Orion, not only i respect your opinion, but my views tend to accord with it to a great extent. I, for one, am all up for INDPENDENCE. if i were born at around the period of India's indpendence, then i would have most probably opted for the path which Gandhi suggested and followed. and i don't deny the fact that it was india's freedom from british rule that made them stand, where they actually are standing currently. they have easily second or third best economy in the world, and they deserve it. Bravo! I don't know whether india would have gone for partitioning though, if they were not officially independent. but that does not justify for not going for independence. I would say, it was poor leadership during that time, that led towards partitioning. Gandhi was way way too liberal for the giveaway. The reason why i brought Nepal's situation in the context is due to the very fact that india went through similar situation during partition. responsibilty and visonary approach are as much integral and necessary as democracy is for a country. if nepal does not take it responsibly, then we may have to go through similar catastrophe. God forbids! Churchill dual shades cannot be denied. he was born in a rather controversial phase in the history of world when a sage like gandhi had to be murdered. so i don't object you in pointing out the grey and black shades of Churchill. but he is one of a kind in the history of world politics. having won the nobel prize in literature, he was not too far away from bagging up another nobel prize for peace due to his stance and support for the deported jews during holocaust. he is, and will remain an eminent historical figure for many years to come. Loote