Pleas For Sanity as Sabres Rattle Over Mumbai Mayhem

All you uber Pakis -- this should make your chests swell up in pride

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5bjN3Q6aA8

All very well said but the fact remians that at some point Pakistan has to do some house keeping and sweep out those creating mayhem at home and abroad.Going on harking back to Afghan war and USA etc is akin to falling back into old patterns of habitual denial of responsibilty.Already the Pak govt is beginning to sound like a wound up toy with its,"where is the prrof,where is the proof,where is the proof?"rhetoric.

Re: # 1260
Ekal...
"they are all convinced India is deliberately killing them, and are intent upon killing us back (so they say)...."
The matter is not such. Pakiland is almost entire beduine followers. so the civilised population is very less. How can India create trouble in Pakiland? This is simple logic and these beduin followers also understand that. But the problem is when you are engaged in crimnal activity, the best way to defend yourself is to point finger at others too...means, I am criminal, but the other party is also engaged in such act....muslas are very nasty creatures....otherwise, a head of the state would not have made sweeping comment like "scum" etc....

Aha_snark, this for your consideration tomorrow. We are focussing too narrowly on this point but I will enlarge the discussion later.

"that would be necessary to stop the water flow to pakistan (and such a mechanism i would assume would be"

But I don't want it stopped , just significantly reduced.

Are you saying , that in your considered opinion, we have no structural way of reducing the flow without necessarily stopping it altogether ?

LOL, goodnite aha_snark

Whether it is the poor sods in the NWFP and FATA or educated sods of karachi - they are all convinced India is deliberately killing them, and are intent upon killing us back (so they say).

Sooner or later, that is the basic problem we have to remove on a long-term basis. :)

publius,
i read the decades-old treaty when the entire baglihar project fracas started a few years ago. we are definitely allowed to put in place run-of-the-river hydroelectric plants in place. as far as I can recall, there is a provision in the treaty for those hydroelectric plants to have a sort of a sluice pool (i'm pretty sure i'm getting the name wrong) to assist electricity generation. however, such a pool is very different from the familiar cachment area we see in large gravity dams like the bhakra-nangal etc.

now, the debate was that the "sluice pool" overstepped the limits of what was permitted under the agreement. The way it ended up was that raymond lafitte, the swiss expert ruled in favour of india on some points and in favour of pakistan on another point. it's a highly technical ruling and as far as I can see, the Indus water sharing system regime is working and has worked through all the wars that india and pakistan have been in.

update: i'm almost totally alseep but i did some research; the fact of the matter is that raymond lafitte completely upheld the design of the dam. there were some cosmetic alterations to the dam that india had itself proposed that he asked should be made. pakistani assertions that the water is being choked off are completely ludicrous; if india was indeed doing so, do you think pakistan would not be screaming about it in the UN??? the world bank neutral expert ruled on the dam. it cannot store water for irrigation. the matter ends there. regular pakistani inspection teams visit the dams and all other similar structures. if any alterations were made, they would be raising hell - and they would be entitled to raise hell.

" Lafitte has firmly rejected Pakistan’s desired reduction of the Baglihar pondage from 37 million cu m to 6.22 m cu m to convert the project from a peaking to a “constant (base) load� station, thus defeating both purpose and viability. However, he has marginally reduced the project’s designed pondage based on a different calculus."

http://www.bgverghese.com/Baglihar.htm

the thing about this stupid choking water off rumour is that like the "raw is responsible for marriot" rumour, there is absolutely no proof apart from a whisper campaign. like our dear masadi and the geniuses at brass tacks, if one is convinced that there is a conspiracy theory, every thing that supports yoru worlview is instantly 100% credible, everything that disagrees with it is part of the conspiracy.

eklavya
sirji, there are poor sods in the NWFP and FATA who believe that polio vaccines cause male impotence and that they are part of a zionist plot to destroy muslims; they kick out any vaccination teams, as a result polio is making a comeback.

the fact that morons believe that india is doing X Y Z shouldnt affect or doing or not doing X Y or Z.

BJ2
When i said they'll nuke us if we dam the indus, i meant that if we made an unambiguous move to build the sort of water storage/control mechanism that would be necessary to stop the water flow to pakistan (and such a mechanism i would assume would be massive and easily detectable) then it would be a clear threat to pakistan's very existence and would be a threat to the lives and livelihoods of millions of the poorest pakistanis. as it stands now, the baglihar dam does not threaten pakistan. on the contrary, it will actually be providing power to the kashmir valley.

publius,
that quote about 7000 cusecs is an obscure opinion piece from a disgruntled pakistani. it's also from cobrapost.com .

aha, are you in India? It must be very late for you then. Go to sleep, we will discuss it another time. :)

Re: # 1251 eklavya

I see your point. It's a question of judgement, I agree. At some point a determination is arrived at that the current situation is less palatable than a complete breaking up and re-ordering.

to answer your question, i really don't know. I'm not saying it's an impossible state of mind to reach; i just don't know.

however,

sans a plan for foolproof detection and sequestering of all NBC material, such a plan is incomplete. i'm v. sleepy so forgive me if i've asked you this, but what would such a plan for NBC material sequestration look like?

I think the nuclear issues weighs extremely heavily on aha_snark's mind.

It might be useful to first set that aside, and then discuss what India should be doing. Then we can include the nuclear element and see what should or should not be done.

----------------

On water issue itself:

Let's remember that we are dealing here with a nation that ALREADY FULLY BELIEVES we are starving it of water, and parching its lands.

In fact, that firm belief is one of the reasons why normal Pakistanis like aasif are willing to kill hundreds of Indians in cold blood. Or at least support those who do.

Given that fact, what do we get by NOT depriving Pakistan of water?

(I myself do not propose that because I see India's fight strictly and immediately with Pakistani state, not with people most of whom are as much victims of Pakistani state as the rest of us).

Re: # 1250

[But this will never happen because the moment we start to dam the Indus, the Pakistanis will nuke us.]

Snark, go easy on that afeem!

Aha_Snark also consider this
"Under the Indus Water Treaty, India can use the waters of the Chenab for hydro-electric generation, but not for irrigation or any other consumptive use. In violation of this provision, the Baghliar Dam will allow India to draw up to 7,000 cusecs (cubic feet per second) of water a day from the Chenab river for irrigation purposes, thereby reducing the quantum of river flows available to Pakistan"

Now if this is true and if we can draw 7000 cusecs then by further modifying the Baghliar dam etc can't we draw more ?

The broad point here is not damning per se, but creatively using the rivers in India to punish Pakistan without necessarily creating a conventional war.

I don't see any reason to conclude that nothing like that can be done.

Aha_Snark,

First even though I don't know enough about the techincal issues involved I am presuming that we can control the level of punishment we can inflcit and the amount of water available to Pakistan by controlling the design etc. Please show me evidence that we can't do that.

Second you say "because the moment we start to dam the Indus, the Pakistanis will nuke us"

That is most panicky statement that I have read so far.

Just as a point of principle I believe in prudence and realism and I of course would not recommend India to go through with any action that rises to that level.

But I see no reason to simply assume a nuclear response without exploring that option in great detail.

Now on the question of crime, imposing severe hardship on Pakistan is morally just for the reasons I have already stated before.

By undermining the Pakistani state, of course, actively working toward a goal of freeing Pakistan's natural nations to find their own genius without being handicapped by others - as best explained by romair in one of his posts.

-------

For now, let's leave the fear of Pakistani nuclear weapons aside.

aha_snark, is there any point beyond which you will conclude that working with Pakistani state is an futile exercise, and a focus on actively undermining and breaking up the current Pakistani state will be a better option for everyone than trying to work with it?

Essentially, what will it take for you to reach that conclusion?

Re: # 1249 publius

Before the canal system built by the British, much of the Punjab was dry wasteland on which nothing much grew. After the canal system was put in place, the area came to beome the bread basket of India.

The Indus system is the prime irrigator of the lands of Pakistan. Block it and some consequences include:

a) drinking water will grow scarcer unavailable
b) crops will fail, leading to famine, mass poverty and unknown numbers of starvation deaths.
c) assured economic and national collapse will stare pakistan in the face. It will not get any money from cotton exports the next year, one of the export mainstays of pakistan. but more immediately, hundreds of millions of Pakistanis will be deprived of food, water and the means to earn a living. it is beyond doubt that untold numbers of poor pakistanis will die or will suffer terribly.

