital of Andhra state until a new capital is decided.

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:27 pm

Recent history tells us that interim capital idea may not work. When Madras & Andhra were split it was proposed that Madras city serve as common capital for both states (i.e., interim for Andhra) for 6 months or a year. That wily old fox Rajaji would have none of that. He wanted a clean break, Madras as capital only for the Madras State, and not even for a day should it be capital of Andhra.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:32 pm

If Telangana state becomes a fait accompli, I expect lots of fights within the remaining state regarding the location of the capital. Visakha and Vijayawada will both be strong contenders. And neither is quite set up to be capital city on day one. Rajaji was probably worried about Andhra claims on the city of Madras itself, and so insisted on a clean break. But in this case, geography rules out Andhra claims on Hyderabad, so the leaders of Telangana may not oppose the interim capital idea.

CD, I agree on KCR. His one issue is effectively dead the moment the center declares Telangana state. The people of Telangana really don't like/trust him. That is why his party doesn't do very well even when his issue is alive. If a leader trusted by the people was leading the separate state movement, that movement would get almost all seats in Telangana given the level of popular support for the idea of a separate state. It is because the people don't trust KCR and his TRS that they don't manage that.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:35 pm

indophile wrote:Recent history tells us that interim capital idea may not work. When Madras & Andhra were split it was proposed that Madras city serve as common capital for both states (i.e., interim for Andhra) for 6 months or a year. That wily old fox Rajaji would have none of that. He wanted a clean break, Madras as capital only for the Madras State, and not even for a day should it be capital of Andhra.

In this instance, I don't think T Company will have much of a choice (or heartburn), they'd prefer an interim capital over no capital at all (Hyd that is).

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:39 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:
indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

those are very good points that arent on the radar of anyone, atleast publicly acknowledged. there are two ways this might go, once telangana is declared - the TRS heavy govt will tone down their rhetoric and behave like sane administrators and everything will be on somewhat even keel and the area will settle into an underachieving mediocrity, albeit with advanced hyderabad as it's crown jewel with locals staying put, MIM with more influence than before....or they'll go overboard, make life miserable for "non-locals" starting at property ownership, representation in govt etc and the area will see a slow but sure drain, both industrial and human resources to rest of andhra and in addition to the water sharing conflict, this will turn out to be a generational mistake that former AP and particularly telangana area will not recover from in our lifetime, with MIM becoming another leftwing/muslim headache like the naxals.

I dont purport to know what'll happen, but extrapolating from recent events and current leaders that are coming up in the area, am guessing the latter is more of a possibility.

I hope it will be the former, but based on recent observations of TRS and such, I do worry it may be the latter.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:56 pm

panini press wrote:If Telangana state becomes a fait accompli, I expect lots of fights within the remaining state regarding the location of the capital. Visakha and Vijayawada will both be strong contenders. And neither is quite set up to be capital city on day one. Rajaji was probably worried about Andhra claims on the city of Madras itself, and so insisted on a clean break. But in this case, geography rules out Andhra claims on Hyderabad, so the leaders of Telangana may not oppose the interim capital idea.

Taking a leaf out of the link (Delhi & Hyd as India's capital cities) posted by Sandilya, I vote for Vizag & Tirupathi as Winter/Summer Capitals to counter further bifurcation of remaining A.P/Andhra/SeemAndhra or whatever it will be named as Smile

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:14 pm

I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:15 pm

panini press wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

those are very good points that arent on the radar of anyone, atleast publicly acknowledged. there are two ways this might go, once telangana is declared - the TRS heavy govt will tone down their rhetoric and behave like sane administrators and everything will be on somewhat even keel and the area will settle into an underachieving mediocrity, albeit with advanced hyderabad as it's crown jewel with locals staying put, MIM with more influence than before....or they'll go overboard, make life miserable for "non-locals" starting at property ownership, representation in govt etc and the area will see a slow but sure drain, both industrial and human resources to rest of andhra and in addition to the water sharing conflict, this will turn out to be a generational mistake that former AP and particularly telangana area will not recover from in our lifetime, with MIM becoming another leftwing/muslim headache like the naxals.

I dont purport to know what'll happen, but extrapolating from recent events and current leaders that are coming up in the area, am guessing the latter is more of a possibility.
I hope it will be the former, but based on recent observations of TRS and such, I do worry it may be the latter.

