Wrong analogy.
Bush "invaded" Iraq to overthrow another brutal dictator (whose brutality exceeds that of Gyanendra by miles) who has ruthlessly strangulated any move towards democracy and has been killing his own people for decades. His entire regime along with the supporters of his ruling establishment (i.e the Bath party) are terrorists. And they are actively supported by a neighboring terrorist state Syria.
Another terrorists state Iran is supporting the Shia's in the South.
In stark contrast to Gyanendra, Bush is actually trying to restore democracy by carrying out elections in that part of the world where democracy was unheard of. Far from conducting elections Gyanendra has dissolved democracy, imprisoned democratically elected members of the Parliament and had clamped down on individual rights. Gyanendra's actions are more in line with Saddam Hussein's (miniature Saddam Hussein).
The terrorists were always there long before Bush came to the scene. The libel that Bush is creating the terrorists is similar to your accusation that India is creating the Maoists in Nepal.
The main goal in the War on Terror is to kill evil-doers. Spreading democracy is only a consequence of the greater global war, not it's cause.
The libel that Bush is creating the terrorists is similar to your accusation that India is creating the Maoists in Nepal.
The difference is that India is not fighting the Maoists but supports them. They put an arms embargo on the Royal Army of Nepal. They gave the second in command of the Maoist terrorists safe passage to New Delhi to meet with the leader of the Indian Communist Party. Then they arranged an alliance between the Maoists and a coalition of mostly communist Nepali parties swearing to overthrow the Monarchy. At home the UPA passed the responsibility for dealing with Naxalites to each state. The corrupt communist ministers called ceasefires with the insurgents without insisting they disarm.
All these weak appeasenik pro-terrorist policies have led to massive increases in terrorist attacks within India and a state of paralysis and chaos throughout Nepal.
India must not only change its policies towards its own internal threat, but must acknowledge the links between the Indian and Nepalese "people's wars" and cease its hostile policies toward the nation of Nepal.