I may agree or disagree with you on other points, but on this one, I am completely sure: damming the Indus will be a gross crime against humanity.

Keeping in mind the consequences noted above, there is nothing trivial about this "technicality" that you speak of. We will not be in a state of war, we will have committed a massive, unspeakable international crime. In the study of International Law, such an act is clearly spelt out as an act of war, of aggression.

But this will never happen because the moment we start to dam the Indus, the Pakistanis will nuke us. Please realise that acts of war deserving of nuclear reprisal do not have to be confined to those involving gunpowder and missiles.

To my mind, an actual nuke of a pakistani city would be less of an act of war than damming the Indus. It's not even an option. India will never ever do it. It is nothing but an idle fantasy. You might as well imagine Israel and Pakistan teaming up to nuke America.

"I posted that stopping the Indus would be a violation of the Indus Water Treaty, forbidden against International law and a crime against humanity. You seemed to impliedly defend such an act in post # 1117 by talking about how the point was moot. In any case, if that was not your intention, I apologise"

I will respond to the rest later but just a quick response to this one. I was talking about a shooting war .

I am completely in favor of building dams on western rivers i.e withdrawing/violating IWT. This(technically a state of war maybe) does not involve mass killing( far less mass murder) so there was no point in bringing mass murder up. Anyway that was my point.

I will respond later to the rest.

Re: # 1246 publius

Do you beleive that left to itself one day the Pakistani state will simply stop terror against India ?

No one is talking of leaving Pakistan to itself. My position is that the current dispensation has made _some_ undeniable moves to de-escalate with India. Before the attacks, Z had made the offer of a No First Use pact. the main opposition leader, Nawaz sharif, is calling for a No-War pact. It has also appointed a supposed moderate as ISI DG. After the attacks and after a great deal of scepticism, Z&Co have made some moves against JuD, and today intensified those moves, in the face of concerted opposition, which is painting JuD solely as a relief agency.

http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/connect/Dawn%20Content%20Library/dawn/news/pakis tan/authorities-intensify-action-against-jamaatud-dawa--ha

The objective is not destabiliation, per se,( although I would welcome it) but punishment and deterrence.

Ah I see.

Both of these are ends in themselves( please try and understand what I mean by that. Justice i.e punishment as well as deterrence is something that we pursue for itself because these are things that we value in themselves, in this context).

Fair enough

Our only hope w.r.t Pakistani army is to raise their costs( both moral and physical) high enough and for a long enough period to achieve some level of deterrence.

Well, considering how many hundreds of troops die in the Siachen glacier every year, this cost to the Army will obviously have to be higher to achieve deterrence. But the problem with ratcheting up a punitive response is that quite apart from the fact that it will almost certainly invite retaliation, leading us to escalate, retaliate and so on, this cost has to be
a) high enough to the army to deter proxy war
AND
b) not so high enough that the nuclear trigger is pushed

Who the hell knows what the red line is ? what single death will be the straw that pushes the big red button? Can you deny it is a colossal gamble? I'm not saying that the gamble should never be made; should we not exhaust every other possible option? Considering the numbers of people at stake a strong military strike that we think will deter Pakistan's Army could possibly be the biggest ever roll of the dice in the history of mankind.

Once again what has disunity done for us ? The objective is not disunity but deterrence. I don't care if Pakistanis are united as long as they don't attack us and are punished when they do.

I agree that the objective should be deterrence against attacks

coming to the point of deterrence, I am hard pressed to find out where military deterrence has, unreservedly, worked. Consider Israel, nuclear armed and backed to the hilt by the US, with a small geographical area to defend, with no strong armies arrayed against it, with no nuclear powered enemies against it. It retaliates strongly against real and perceived threats, not making any distinction between combatant and non-combatant. It has massive international power. If that state cannot secure its citizens and territory against terror, and lives in perpetual fear of what retaliation it is promised by its enemies, what leads you to consider that Indian retaliation against Pakistan will

a) work, in that it will deter; and
b) not invite escalation; and
c) will not strengthen the ranks of those willing to die in fidayeen attack after fidayeen attack and suicide bomb after sucide bomb, thereby *increasing* the number of terrorist attacks?

The authority that *CAN* defang Pakistani terror _with the least amount of backlash_ is Pakistan's Government. It's a dirty filthy job. They say they are trying to do it. It's a new government 10 months in the saddle, against a massive force of Pakistanis arrayed against it. let it grow strong, let's see what action it takes.

Where did I argue for mass murder ? Where did I even argue for war ? Are you capable of accurately representing those with whom you disagree ?

I posted that stopping the Indus would be a violation of the Indus Water Treaty, forbidden against International law and a crime against humanity. You seemed to impliedly defend such an act in post # 1117 by talking about how the point was moot. In any case, if that was not your intention, I apologise.

Publius maharaj: your big talk wrt india-pakistan bs on the internet after mumbai would be slightly more convincing if you ever had anything else to say before mumbai. as it is, you are merely using the tragedy of mumbai to bolster your miserable little ego.

i dont think you are so stupid as to be unaware that the indian government doesnt have any options - it tried messing with Pakistan in 2001, and this time it knows better.

if you were slightly less stupid, you would be making a virtue out of a necessity and standing on that favorite platform of too many indians - the high moral pedestal.

Aha_Snark , Here is part 2 of my response ( for the first part see below)

"Why? If your objective is destabilisation, are you telling me that _by itself_ the Pakistani state is not doing a superb job of destabilising itself?"

Has the current destablization prevented it from carrying on a Jihadi war with India ?

Do you beleive that left to itself one day the Pakistani state will simply stop terror against India ?

The objective is not destabiliation, per se,( although I would welcome it) but punishment and deterrence.

Both of these are ends in themselves( please try and understand what I mean by that. Justice i.e punishment as well as deterrence is something that we pursue for itself because these are things that we value in themselves, in this context).

Our only hope w.r.t Pakistani army is to raise their costs( both moral and physical) high enough and for a long enough period to achieve some level of deterrence.

"And for what? Action against India has united India. The mere fear of an Indian threat united the Pakistani parliament against us. What guarantee do you have that direct action against Pakistan will not unite the entire country - the media, the people, the parties, the militants, the army - against us?"


Once again what has disunity done for us ? The objective is not disunity but deterrence. I don't care if Pakistanis are united as long as they don't attack us and are punished when they do.

"But there is a difference between weighing and considering the loss of innocent lives as a major factor in planning any action and using the inevitability of harm to innocents as excuse for mass murder"

Where did I argue for mass murder ? Where did I even argue for war ? Are you capable of accurately representing those with whom you disagree ?

For a detailed view of what I have proposed read this.(http://www.chowk.com/unplugged/t/60906)

publius

publius, please also consider that Mush was dictator for 8 years and he wielded near-absolute power. Everyone lined up to do salaam. This government is a shaky one that has the Army and the ISI establishments lined up against it; it is one that has bitter enmity/rivalries/disagreements with the PMLN & the PMLQ and the MMA and the MQM.

It did not even have the political capital to censure the MNA who defended the burial of three girls alive as part of tribal honour and custom.

And not only is it beset on all sides, it's barely 10 months old! Compared to the faujis who have ruled Pakistan, abhi to iskey doodh ke daant nahin nikle!

It's back is to the wall. The international pressure and the UNSC ban is the perfect excuse to crack down on terrorists who, one day, will be shooting at the Govt. of Pakistan, in any case. Today, it can't say a word about Kashmir to any nation without hearing the long list of misdeeds it has to answer for.

India is in a strong position and we have retained the moral high ground. Let's not overplay our hand and lose what we have. If we play our cards right, we might make some serious gains on this front. And considering the unknown consequences of military action (especially when one actor is the Pakistani state, seeing bhoots of Indian invasion and with an itchy nuke finger) and the fact that there is a new player on the other side, and the old boss has been kicked out,

don't we have the obligation to at least try?

publius

No of course not. Because the actions that are implied in that view are conditioned by the context.

I think i'm referring to this obliquely as well in my discussion with harish garu. Your argument for differentiation between India and Pakistan is that India is a robust, raucous democracy that is flawed but has a system within itself that responds and corrects flaws while Pakistan is a totally different animal altogether.