I don't get it, why would MIM be any stronger in a separate T state than it is now.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:32 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
indophile wrote:Why are the MIM folks opposed to Telangana? Afterall the Telanagana movement leader KCR issued several reverential statements towards the Nizams' rule. Also, why does the central govt wish to declare Telangana given that the place has a history of Naxalism, Razakars etc. Telangana, if comes about, has the potential to rival Aurangabad, Jalgaon and a few other areas of Maharashtra in nurturing fundamentalist muslim pockets. In the name of protecting the "locals" from "outsiders," the govt may be creating a Kashmir right in the middle of India, if not in population demographics, coulbe be in creating a haven for troublemakers of both Indian and non-Indian origins.

those are very good points that arent on the radar of anyone, atleast publicly acknowledged. there are two ways this might go, once telangana is declared - the TRS heavy govt will tone down their rhetoric and behave like sane administrators and everything will be on somewhat even keel and the area will settle into an underachieving mediocrity, albeit with advanced hyderabad as it's crown jewel with locals staying put, MIM with more influence than before....or they'll go overboard, make life miserable for "non-locals" starting at property ownership, representation in govt etc and the area will see a slow but sure drain, both industrial and human resources to rest of andhra and in addition to the water sharing conflict, this will turn out to be a generational mistake that former AP and particularly telangana area will not recover from in our lifetime, with MIM becoming another leftwing/muslim headache like the naxals.

I dont purport to know what'll happen, but extrapolating from recent events and current leaders that are coming up in the area, am guessing the latter is more of a possibility.
I hope it will be the former, but based on recent observations of TRS and such, I do worry it may be the latter.

I don't get it, why would MIM be any stronger in a separate T state than it is now.

In separate Telangana state, the few MLA seats they habitually win will be a bigger percentage of the total. So in a hung assembly, they become kingmakers more often. Also, the share of their votebank in overall state vote share will be higher in separate Telangana than in united AP.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:34 pm

indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?

Where would you build it?

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:40 pm

panini press wrote:
indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?
Where would you build it?

1. Peddapuram
2. Chilakaluripeta
3. Amalapuram

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:57 pm

panini press wrote:
indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?
Where would you build it?

Araku area is real pretty, and so are the areas where the Godavari river cuts across the mountains. Even the ancient Satavahana town Amaravati should be okay too (I don't know how fertile is the land around there; does the Krishna river cut across the mountains around that area?). Even Madanapalle in Rayalaseema is a very nice place. Any new place affords good planning for the capital, broad avenues, strict zoning etc., as opposed to going with an established place.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:04 pm

I like the choice of Amaravati. Yes, the Krishna river cuts across hills there. But because of the hills, connectivity to Amaravati is really poor. I was looking up roads and it looked pretty bad -- only connections are winding roads from Guntur and Sattenapalle.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:06 pm

panini press wrote:

In separate Telangana state, the few MLA seats they habitually win will be a bigger percentage of the total. So in a hung assembly, they become kingmakers more often. Also, the share of their votebank in overall state vote share will be higher in separate Telangana than in united AP.

Let's see, T state would've about 120 assembly seats, MIM won, what 7 seats in '09, I'm skeptical of them repeating that feat. I don't see how vote share would matter, their share per constituency will not increase because of separate T state.

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:09 pm

Connetivity and transportation links to Araku, Amaravati or any other new place will be poor. Once the Capital comes, everything follows. The criteria should be - water, climate, and natural beauty. These things man cannot create. Everything else (roads, airports, etc.) can be built later.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:09 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:

In separate Telangana state, the few MLA seats they habitually win will be a bigger percentage of the total. So in a hung assembly, they become kingmakers more often. Also, the share of their votebank in overall state vote share will be higher in separate Telangana than in united AP.

Let's see, T state would've about 120 assembly seats, MIM won, what 7 seats in '09, I'm skeptical of them repeating that feat. I don't see how vote share would matter, their share per constituency will not increase because of separate T state.

True, the vote share is not that important. And I take your point about 7 out of 120 -- it's never going to be a major player. But 7 in 120 is a little bit more influence than 7 in 294.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:16 pm

indophile wrote:Connetivity and transportation links to Araku, Amaravati or any other new place will be poor. Once the Capital comes, everything follows. The criteria should be - water, climate, and natural beauty. These things man cannot create. Everything else (roads, airports, etc.) can be built later.

