Posted by: ImI January 8, 2008
Nepal good with king or without king? have your say
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?        
Maddog , I have a question for you then ..Ok there were factors which hindered King.
But what about increasing his salary when country's economy was so bad.He did not have enough money?
What about buy stupid planes from china for his pleasure when RNAC was doing so bad?
Is that smart decision in the crunch time?

I agree with bathroom coffee ..A leader is given chance and he has to do it.It is not just good enough to have good intention you have to deliver.If you can't deliver then you are failure .Can't cry later.
To lead  you have to be diplomatic as well.What was the point alienating allies like Deuba? May be he was corrupt but this is politics.He should have used his brain.If can't he is a failed king.Mahendra was smart.Gaynedra is dumb.This is politics.

I just want institution to be there cause it is only and only reason which is why Nepal has remained Nepal.Many won't agree .They will say People blah blah ...and we all know how Nepalese people are.They will kill each other . We are just seeing the trailer.Madesh, limbuwan ,khubuwan etc.

Read Full Discussion Thread for this article