While I would completely disagree about how "lawful" Gujarat was in 2002 [1] I would agree to an extent that India contains within itself a self-correcting and evolutionary mechanism. Sometimes the mechanism gums up but overall, all said and done, it's working, in fits and starts.

Your conception of Pakistan is what I'm not sure I agree with. I think if you look at Pakistan dispassionately, it is possible to consider it as something other than the state you make it out to be. Your casting of Pakistan is that of a phenomenally competent and implacably inimical supervillain state - a cross between Lex Luthor and Mogambo. The country is a federation that was halved, in living memory. It is actually barely a federation in anything but the most notional sense - just take a look at how bitter the dispute over water is between Sindh and Punjab, for example. From the weak and dissolute leaders who preceded him, the likes of Yahya, Ayub etc, we had
a) the fatal hubris of Bhutto,
b) the deathly dictatorship of Zia, complete with nation-stifling and society-warping petrodollar fanaticism,
d) the succession of civilians who proved every fauji's prophecies right by stuffing both hands in the till and begging the fauj to take over when they were out of power
e) Musharraf's frozen dictatorship that ensured that pakistan remained in virtual stasis

Now, we have a regime that is at least making the right noises, has wrestled Mush out of office, has replaced the ISI chief with someone said to be more liberal, and has moved against the JuD and LeT (after a lot of international pressure and an overdose of denial, agreed)

And contrast this with the achievements of India vis-a-vis Kashmir/Pakistan. It's never ever fashionable to praise babus for the good work that they do but I happen to think that Indian diplomats have done a pretty darn decent job. They certainly get what they want, if you consider the 123 deal, for example. If you just look at hum kahaan the aur ab hum kahaan hain, you'll find that we've broken the hyphen that welded us to Pakistan, we've forged strong relationships with global powers, Pakistan has made unprecedented concessions on Kashmir, has cracked down on jehadis so that infiltration has dropped (our own Army corroborates this).

I would urge that you consider the possibility Publius sir, that Pakistan too is not a state in stasis - that it too is evolving.

Moreover, robust and bold diplomacy by a solid foreign service has worked, post Op. Parakram. it has worked before it. And there is a chance that it will continue to work.

Yes, a press conference or a treaty clause is not as flashy as a BRAHMOS missile, it doesn't satisfy the visceral urge for revenge that I feel, but in the long run, the 3 rice eaters and a college professor - Mukherjee, Chidambaram, Antony and Manmohan - might actually do something.


[1] thousands of cases were not registered or were wrongly registered, evidence was tampered with, names were not recorded properly - all in an effort to shield the accused... but let's not get sidetracked about Gujarat or we'll be here past 10000 posts.

harish,

it all depends, really, on whether you are right in your assessment of how _purposeful_ the Pakistani state is.

1. Does the Pakistani government know what it is doing?
2. Do Zardari & Co control the ISI/Army fully?
3. Is a policy of planned retention and deployment of LeT against India something that Zardari / ISI / Army are equally supportive of and complicit in?

Aha_Snark # 1207,

I will deal with your long post in chunks.

"You've just stepped down the same path that the jihadis did, by saying that people sipping coffee in the Leopold were somehow responsible for Godhra, for Kashmir, for the Babri Masjid. That a hardworking taxi driver was responsible. That a guy who even gave the bastards water when they were thirsty were responsible. That a rabbi and his pregnant wife are responsible for Palestine. That the newborn children and their new mothers in the damn maternity ward in Cama Hospital are responsible"

Let me try and untangle the various problems in your response.

There are different levels of moral culpability in any evil. There are people who carry out evil actions themselves , there are those that support those actions( morally or physically) and there are those who rationalize and deny them( in the face of sufficient reasons and evidence).

I am not suggesting that people of Pakistan are guilty in the same way for Jihad that the government of Pakistan is but they are guilty( in their own way).

[ Please note to say that the people of Pakistan are guilty is not to say each and every Pakistani person is so. Human language has to be interpreted in a common sensical manner when dealing with generalisations]

Now let's ask ourselve are the people of Gujarat not guilty of supporting somebody like Modi, who is apparently complict in mass murder. Yes they are.

So doesn't this logic, you ask , lead to the conculsion that the terrorists, in line with this thinking, would be justified in random killings of Gujaratis.

No of course not. Because the actions that are implied in that view are conditioned by the context.

The state of Gujarat is a democratic state within a liberal nation. It has several proper means of addressing the injustice and evil that was done there. One does not seek to address that evil by force because in a civilized ,democratic setup, force has been replaced by rights based voluntary action.

One files court cases, one takes public dharna, one does media campaigns. One passes moral judgement, one ostracizes and shuns.

Any terrorist opting to killing Gujaratis randomly is doing something deeply evil because he operates within the the context of a civilized society and a democratic setup.

Now consider the totally different context of the other situation. India has no effective non force based resort to get real justice from Pakistan. Pakistan is an enemy state that has been carrying out a Jihad against India and has no intention of giving it up( and once again it is the army that we are talking about here)

All the actions that have done by Pakistan so far are under presssure and are exactly the same that were done in 2001. They have no lasting significance. Let was banned then and it's leader placed under house arrest. Which was a complete show and it was back in business after a small interrugnum.

It meant nothing then and it means nothing now.

The only purpose from India's pov here is to let the world see that non force options are being used and once it becomes clear that they are ineffective then it becomes India's moral right (by the reasoning that I have used above) to use force( by which I do not necessarily mean military options).

So to sum up the moral theory that I have proposed does not create a moral equivalence between the actions of the terrorists and the proposed action against Pakistan.

There are other aspects of your post that I will address later.

#1239 by dost_mittar

Trust or no trust, the US mission in Afghanistan is still critically dependant upon Pak cooperation.

That may well be true DM sahib, but after the truck-burning incident, the US has already began looking into alternative routes from Central Asia. If things deteriorate, the US won't hesitate to put boots on the ground and as Obama indicated, the American focus is shifting towards South Asia from Iraq.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

HH#1238:
Trust or no trust, the US mission in Afghanistan is still critically dependant upon Pak cooperation. The Peshawar incident that you mention may be intended as a message to the US of how dependant it is on Pakistan.

#1237 by dost_mittar

If Pakistan did indeed come up with some info. it still would not mean that these are not non-state actors. After all, it has admitted and arrested such "actors".

DM sahib, Pakistan has not officially admitted to the involvement of any of its institutions. But if at all the FBI manages to lay its hands on the terrorists, that would become a real possibility.

As far as handing them over to FBI or any outside agency is concerned, that is a non-starter. They refused to let the americans question AQKhan and even Omar Sheikh who is in jail for killing Daniel Pearl. After all, assets have to be protected.

Those were different times DM sahib. The US was heavily reliant on Pakistan to do its dirty work in Afghanistan. It let go of AQ Khan and Omar Saeed in expectation of Paki cooperation. After 7 years and countless betrayals, things are different. It no more trusts Pakistan to do its bidding and has to resort to blackmail to get things done or even direct action in the form of cross-border raids and Predator drone attacks. The latest attack on US armored vehicles in which 150 APCs including Humvees were burnt down by the Taliban near Peshawar is another item in the long list of Paki betrayal/incompetence, depending on which way you look at it.

hh#1235:

If Pakistan did indeed come up with some info. it still would not mean that these are not non-state actors. After all, it has admitted and arrested such "actors".

As far as handing them over to FBI or any outside agency is concerned, that is a non-starter. They refused to let the americans question AQKhan and even Omar Sheikh who is in jail for killing Daniel Pearl. After all, assets have to be protected.

To make sure the war was being declared on terror and not on Pakistan, Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee clarified: “I am making it quite clear that it (war) is not a solution.�

http://www.dawn.com/2008/12/12/top2.htm

#1233 by dost_mittar

It can interrogate people it has arrested to find out the whereabouts of the missing trainees in the camp where the mumbai terrorists were trained.

DM sahib, why would Pakistan even attempt such a foolish thing? That would be a dead giveaway. Up until now, Pakistan has been maintaining a state of plausible deniability; that these were non-state actors who had nothing to do with the state of Pakistan. If they manage to nab the remaining 15 and if the FBI extracts the right to interrogate them (which is a possibility), a lot of unsavory things will come to the fore and Pakistan will have nowhere to hide.