How long can one afford to have a state capital without an airport and basic infrastructure! In a fast paced world a new state without a proper state capital will be a major disadvantage unless we follow US's tradition and develop another city (e.g. Vizag) as a major business hub.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:18 pm

Perhaps Rajamundry can be a compromise capital -- half way between Vijayawada and Visakha, and has the appeal of being the old capital.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:22 pm

panini press wrote:Perhaps Rajamundry can be a compromise capital -- half way between Vijayawada and Visakha, and has the appeal of being the old capital.

What about Ongole area that was rumored to be new capital city, a couple of years ago.

by Propagandhi711 Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:40 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:

In separate Telangana state, the few MLA seats they habitually win will be a bigger percentage of the total. So in a hung assembly, they become kingmakers more often. Also, the share of their votebank in overall state vote share will be higher in separate Telangana than in united AP.

Let's see, T state would've about 120 assembly seats, MIM won, what 7 seats in '09, I'm skeptical of them repeating that feat. I don't see how vote share would matter, their share per constituency will not increase because of separate T state.

is there something I'm missing?

1) MIM's core constituency is in telangana districts. it's a bit player in state politics because rest of the state doesnt give a shit about it's existence.
2) carving telangana makes their sandbox get bigger in comparison to the rest of players in the region, precisely since they have a captive vote bank and proportionally will have a larger say once the horse trading for seats, coalitions etc starts.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:43 pm

Basically there are two types of influence for MIM. Seats that they can win outright -- just a handful. In some other seats, they control 10-20% of the votes. If they can deliver those seats to one side or the other, it can make a difference to the outcome. All the seats they can win outright are in Telangana, and most of the seats where they have some votes are also in the region. So they become a more prominent alliance partner for Congress, Jagan or TDP in Telangana than they are today. How much more real influence or power that gets them is unknowable right now.

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:54 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
indophile wrote:Connetivity and transportation links to Araku, Amaravati or any other new place will be poor. Once the Capital comes, everything follows. The criteria should be - water, climate, and natural beauty. These things man cannot create. Everything else (roads, airports, etc.) can be built later.

How long can one afford to have a state capital without an airport and basic infrastructure! In a fast paced world a new state without a proper state capital will be a major disadvantage unless we follow US's tradition and develop another city (e.g. Vizag) as a major business hub.

It's the usual chicken and egg problem. I would say build a real nice sparkling well-planned new and "permanent" capital on unquestioned Telugu land than compromise and settle for something less desirable. I say permanent because Andhra capital has already moved from Madras to Kurnool to Hyderabad. Enough is enough.

by indophile Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:58 pm

panini press wrote:Perhaps Rajamundry can be a compromise capital -- half way between Vijayawada and Visakha, and has the appeal of being the old capital.

Rajahmundry has the same problem as Vijayawada. The land around there, together with West Godavari & Krishna feeds at least 1/3 of India. Building roads, buildings, airports, movie studios, etc., around there is a misuse of what Cotton conceived.

by confuzzled dude Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:06 pm

panini press wrote:Basically there are two types of influence for MIM. Seats that they can win outright -- just a handful. In some other seats, they control 10-20% of the votes. If they can deliver those seats to one side or the other, it can make a difference to the outcome. All the seats they can win outright are in Telangana, and most of the seats where they have some votes are also in the region. So they become a more prominent alliance partner for Congress, Jagan or TDP in Telangana than they are today. How much more real influence or power that gets them is unknowable right now.

Both kinds of influence won't be enough to call them key players on a consistent basis. They will win anywhere between 2-7 seats, in those election years with 7 seats, might be major players (when no one gets an absolute majority). In other years not so much. In other words they will be like how they've been or like communists. I still don't buy into this 10-20% votes theory, if they haven't made an impact in united state most likely they won't be able able to make any difference in a 2 or 3 states scenario.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:17 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:I still don't buy into this 10-20% votes theory, if they haven't made an impact in united state most likely they won't be able able to make any difference in a 2 or 3 states scenario.

I am talking about major towns in Telangana. Like Nirmal where Akbar Owaisi made his speech. MIM won't win an MLA seat in Adilabad district, but in the towns there, his party has some support. In a close election between Congress, Jagan and TDP, that vote block can make a difference. I don't know if this sort of influence will give MIM much power in separate Telangana. In united AP, it certainly hasn't given them much power. I hope it stays that way -- MIM is the most extremist party in India today, worse in some ways than the Kashmiri parties that participate in elections.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:10 pm

indophile wrote:Connetivity and transportation links to Araku, Amaravati or any other new place will be poor. Once the Capital comes, everything follows. The criteria should be - water, climate, and natural beauty. These things man cannot create. Everything else (roads, airports, etc.) can be built later.

