Should Ram Sethu be destroyed or not? - Page 3

Created

Last reply

Replies

73

Views

4k

Users

19

Likes

1

Frequent Posters

SolidSnake thumbnail
19th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 18 years ago
#21

http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?rep=2&aid=3945 16&sid=NAT&sname=&news=Factbox:%20The%20divide%2 0over%20the%20bridge

The Project

Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project (SSCP) envisages dredging a ship channel across the Palk Straits between India and Sri Lanka.
The project will allow ships sailing between the east and west costs of India to have a straight passage through India's territorial waters, instead of having to go around Sri Lanka.
Two channels will be created:
One across Adam's Bridge (the chain of islets and shallows linking India with Sri Lanka, also called 'Ram Sethu') South - east of Pamban Island;
Another through the shallows of Palk Bay, deepening the Palk straits.
The total length of these two channels would be 89 Kms.
The project was conceived as early as 1860 by Alfred Dundas Taylor, it received approval of the Indian government only recently.

The controversy

The project will have to cut across the Adam's bridge, which the Hindus believe was the bridge that Rama built to cross the ocean to reach Lanka. It is therefore regarded as a sacred relic- its destruction considered sacrilege.

The pros
The project is expected to save about a USD 5 mn/year in fuel savings
Though forex saving estimates are not available, they would be over and above the USD 5 mn/year mentioned above.

The cons
The project may become uneconomical what with the construction costs touching USD 550 mn.
The project may be ecologically harmful due to large scale sedimentation witnessed in this region of the ocean. Yet untouched marine life and coral reefs can also be damaged.
NASA's statement says the bridge's unique curvature and composition by age reveals that it is man-made so the bridge may be of historical value though the government denies it.
The project may also be endangered by Tsunamis, known to occur in this region.
  • It will make the waters international and might be a threat to national security.
  • syrene thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #22
    I think those who are protesting are unnecessarily putting way too importance on the religious significance.Granted, that is the most emotional point, but the the ecological damage, cost and the security angle are very important factors. As long as only the mythological factor is highlighted there is a very good chance that the govt will just disprove it using the ASI and the other issues will be swept cleverly under the carpet.
    sareg thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #23

    Originally posted by: sareg

    Ram Sethu 😆 😆 , that title really confused me

    If a religous structure stands in the way of building infrastructure the structure should go. But that should get applied to all religious structures of all religions uniformly

    With the recent statements of the Govt, I guess I will rethink my position on this😉

    raj5000 thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #24
    Cons win over pros as per insight by Solidsnake. My take is whatever is beneficial for the nations from economical stand point, is the route to take. Let the next generation comes they will give hoots to religious sentiments and take a more pactical approach. Before you quote, think about how many folks from newer generation care about religious sentiments, sooner the better go for it. Atleast we can tell stories about the bridge to our grand children 😉 😃 (am not happy but what else to express)
    Edited by raj5000 - 18 years ago
    sareg thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #25

    Originally posted by: raj5000

    Cons win over pros as per insight by Solidsnake. My take is whatever is beneficial for the nations from economical stand point, is the route to take. Let the next generation comes they will give hoots to religious sentiments and take a more pactical approach. Before you quote, think about how many folks from newer generation care about religious sentiments, sooner the better go for it. Atleast we can tell stories about the bridge to our grand children 😉 😃 (am not happy but what else to express)

    there are times and circumstances where you rethink your economic growth and stick to your heritage, if you grow economically but then have nothing to claim heritage to, what stories are you going to tell? everything will be a myth😉

    raj5000 thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #26

    Originally posted by: sareg

    there are times and circumstances where you rethink your economic growth and stick to your heritage, if you grow economically but then have nothing to claim heritage to, what stories are you going to tell? everything will be a myth😉

    Well said bold part 👏👏 but when thinking or talking about heritage not essentially help us secure the heitage, better move forward and focus on how the long gone hertitage can be preserved. With preserved I mean in minds and hearts of old/younge generation.

    sareg thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #27

    Originally posted by: raj5000

    Well said bold part 👏👏 but when thinking or talking about heritage not essentially help us secure the heitage, better move forward and focus on how the long gone hertitage can be preserved. With preserved I mean in minds and hearts of old/younge generation.

    That was my initial position on this topic Raj

    however if someone takes another step and questions my source of faith, that ideological thinking goes out the window and it makes me a change positions

    raj5000 thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #28

    Originally posted by: sareg

    That was my initial position on this topic Raj

    however if someone takes another step and questions my source of faith, that ideological thinking goes out the window and it makes me a change positions

    Hear yaa, same here Sareg, time to move forward, I guess😊

    Swar_Raj thumbnail
    19th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #29
    bumbing this as per QT 😃
    ahs soem more articles in case some one wants to read them
    Aanandaa thumbnail
    20th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
    Posted: 18 years ago
    #30

    Originally posted by: raj5000

    Cons win over pros as per insight by Solidsnake. My take is whatever is beneficial for the nations from economical stand point, is the route to take. Let the next generation comes they will give hoots to religious sentiments and take a more pactical approach. Before you quote, think about how many folks from newer generation care about religious sentiments, sooner the better go for it. Atleast we can tell stories about the bridge to our grand children 😉 😃 (am not happy but what else to express)



    I disagree....The newer generation care for these sentiments better than their predecessors..Todays kids/youth are more passionate about their sentiments and their beliefs and its quite offensive to say that they give hoots to religious sentiments...😕

    Related Topics

    Top

    Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

    Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

    Add to Home Screen!

    Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".