Re: # 1233 dost_mittar

absolutely, that would be a bold move forward which would be received very well indeed. right now, the preception is that pakistan was bending over backwards to not do anything or admit anything and it is only after the UNSC ban that the offices were sealed. I don't know how credible this is but i've also read reports about how the LeT men were allowed to transfer documents and "seal the offices themselves!"

freeze their bank accounts, confiscate their properties - after all, theyre a banned organisation, right?

Moreover, why in the world is hafeez Mohammed Saeed being allowed to speak on TV ? this is the arrest ? Masood Azhar in house arrest in his palatial bungalow and HM Saeed free to talk on TV ?

eklavya#1209:

Actually, Pakistan can do one thing that will immediately transform Indian and world opinion about it. It can interrogate people it has arrested to find out the whereabouts of the missing trainees in the camp where the mumbai terrorists were trained. According to reports, there were 25 of them of which ten were meant for the mumbai attacks. If Pak authorities can find out where the others are even if can determine what are their intended targets, it will immediately establish their credibility.

Will they do it? I am not betting my depleted stock account on it.

Re: # 1212 harish_hyd

The Paki state thus sees them as allies, not enemies

You've put your finger on it, sir.

Yes, this is an area that I find myself returning to again and again. The crux of the matter really pivots on a) whether or not Zardari & Co are serious when they say theyre against LeT and it's deployment against India and b) If they are serious, what is their capacity to act against these interests

'.i have always felt that indian muslims are india's biggerst asset and its biggest liability......if india can get their living standards to a very high level, than the idea of pakistan fails.....however, if india cannot do that, then the idea of pakistan, gains weight.......'

Now, the question is, ' Is raising their standard responsibility of Indian Government and non-muslim Indians only or community itself and its leaders also have some responsibility towards it?
Only if M Shahabudin ex MP and others of his kind start concentrating more on condition of the community then whether one is a 'Muslim Indian' or 'Indian Muslim', whether Taslima should get visa or not, whether to send kids to school to study in Indian languages in addition to Urdu as a language or not (Haryana meo case) etc etc?

Regards

tahmed ji
'and you were there with your adding machine keeping count'

No, Sir, I was not but so was the case with those from other side who keep on updating data on a regular basis according to a pre-decided percentage increase.
Regards

h-h ji
Thanks for your concern. But when one is in cyberspace one has to receive and accept all kind of material coming ones way. And by the way, hamidm ji is Chowk Icon- Chowk Idol and a much admired/respected man. Of course, he has a way with the language that everyone loves to read what he writes.
Regards

#1223 "these guys have killed more people"

...and you were there with your adding machine keeping count.

romair #1225 again this half-baked comparisons in your attempts at tarring a democratic nation with the same brush as is applied to terrorists and rogue regimes:

1. Bush is leaving power when his term is up. Hitler did not.

2. on your changing the meaning of the word "terrorism" in our capacity of defense lawyer to obl and the 10 miserable men - seE #1226.

also on #1220: you are merely playing with words in your attempts to compare apples and oranges. lets get the terminology straight:

"terrorism" has a specific meaning - individual groups that target civilians.

when nations target civilians - the term used is "war crimes", "genocide", or "crimes against humanity", depending on the context.

if you wish to be obl's lawyer, or the lawyer for these ten miserable men who attacked mumbai - that is your choice. but dont change the meaning of words to support what you are trying to prove.

tahmad #: "bush is an elected president (granted the first time around the process was not quite kosher) of a country. when did al qaeda hold its last elections?"

....hitler was an elected chancellor of germany also.....all the indian prime ministers, who have pushed kashmir policies, are elected.......russia's actions in chechnya are carried out by an elected putin.....

......state terrorism is, generally, carried out by elected leaders, using state machinery to carry out terroristic activities in other countries......i.e. killing innocent civilians in other countries, to achieve their political aims......

that is why it is called state terrorism.....it is not carried out by a non-state actor, but has the complete power of a state govt. (with an elected state head) behind it.......

.......unless, of course, one believes that being an elected state head, absolves one of all acts of terrorism.....

......in which case, you would agree than modi has never committed any terrorism......he gets elected, again and again, as the chief minister of a state....and has even been absolved of all crimes by the national courts (unlike bush who refuses to recognized the int'l criminal court).......

#1223 by Humsab

Humsab ji, please do not lower your dignity by responding to a chut!ya like Romair. Leave that to lesser mortals like me or aces like hamidm2 and tahmed32 sahibs, who seem to be doing a fine job of it.

'what needs to be studied is who comes first......the state terrorist or the individual terrorist......and who kills more people.......'

In the case of Kashmir, it is well documented that individual terrorists came first in late 80s as far as present cycle is concerned and these guys have killed more people.

Judgement-----?????
Regards

borivilli_express #: you are carrying out a valiant (and articulate) fight.....as hamidm mian has highlighted many of us from the wrong side of the border would come to your assistance, however, we could be accussed of interfering in india's internal affairs.....which we would be doing.......(now if you were a kashmiri from across the LoC and not the border, it would be a different story)......

not to say that you require any assistance, or have asked for any....

.....in any case, the analyses you are presenting, are interesting, and provide an otherwise disappearing view on this site (that of an indian muslim)......

.....i have always felt that indian muslims are india's biggerst asset and its biggest liability......if india can get their living standards to a very high level, than the idea of pakistan fails.....however, if india cannot do that, then the idea of pakistan, gains weight.......

#1220 romair: bush is an elected president (granted the first time around the process was not quite kosher) of a country. when did al qaeda hold its last elections?

bush is bound by a constitution (even if he stupidly tried to overstep it at times, he ultimately failed). what constitution is obl bound by?

you are equating cops and robbers when you equate the US and terrorists.

tahmad #: "i get it. cops are state terrorists. robbers are individual terrorists. wow!!"

....i am afraid you get very little....you need to try to get some more....cops and robbers have nothing to do with terrorism....that is related to criminal activities (or childhood games).....

......bush is a state terrorist (leads a state machinery in committing acts of terrorism)......obl is an individual terrorist (leads a non-state organization in committing acts of terrorism)......pakistan govt. in 71 was a state terorist.....mukti bahani was an individual terrorist.....indian govt in kashmir is a state terrorist....various factions of LeT are individual terrorists......turkish govt. in kurd lands are state terrorists......various factions of kurd movements are individual terroists.......russian govt. in chechnya are state terrorists......various factions of the chechnyan resistance have committed individual terrorism.....ussr in afghanistan was state terrorist......some factions of mujahideen resistance were individual terrorists.....usa in iraq is a state terrorist.....al-qaeda in iraq is an individual terrorist....french in algeria were state terrorist.....various acts of algerian resistance were invidiaul terrorism......

what needs to be studied is who comes first......the state terrorist or the individual terrorist......and who kills more people.......

hamidm: i see you have struggled mightily with the indian hordes on chowk for the rights of the kashmiris. i am touched by this sudden concern that you develop for the "unwashed masses" when it comes to kashmir.

Eklayva # :"If Mukti bahini did what LeT does, then it was a terrorist organization........If Advanis does what Hafiz Saeed does then Advani is an outright terrorist."

.....thanks for the straightforward answers......

...i am bit surprised you are unaware of what mukti bahani did......it was one of the most successful chapters in indian history, and turned indra gandhi into a superstar....

.....i am also surprised you are unaware of what advani has done......if my info is correct, he was the mastermind behind ayodhya.......

.......just out of curiousity, do you believe in anil's very pragmatic theory, also, "if a person achieves his aims through terrorist, then he seizes to be a terrorism......however, if he doesn't, then he is a terrorist?"........

when i think about it, practically speaking, it is accurate.....however, i think it simply raises the ante for more terrorism, and doesn't reduce it........

#1216 i get it. cops are state terrorists. robbers are individual terrorists. wow!!

anil #: "In summary, if some organization wins or prevails, it is not a terrorist."

...this is an interesting answer.....not quite what i expected....in my interactions with you, i have always felt that you support state terrorism, but oppose individual terrorism.......while i oppose both......which is why we can never agree......however this answer is different....

.......if success is the only criteria for who is and isn't a terrorist, then doesn't this encourage more terrorism.....e.g. one could argue that the reason LeT has been declared a terrorist organization is because it wasn't, "terroristic" enough.......i.e had it carried out more terrorism, it could have actually succeeded in separating kashmir and then would, according to your definition, have won and would not longer be a terroristic organization......