They can't build the capital in Araku - it is a protected tribal area; outsiders can't even own property there.

How about Konaseema? Hyd yaaaasa will be replaced by amalaaapuram deerghaaaaalu.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:13 pm

Konaseema has the same infrastructure problems. Plus flooding every 2-3 years. If Telangana becomes a separate state, I will identify strongly with that state, so I am at best an outsider when it comes to Andhra state. But I still hope they pick Rajamundry for the capital. Nothing like the hometown of Nannaya, Srinathudu and Viresalingam for a capital. Hyderabad will be far behind in terms of intellectual chops.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:19 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:
indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?
Where would you build it?

1. Peddapuram
2. Chilakaluripeta
3. Amalapuram

Chilakaluripeta - HOT HOT HOT!

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:21 pm

panini press wrote:Konaseema has the same infrastructure problems. Plus flooding every 2-3 years. If Telangana becomes a separate state, I will identify strongly with that state, so I am at best an outsider when it comes to Andhra state. But I still hope they pick Rajamundry for the capital. Nothing like the hometown of Nannaya, Srinathudu and Viresalingam for a capital. Hyderabad will be far behind in terms of intellectual chops.

Nobody remembers those guys. The only famous thing in Rajahmandry is "Isukaveedhi" lol!

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:24 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:
indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?
Where would you build it?

1. Peddapuram
2. Chilakaluripeta
3. Amalapuram

Chilakaluripeta - HOT HOT HOT!

LOL, guvuru-gaaru, eviti idi mana voorena? maa taatagaaru narasaraopeta talooka vipparlapalli agraharam vastavyulu.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:30 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:If Telangana state becomes a fait accompli, I expect lots of fights within the remaining state regarding the location of the capital. Visakha and Vijayawada will both be strong contenders. And neither is quite set up to be capital city on day one. Rajaji was probably worried about Andhra claims on the city of Madras itself, and so insisted on a clean break. But in this case, geography rules out Andhra claims on Hyderabad, so the leaders of Telangana may not oppose the interim capital idea.

Taking a leaf out of the link (Delhi & Hyd as India's capital cities) posted by Sandilya, I vote for Vizag & Tirupathi as Winter/Summer Capitals to counter further bifurcation of remaining A.P/Andhra/SeemAndhra or whatever it will be named as

One in Horsley Hills (close to Seema) and one in the Ghats near Yeleru reservoir (Peddapuram area) - and politicians would love to get reelected just to escape from Guntur, Vijayawada, Vizag, Kurnool ..... weather. The only problem will be - people will start thinking of splitting Seema and Kosta!

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:38 pm

Seriously though, if Telangana state is inevitable -- and I still hope it is not -- then Andhra should choose a viable capital from day one. After the Hindians, we Telugus will be first Indians to choose to live under multiple states, and both of them need to be vibrant business-friendly entities.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:39 pm

panini press wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:
indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?
Where would you build it?

1. Peddapuram
2. Chilakaluripeta
3. Amalapuram

Chilakaluripeta - HOT HOT HOT!
LOL, guvuru-gaaru, eviti idi mana voorena? maa taatagaaru narasaraopeta talooka vipparlapalli agraharam vastavyulu.

Kaadu. Akkada baaga vEdigaauntundi.

nEnu aa agrahaarm okasaari vellaa. Akkada okaayana oka kaalu meeda nunchoni, rOjantaa soorya namaskaaraalu chEstaadu. Maa aavida chitraguptuni nOmu chEsukunnappudu pilavataaniki vallaa. Baagaa chaduvukunnavaadu. Chakkagaa aaseervadinchi vellaadu.

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:42 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
panini press wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:Where would you build it?

1. Peddapuram
2. Chilakaluripeta
3. Amalapuram

Chilakaluripeta - HOT HOT HOT!
LOL, guvuru-gaaru, eviti idi mana voorena? maa taatagaaru narasaraopeta talooka vipparlapalli agraharam vastavyulu.