.....similarly, if the indian state forces start losing their battle in kashmir, they would be encouraged to increase their state terrorism, so as to come out a winner, and thereby not considered terroristic......

this seems identical to the approach taken by organizations that indulge in terrorism......i.e. they just need to win.....once they win, all their terrorism will be forgotten.......

won't this escalate terrorism, even further.......

" would call LeT as mindless lunatics (I do not mean to hurt, but you asked me speak)."

...i do not get offended.....and i agree with you....i think they are mindless lunatics....i don't support them (i don't know why you think i support them).....however, i think if one is to discuss them, in the light of terrorism, then one has to discuss the indian state terrorism, also....

" would call Advani a very shrewed politician. The man knew when to get on that Rath, and when to get off."

...i think on this one you have avoided the question......so i will ask again.......do you think advani is a terrorist (i.e. has he committed acts of terrorism in india).....

.....if he has, and he still becomes the pm, then would it be ok for pakistan to nominate hafiz saeed as pakistan's pm

...in any case, your answers have surprised me.....all this time, i thought you were somewhat of a misguided nationalist........it turns out you are, truly, a shrewd profit-loss businessman :).......

......if i understand your answers correctly, as long as one wins, anything is legal.....because one gets to define the rules, and history, after one has won......so advani's biggest asset is that he is winning......and LeT biggest drawback is that they have been losing (after winning initially)........

in any case, it is much easier to deal with shrewd businessmen than misguided nationalists.......so there is still hope for india and pakistan......

Yaar Borivili, it is hard not to sympathize with these innocent kids who became orphans for no fault of theirs. But at the beginning of the "Azadi" movement, with active encouragement from Pakistan, Kashmiri Muslims meted out similar treatment to the Pandits of the valley, who had lived with them as brothers for centuries before. Mosque loudspeakers blared out threats, asking them to leave the valley but leave their womenfolk behind. The Indian Army walked into Kashmir only after the movment had become violent and not a day before that. So the primary responsibility for the sad plight of these innocent kids lies with the Geelanis, Yasin Maliks and Mirwaizes.

borivili ji
Is there a country where muslims are happy, contented without any grievance?
Is there a community (hindus, jews, christians etc etc all are bad doing injustice to these innocent pious people)against which muslims dont have any grievance? For example, is there a muslim country where these believers are blissful? OK not blissful but just about happy? Fine, not even happy, let us say just satisfied?
Regards

BJ muslims aint leaving anywhere below is a sample your policies have created, dont create another 150 million:

Fighting in Kashmir gives rise to orphanages
Between 60,000 and 100,000 children in this state of 5.5 million people are thought to be orphans – including fatherless children with mothers too poor to care for them.
By Mian Ridge | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the October 22, 2008 edition

Srinagar, India - Gazi Abdullah, a gentle, articulate 11-year-old considers himself fortunate. He describes a life filled with friends, games of cricket, and top scores in math.

But it hasn't always been so. Without a trace of self-pity, he tells how his father was killed in crossfire between separatist militants and the Army when he was two years old.

"After that our home was not in a good condition," he says, alluding to the wretched poverty that he, his mother, and his sister endured for years.

Today, Gazi lives at an orphanage in Srinagar, Kashmir's main city, with 350 other children ages 6 to 18, more than half of whom are victims of Kashmir's 20-year insurrection against India.

Between 60,000 and 100,000 children in this state of 5.5 million people are thought to be orphans – a term here that refers to children who have lost their fathers and whose mothers are too poor to look after them.

Before 1989, when separatists began their uprising against India, Kashmir had few orphanages. Srinagar had just one, with fewer than 20 children. But today there are half a dozen large institutions in the city – and even more scattered throughout the Kashmir Valley.

"This was never part of our culture before all the violence," says Saifullah Khalid, the principal of the Muslim Welfare Society-run orphanage where Abdullah lives.

"Before, people would never have taken their brother's children to a strange place and left them there," he says, gesturing at the orphanage's bare, unfurnished interior. "They would have adopted them. But with the huge numbers of deaths, this became impossible," he says.

Kashmiris have responded generously to the plight of orphaned children by donating to the orphanages, "especially at Ramadan," says Dr. Khalid. This orphanage, like several others here, receives some funding from the Indian government that allows the organization to give monthly bursaries to several hundred fatherless girls, which allow them to remain at home and in school.

"And we do what we can with these boys," Khalid adds, briefly pressing his hand to his heart, "to give them the love and affection that they miss from their families."

Nighat Shafi Pandit, a well-known Kashmiri activist and chairwoman of the Help Foundation that runs schools for orphans and other poor children in and around Srinagar, says that at the height of the conflict in the mid-1990s, there were days when up to 100 people, mostly men, were killed.

She regrets that the government did not give more support more quickly to the widows these deaths created that could have allowed their children to remain at home.

"We shouldn't have needed orphanages," she says. "Uprooting a child from its home and environs can cause terrible damage."

The bombings, shootings, and disappearances that punctuated daily life in this Himalayan region – once described by the 17th-century Mughul emperor Jahangir as "paradise on earth" – have abated somewhat in recent years.

Last year, violence in Jammu and Kashmir dropped to its lowest level since the insurgency began. There were fewer than 800 politically related deaths in 2007, compared with 4,507 in 2001, according to the Institute for Conflict Management in Delhi.

But some 600,000 Indian troops still remain based in Kashmir, and their presence is deeply resented. In recent months, Kashmir has seen some of the largest protests against Indian rule in years. On Oct. 11, thousands of Muslims took to the streets to protest the visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. At least two people were killed.

Last year, the aid group Medicins Sans Frontieres (MSF) found that in some parts of the valley, 1 in 3 Kashmiris had lost members of their extended families to the conflict and a similar number had contemplated suicide.

With few state resources here for such people, individual altruism is often the only source of help. Kiswar Ahmed, a psychologist from the northern state of Himachal Pradesh, makes yearly visits to Kashmir. She works as a volunteer therapist with orphaned children.

When new children arrive at orphanages, "they are scared," she says. "Scared of strangers, scared of the dark, scared of everything."

She says that Kashmiri children tend to have "a very strong religious faith that grounds them and gives them some security." But she adds that thousands more need professional therapy than receive it.

But some children, such as Gazi, find a way to move beyond the conflict. If he had stayed at home, he would almost certainly have left school and taken a job. But he has a longer term goal: to study hard enough to become an engineer. "Then," he says, "I can look after my mother and sister."



Jammu & Kashmir Yateem KhanaChana Mohalla, Chhatabal, Srinagar, J&K, IndiaE-mail: jandk_orphanje_sgr@yahoo.co.inPhone (from US): 011-91-194-247-1707

#1211 by Aha_Snark

The state of Pakistan knows how to crack down - in the past, it's cracked down on students movements, the left parties, the baloch, the bengalis - with absolutely no mercy.

That Anirudh bhai is because those movements were against Pakis state itself and the groups you mention have had absolutely no support from any of the organs of the state. OTOH, the LeT, JeM and the Paki Taliban have been midwifed by the Paki army/ISI itself and even though they may have sometimes gone after state functionaries and the army in the tribal areas, they overwhelmingly are oriented towards external enemies: India in the case of LeT and JeM and US/NATO forces in the case of Paki Taliban. The Paki state thus sees them as allies, not enemies. So where is the incentive for them to take serious action against these outfits?

Re: # 1209 eklavya

That's a very difficult question - what Pakistan can do in this situation is also intimately tied in with how it handles its current state of affairs - from taxes to education, basic health services, transport (except the excellent Motorways) - it's pretty dire, wherever you look.

Things the pakistani government can do:

1. use simple triangulation to detect the source of all illegal TTP FM radio broadcasts and bomb those transmitters. Do NOT tolerate the dissemination of anti-state propaganda and crack down strictly on it when it happens. The state of Pakistan knows how to crack down - in the past, it's cracked down on students movements, the left parties, the baloch, the bengalis - with absolutely no mercy.

2. Issue a presidential ordinance that makes it a crime punishable by a long jail sentence for any person or group in Pakistan to commit, plan to commit or abet the commission of any act of terrorism anywhere in the world. Visibly and publicly close the camps down and publicly counter anyone who says that terrorism is justified if it is against the Indians.

3. strongly clarify that those who fight against GoP, behead Pakistani soldiers and carry out bomb blasts in mosques and public places cannot be called "patriotic Pakistanis" because of rumours of an Indian attack that they will help repulse. Authorise only one or two government spokespersons for internal security and external security. Maintain message discipline, ensuring that no government minister or functionary goes on record on these matters other than the spokespersons.

4. considering how badly the PPP has treated the PML(N), this may be very difficult, but form a joint consensus with the PML(N) on measures that can be taken to purge, in a concerted but gradual process, the government of elements that will, ultimately, turn out to be hostile to the GoP.

#1207 Posted by Aha_Snark

Excellent post. The fact is that India certainly can do more but with people like publius on both sides, chances are less will be done. My opposition is to negative actions but I think both the US and India have decided to stay positive and that hopefully will go a long way in improving the situation.

Pakistan still needs to come down heavily on the religious fundos and parties like JuD but things take their own time. Through this crisis, so far, the political government in Pakistan has gained and hopefully the Obama admin will maintain pressure to continue to strengthen the civilians in Pakistan.

aha_snark and dm ji

Seems, dr manmohan singh has apologized to the nation, the UN has placed sanctions on LeT, and Pakistan has asked some LeT leaders to stay inside a house and promised to try them if India gives evidence.

Have you gentlemen heard of anything else that Pakistani state has done or can do?

aha snark#1207:

Excellent post!

Re: # 1117 publius

Since Pakistan is already engaged in a proxy war with India, morally the point is moot.

Uh, no. The point is not ki they bomb bus stations and temples and kill lakhs (generous estimate) so we cut off the water for 15 crores.

Not to mention that as it stands right now, Pakistan is in such a bad state that it can barely stand up and go to the loo without the threat of someone taking the gaddi in a coup while it's gone, let alone form and execute a coherent national policy on anything. The damn state can't enforce a single-dish policy in weddings, can't collect tax, can't run schools, needs an Ehtesab Board _for_ the Ehtesab Board, has an army that is only popular when there is threat of war... has (i am told) 10 hours of loadshedding in the metros. it doesn't have money to pay for gas to run power plants. THIS is the face of an implacable, united enemy pursuing a coherent policy of proxy war?

Proxy war was in full force up to jan 2002, and we had been fighting it from the days of Khalistan and before. Please look at the figures of violence in Kashmir before and after the date; our own army agreed that there was such a decline that some years ago they said some formations would be exiting bases in Kashmir.

Until the Amarnath land lease fracas, everyone was talking about a return to peace, tourists from 24 Parganas were going there in loud muffler-wrapped groups, things were definitely not reminiscent of a war zone.

Yes, the State of Pakistan needs to ensure that training camps which train people to commit terrorism in India are closed. If their colossal Punjabi egos will let them admit it, they will realise that this is a fantastic opportunity to get rid of a lot of groups that, in the end, will support the overthrow of the Govt. of Pakistan.

But GoP can't even ensure that a dump truck doesn't just ride through a restricted area of Islamabad and explode itself in the driveway of the Marriot!

Legally we should examine all creative legal theories, ( and I am not an expert here), say Pakistan's state sponsorhip of terror , to withdraw or violate.

Why? If your objective is destabilisation, are you telling me that _by itself_ the Pakistani state is not doing a superb job of destabilising itself? It's reaping the bitter harvest of decades of petrodollar obscurantism. Its own politicians are so opportunistic that each and every one of those sorry bastards has *called* for coups when out of power. Nawaz did it, Benazir did it, and people are already starting to forget how bad Mush was and are calling for Kayani to "do his duty".

Even if India wanted to destabilise the state, do you really think we can do a better job? And is it worth the costs of treaty violations? Right now, we have tremendous international capital, we're way way past the stage when the world used to hyphenate us with Pakistan. The instant we start violating treaties, every single account of Pakistani perfidy will have to contain the information that India has also violated international convenants, dragging us down to their level.

And for what? Action against India has united India. The mere fear of an Indian threat united the Pakistani parliament against us. What guarantee do you have that direct action against Pakistan will not unite the entire country - the media, the people, the parties, the militants, the army - against us?

A predominant majority of these people are indirect participants in Pakistan's war against India. Some by actively supporting Jihad, some by denying that it even exists. There is a level of moral culpability there( not equal to prime movers, of course , but it is there). So a level of punishment is morally justified.

I disagree. Please read the wikipedia entries on Genocide. Serioulsy, do it. The first step to genocide and crimes against humanity is to consider a particular group of people, a whole chunk, collectively responsible and therefore worthy of collective punishment.

You've just stepped down the same path that the jihadis did, by saying that people sipping coffee in the Leopold were somehow responsible for Godhra, for Kashmir, for the Babri Masjid. That a hardworking taxi driver was responsible. That a guy who even gave the bastards water when they were thirsty were responsible. That a rabbi and his pregnant wife are responsible for Palestine. That the newborn children and their new mothers in the damn maternity ward in Cama Hospital are responsible.

I understand your rage; I feel it too. Assume that India had attacked a terrorist camp in Pakistan on the 1st of december. By now, would the GoP have banned JuD? Arrested and held the people named in it? Are you seriously trying to say that our missiles would have made them run for cover and go underground like they are doing now? We would have MADE THEM INVULNERABLE IN PAKISTAN. There is no fucking way that the UNSC would have banned JuD, Hafiz Saeed and the others. and moreover, we would have provided the best recruitment poster for LeT and JuD. People would have flocked to join their ranks.

Yes, I feel your rage. Ours is a just rage. But look at the story of Ashwatthama, of righteous rage gone horribly wrong - that story tells us that out of righteous rage can come horrible crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashwatthama

I don't say that there should be no military move against Pakistan ever, that there is no red line that we should not cross. However, I happen to believe that our diplomatic service is pretty darn good - in most deals we drive very very hard bargains. With the amount of international sympathy we have on our side, I see stringent sanctions for Pakistan if it can be shown that they are *not* banning terror groups. If there is another major attack that can be traced as clearly to LeT/Pakistanis, the entire world will support military action against the camps in Pakistan.

Please ask yourself. would any military action we had taken put the GoP on such a back foot as it is now?

Secondly in situations based necessarily on collective like these it cannot be an absolute crieterion that no innocent person ever get hurt.

Of course. No one is saying that our missiles will kill only the guilty. The fact that innocent people will suffer is guaranteed in any military action.

But there is a difference between weighing and considering the loss of innocent lives as a major factor in planning any action and using the inevitability of harm to innocents as excuse for mass murder.

Please also note that under the laws of war, collective punishment of civilians is forbidden. And no, please don't let your rage extrapolate the existence of chanda boxes for jihad into support by the entire population for terror in India so that you can say that theyre not _really_ civilian, all of them.

Re: # 1203

Hamidm2 miaN, I think it is more practical for India and Pakistan to remain enemies than to try to become friends.

Indians trying to become friends with Pakistanis would be like healthy folks indulging in sex with AIDS-infected folks. (I say it with the utmost compassion for those who suffer from that disease.) Unless one does it with extreme care, both the parties are doomed, for sure! And, irrespective of what the healthy party does, the other party is doomed for sure!

Sooner or later!

Re: # 1201

[pakistanis belive India bears them the same animosity you accuse them of,]

Bori, idiot! You are not Indian -- so stop pretending to be one.

No, the vast majority of Indian Mussalmaans are not in love with Jinnah's ideology like you seem to be.

Feel free to take up Hamidm2's offer of free room and board in Pakistan -- or preferably in his Hispanic-tended mansion in Michigan.

I enumerated all the "enemy" acts of Pakistani administration. I see you are scared to bring them up. That is because what Pakistanis have been doing is inexcusable!

I understand that your love for Pakistan makes you blind to all the evil that country has been directing toward India. But that does not mean I won't tell it like it is.

Being truthful and recounting the same does not require one to be fundamentalist. Denying it -- like you seem to be doing, carries all the hallmarks of one.

The Pakistanis on this site are inveterate liars -- and Hamidm2 miaN is the worst of the lying liars! In my opinion.

I think you will fit in perfectly if you do "cross over" to their side. Don't let me stop you.

bori mian,

.... i am beginnig to feel sorry for you, so if you want to cross over to the right side of the border you are welcome ......... i am afraid we cannot accomodate all 150 million of you guys but i am sure we can make room for one or two .....