Kaadu. Akkada baaga vEdigaauntundi.

nEnu aa agrahaarm okasaari vellaa. Akkada okaayana oka kaalu meeda nunchoni, rOjantaa soorya namaskaaraalu chEstaadu. Maa aavida chitraguptuni nOmu chEsukunnappudu pilavataaniki vallaa. Baagaa chaduvukunnavaadu. Chakkagaa aaseervadinchi vellaadu.

Avunu, akkada baagaa chaduvukunna vaLLE kalisaaru.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:13 pm

panini press wrote:Seriously though, if Telangana state is inevitable -- and I still hope it is not -- then Andhra should choose a viable capital from day one. After the Hindians, we Telugus will be first Indians to choose to live under multiple states, and both of them need to be vibrant business-friendly entities.

It has been brought to my attention that you are "stealing time" from your house work in the evenings. Should we contact your boss and report your stealage of time and effort that should be exclusively spent in "enhancing home environment?"

by Idéfix Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:19 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
panini press wrote:Seriously though, if Telangana state is inevitable -- and I still hope it is not -- then Andhra should choose a viable capital from day one. After the Hindians, we Telugus will be first Indians to choose to live under multiple states, and both of them need to be vibrant business-friendly entities.

It has been brought to my attention that you are "stealing time" from your house work in the evenings. Should we contact your boss and report your stealage of time and effort that should be exclusively spent in "enhancing home environment?"

So the boss just called me and told me, "our car is stolen." I was my usual calm self and told her to look around, retrace her steps and walk at least one block each way. I said, "don't worry, if the car is really stolen, we have insurance to cover us." That seemed to calm her down quite a bit. Turns out it was towed by the overzealous private contractors hired by the city of San Francisco. The damages: $450.

by yogi Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:47 am

If the bifurcation is inevitable i would go for Ongole as the new capital.It has got various advantages.To mention few its proximity with rayalaseema(so that seema guys won't have a problem),not so fertile lands making land reclamation a bit easy task,its on the quadriangle route of NH-5 connecting all major cities and towns,vodarevu port,a domestic airport under construction,better climate,so on and so forth..

by indophile Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:29 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
panini press wrote:
indophile wrote:I would not vote for either Vizag or Tirupati or Vijayawada or Guntur or Kurnool. Vizag has water problem, Tirupati is a busy town as it is, Kurnool and Guntur are too hot, and Vijayawada and surrounds is prime fertile land in all of India (Krishna, Guntur, and Godavari districts are off limits for buildings, roads, movie studios, etc.). Why not build a capital from scratch (a la Chandighar) in a location that has salubrious climes and plenty of water?
Where would you build it?

1. Peddapuram
2. Chilakaluripeta
3. Amalapuram

I know about Peddapuram and Chilakaluripeta and their notnotoriety. May be they could provide a ready reserve of budding and "enthusiastic" movie artists if the movie industry decides to move from Hyderabad to the new capital. I never heard that Amalapuram matched the reputation of the other two. Anyway, Peddapuram and Amalapuram are out -- too fertile a land. Chilakaluripeta should satisfy both the movie people and of course the politicians and their brood.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:36 am

auro wrote:If the bifurcation is inevitable i would go for Ongole as the new capital.It has got various advantages.To mention few its proximity with rayalaseema(so that seema guys won't have a problem),not so fertile lands making land reclamation a bit easy task,its on the quadriangle route of NH-5 connecting all major cities and towns,vodarevu port,a domestic airport under construction,better climate,so on and so forth..

They are now growing sapotas, mangoes, cashews, etc., in Ongole area. Singarayakonda is excellent for fruit. Those guys are making more money than people in W Godavari with paddy.

by confuzzled dude Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:00 pm

indophile wrote:
I know about Peddapuram and Chilakaluripeta and their notnotoriety. May be they could provide a ready reserve of budding and "enthusiastic" movie artists if the movie industry decides to move from Hyderabad to the new capital. I never heard that Amalapuram matched the reputation of the other two. Anyway, Peddapuram and Amalapuram are out -- too fertile a land. Chilakaluripeta should satisfy both the movie people and of course the politicians and their brood.

I was only kidding saar.

Looks like the decision will be further delayed, Congress split over timing and need for Telangana, decision may be delayed

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:12 pm

Looks like the lunacy is being revived:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Telanganas-Joint-Action-Committee-to-wage-war-on-anti-Telangana-forces/articleshow/18169515.cms

by Sponsored content