....... if the bjp gets elected and they start transporting you guys to the showers and incinerators we will do the best we can ..... judging by the venom being spewed by folks like eklavya, pinku and bj that is more than likely, so good luck to you

Re: # 1200

bj mian,

... i never realized you were a hindoo fundamentalist ..... enema?

and please be civil dont create a self fulfilling prophecy by isolating muslims and calling the traitors.

BJ2 pakistanis belive India bears them the same animosity you accuse them of, this is a stalemate which will led to an increasing spiral of violence.

[no wonder this and other problems lie unresolved.]

You are trying to solve the wrong problem. The problem lies with the Pakistani support for terror which they have been providing for decades. The problem lies in pumping jihadis into India. The problem lies with hijacking IC-814. The problem lies with bombing the Indian Parliament. The problem lies in bombing metro trains! The problem lies with bombing Indian Consulate!

What part of the problem your dumbass jihadi-wannabe head does not grasp?!

The problem lies with the enemy mindset that Pakistanis bear toward Indians.

AND the problem lies with those Indians (probably Muslims) who act as the agents of Pakistan, do their bidding, and think of Pakistan as their spiritual master!

Now, take your "disappointment" and stick it inside your Jinnah!

beej,

"If you live in India, it is only fair to expect to live as equal to everybody else"

Wow. What a temporary role reversal :)

See, the alienation and helplessness faced by Muslims is real. The question only is: what can be done about it? We need an honest dialogue about that, and do the best we can to help, but only to the extent it does not violate the rights and privileges of others.

Anyways, time for me to get out of here for now! :)

Goodnite, bhrata beej.

BJ2 your tone and response is disappointing, no wonder this and other problems lie unresolved.

The worst kind of traitor is one who lives in India and yet toes the Pakistani line, who dreams of Pakistan, and cries that his/her forefathers made the mistake of staying in India!

No more favors are necessary. If you don't like the land -- feel free to scoot over to Pakistan!

If you live in India, it is only fair to expect to live as equal to everybody else -- without special privileges and laws tailormade for your group.

And yes, equality can only extend to the equality of opportunity -- nothing gets handed down to anybody on a golden plate! (Ask your Pakistani darlings!)

#1185 Posted by borivili_express

you can not simply ignore the fact that there is something in Islam that makes muslims more prone to alienation than others.. further hindus in UK or USA or anywhere else live quite happily and never feel alienated.. even if they are vegetarian or whatever.. even if they do not do one single thing like people of their host country, they will still not hate or feel alienated... there is a difference that religion brings... and it is not because some muslim is different and he simply got genes to feel alienated.. it is a difference that Islam creates.... India and Indonesia have moderate muslims, Iran have many muslims who are hardly muslims or who do not even like Islam, but rest of the muslims are probably even more prone to alienation than Indian muslims...

[ i dont think a hypothetical kashmiri state would be islamist or rights violating.]

That's what that creep Jinnah said about a "hypothetical" Pakistan state and look at it now! Kambakhat, if you make a difference between citizens based on whether they are Hindus and Mussalmaans, you are part of the problem -- and the difference between a flaming Jihadi and you is only temporary. Kashmiris and Pakistanis seem to have gotten the Ummahitis bug which is fatal. If Bori miaN feels the same symptoms, he should feel free to cross over!

#1185 Posted by borivili_express

[[
see pinku part of the diff between punjab and kashmir is that sikhs are well integrated in india especially they make up 15% of army though are only 2% of pop, kashmiris or muslims are nowhere close to that integrated.
]]

That is their problem. Sikhs are there in Indian Army since British time, but Kashmiries are not there for more than one reason... Those are not at all valid reasons for feeling alienated. You can not expect common Kashmiri to be relying on such factors to feel alienated (they do not even know or understand this much). It is more of religion than anything else. So you are right when you say that Sikhs and Hindus had been close. That also gives you rest of the history, it is not imagination but fact that muslims in general are more prone to alienation because of their religion.

[[
secondly Hindus also historicaly were close to sikhs.
]]
true



[[
thirdly most of the abuses in punjab were done by sikhs on sikhs that was not the case in kashmir where it was indian hindu on kashmiri muslim.
]]
Not that true, they saw violent killings all over India done by Hindus, they even revolted with Pakistan's support, even religion is again different, but somehow the religious ego is not of similar nature. They do not have one single nation for their religion, thought of creating one, but left that thought quite easily despite the fact that Punjab gains 1000 times more by separating than Kashmir. The ego is different: Sikhs are capable of giving, not just taking, they feel proud on being "right", while the problem with Islam is that it inherits lot of deception and is at ease in accomodating deception. The amount of propaganda and lies used by Islamists is un-paralleled in history.

[[
secondly discrimination is not just in housing but according to pepole also in jobs in pvt sector and govt sector and in govt offices (?) police tratment, suspicion etc.
]]

Again, if propaganda is to be believed than Hindus discriminate so much that no hindu hires a muslim????? But if you fake yourself from a laborer to al possible jobs in private or government sectors in all Indian states and check what sort of discrimination you will find, you will be surprised. You are a muslim so you should know how much discrimination you have faced compared to Hindus or different regions. The discrimination in Job is as mush as a Bihari will face in UP? or a UP wala will face in Punjab?? In fact less than that. The suspicion is again less than that is deserved, a trader whom i know hires lot of muslim laborers and never suspect anyone, he hired one muslim laborer just because he can do a few not so legal things, as neither police nor inspectors can go inside that muslim locality, in his words govt of india stops outside of that locality???

You are a muslim, so do you want to suggest you do not know about Indian muslims and their alienation that is there doesn't matter what you do with them??

What alienates a muslim in UK?

You can not exxagerate extraneous reasons and make the problems that muslims themselves create a lot milder than they are. Remember majority of hindu or muslims in India (or even in Pakistan) do not matter at all, they hardly have time as they are quite poor, so all problems are created by those who have some time and worth to think stupidly or to get involved stupidly. Most of the problem creators are from middle classes.

" ithink we need to go beyond what u reccomend and grant some measur of autonomy"

I have two constraints for that. First whatever autonomy is given cannot violate the rule of equality between citizens and equality between states.

Second it is deeply unhealthy to set in motion something that instead of leading to a deeper integration of Kashmir with India leads to further alienation. That must be kept in mind.

#1185 Posted by borivili_express on December 11, 2008



kashmiris or muslims are nowhere close to that integrated.


name 5 countries where a muslim minority is well integrated...you only need look at the UK..

even US where muslims are better integrated than the UK, 25% of young american muslims support suicide bombings...

muslims need to stop whining..

in any case, indian muslims didn't do this shit..so it's a moot point anyway...

I agree with you on egypt as well, i shouldhave put that as a qualification, but most of these staes laws are not sharia and they dont privilige islam over other relgions in heir constitution.

Publius i agree with you but there is a gap between the treatment you reccomend and what is in effect on the ground, and ithink we need to go beyond what u reccomend and grant some measur of autonomy. but i dont think a hypothetical kashmiri state would be islamist or rights violating.

bori, yaar, you have too much coming at you at the same time. Not fair. Many of your ideas are good, and there is no reason why people can't work together here. :)

Catch you later.

"ther than Saudi and Iran none of the muslim countries are islamic states, most of the near east (turkey, syria, Iraq, lebanon, Jordan) central asia ( all the stans and azerbaijan), north africa (from Mauritania to egypt) and south east asia (malaysia, Indonesia (the most populos mulim country)) doesnot have islamic states"

I don't accept a definition which leads to the conclusion that Egypt, for instance, is not an Islamic state.

A state where Islam is officially , effectively and comprehensively privileged over other religions is an Islamic state no matter what it's other structure is.

"the kashmiris are so alienated and feel so powerless that any resistance or help they are ready to accept"

That may well be true but it does not change the fact that the likely result of independence will be a rights violating state.

Discrimination and alienation cannot be solved by institutuionalizing violation of rights.

In fact Kashmiris in the last few years have had good reasons for feeling less alienated , whether they choose to acknowledege those reasons or not.

The turnout in this election alone should be taken as a positive sign. Let us be consistently good to Kashmiris and make sure their rights are protected( and punish the rights vioaltion that do occur) but on the question of separation they have no valid grounds.

eklavya it doesnt matter wether discrimination is formal or informal its effects are felt secondly in many cases there is little overt discrimination but people want to control their own destiny like Georgia and Ukrain etc versus russia, these countries broke away before the stans because they have a sense of their own identity, similarly croatia and slovnia broke from serbia even before bosnia since they did not want to be dominated and had a sense of their own identity.

#1181 Posted by Eklavya on
Well, experiencing discrimination and subjecting to discrimination are two different things...

For example no body is discriminating against muslims when we do not have prayer rooms for them at airport, but they can still feel they are discriminated against...

similarly no body is discriminating agsint them if we do not have sharia laws included in UK law, but they can still feel so..

So the question is not of their feeling but of actual discrimination... anybody can feel anything..

The question is why muslim are so quick to feel alienated...

see pinku part of the diff between punjab and kashmir is that sikhs are well integrated in india especially they make up 15% of army though are only 2% of pop, kashmiris or muslims are nowhere close to that integrated. secondly Hindus also historicaly were close to sikhs. thirdly most of the abuses in punjab were done by sikhs on sikhs that was not the case in kashmir where it was indian hindu on kashmiri muslim.

secondly discrimination is not just in housing but according to pepole also in jobs in pvt sector and govt sector and in govt offices (?) police tratment, suspicion etc.


by the way several districts of jammu are muslim majority.

lastly the roads were blocked and the drivers were physically assaulted and many of those drivers were actually sikhs and they were so terrified they refused after the first few days to venture that way. the reason for not stoping the block was again political, BJP played up the anger in jammu whch was genuine, congress didnot want to use a heavy hand to open the highway for fear of alienating the jammu hindus before the elections. and in fact the initial land grant had been made by Azad just with a view to elections, for the existing arrangements for the amarnath journey were fine, it was the muslim porters who had been doing most of the hauling and services for generations in any case.

#1174 Posted by borivili_express
[[
the state must do what it can to avoid
]]

borivili,
the first thing state need to do is to stop prosylytization, then it should decrease the role of religions to cripple the plans of Islamists/Saudi-Arabia/Pakistan. The state shouldn't have any religious holidays like holi, id or whatever, work more like China or communists to lessen the importance and influence of religion in society... by this time significant part of what you asked is already achieved...

but you can not simply forget history while the whole lot of Islamic propaganda/infiltration is still going on... you can not pretend that people are not hindus/muslims and there is no history behind them till you create an environment where they are actually less of a hindu or a muslim....

muslims find it hard (more compared to others) to be less muslims..... doesn't matter whether they live in an Islamic state or non-Islamic one.. the reason is because Islam has an inherent motivation in terms of us-vs-them ideology that keep them concerned about their identity....

in ALL those cases, discrimination was instituted within the formal state constitution.

Bori, in ALL those cases, discrimination would instituted within the formal state constitution. Or one group tried to constitutionally impose an unfair deal on the other. Or am I wrong?

Pinku, Muslims do experience discrimination. The question: what does that mean, and what can we expect that to lead to? And does it have to be in every case of discrimination?

post 1176 but discrimination among muslims does cause alienation thats is why bangladesh exist and that is why all the arab counries revolted against the ottomans and that is why Kurds fight against Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran or Darfur. and among non mulims too that is why cntral american rebels and anti russian revolts by their former states ukrain, georgia etc and that is why Tibet against china or east timor against indonesia.

part of the answer is the history of hindu muslim interaction in the subcontinent, and Kashmir india interaction

#1167 Posted by borivili_express on
borivili,

[[
Pinku Indian majority is not as nondiscriminatory as you imagine when dealing with muslims and no hindu majority state will agree to live under muslim rule either.

]]

They are certainly less discriminatory than muslims in general. None of Islamic nations fair better than India in treatment of their minorities. Further you are wrong, Kashmir with India has majority of muslim in Kashmir but India itself is Hindu majority. Hindu majority states have lived happily under muslim rule by giving jijiya or whatever during pre 1947 era. And they can do so anytime, because they do not have same degree of ego as is reflected by muslim groups. Both degree and quality of group ego is different.


Also, it is an Islamist problem eventually. The simple truth is that it was obvious to Kashmiries that India can not take anything from them but can only give something to them, the whole problem was the question of muslim majority needing a muslim identity plus separate land. We can not even justify creation of Pakistan itself forget creation of Kashmir.

the data of deaths and rapes is wrong.... it is highly exaggerated... alienation is not just because of deaths and rapes but mainly because the population is muslim and is ready to be alienated... Punjab has seen lot many deaths and rapes in much shorter time, they are still not that alienated. And you can tell Kashmiries that first whatever Kashmiriyaat they feel proud of comes from Hindus and secondly compared to Punjab which plays a very positive role (a strong economy), the role they have played is highly negative.

i have said it earlier any other Army would have performed much worse than Indian Army given the conditions of Kashmir.

You say that Kashmiries were discriminated against in rest of India? when did they go to rest of India and what discrimination they faced??

...failure of Kashmir was because of Kashmiries, they never understood that they do not need to separate from India, they remained confused and Pakistan did the rest to bring the worst out of that situation.

What discrimination Indian muslim's face in India? The most significant discrimination I know of is when you want to rent a room/apartment in a good locality. What else? In a third world country who gets favours?? Can you list the discriminations against muslims that Hindus do not face?


Further just to let Pakistanis know: in the part of Jammu and Kashmir that India controls, majority of area, around 70% is Jammu and Laddhak.

[[
there is also the problem of helplessnes iwth such a huge army presence, upper admin in the hands of the IAS and as the problem of road blockae during the Jammu showdown showed, crores worth of their fruit and commodities just rotted away, basic supplies ran scarce since no imports were allowed.
]]

This is also wrong, similar to the number of deaths and rapes, police/army clarified that they never stopped anything, it was separatists who created chaos and confusion and spread rumour that police is stopping trucks. Still, you can not expect that in such a pathetic situation nothing will go wrong.

Publius other than Saudi and Iran none of the muslim countries are islamic states, most of the near east (turkey, syria, Iraq, lebanon, Jordan) central asia ( all the stans and azerbaijan), north africa (from Mauritania to egypt) and south east asia (malaysia, Indonesia (the most populos mulim country)) doesnot have islamic states.

The reason many of these struggles become islamic is the states they oppose are able to with their brutality destroy the nationalists, but the islamists are ideologicialy comited and so despite small numbers are able to hold out. so for example india eliminated JKLF but finds it more difficult to eliminate the lashkars. the kashmiris are so alienated and feel so powerless that any resistance or help they are ready to accept.

# 1175 is a good post. We need to think more about that. About what can be or should be done.

Consider that objective discrimination among non-Muslims or among Muslims themselves does not cause alienation to the same extent.

Do you think there could be something to that?

the state must do what it can to avoid bringing the baggage of the past into the present and emphasis positive aspects of history where hindu muslims unity existed. hthis is what congress did, unfortunately by the 70s in addition it started the wrong trend of explicitly pandering to religious identities since the peopel were frustrated with corruption and their failed economic policies.

the bjp does the opposite it emphasises only the negative aspects of history and that too it exxagerates, as if the muslim conquerors were representatives of islam or as if all the muslims ever did what was rape, loot and converts, even if they had done so they should not drive this into childrens head, and the muslims of today who are mostly local converts couldnot have been held responsible. this wrong emphaisis and lying changes malleable minds and makes them hate their fellow citizens, same for the muslim side this should be stopped by the stae because it will automatically lead todiscrimination and extreme violence like in gujarat where people were avenging not the injsutices of today but the assumed injustices of 1000 years ago, because they were taught this false history and taught as if this had happened yesterday

the state must do what it can to avoid bringing the baggage of the past into the present and emphasis positive aspects of history where hindu muslims unity existed. hthis is what congress did, unfortunately by the 70s in addition it started the wrong trend of explicitly pandering to religious identities since the peopel were frustrated with corruption and their failed economic policies.

the bjp does the opposite it emphasises only the negative aspects of history and that too it exxagerates, as if the muslim conquerors were representatives of islam or as if all the muslims ever did what was rape, loot and converts, even if they had done so they should not drive this into childrens head, and the muslims of today who are mostly local converts couldnot have been held responsible. this wrong emphaisis and lying changes malleable minds and makes them hate their fellow citizens, same for the muslim side this should be stopped by the stae because it will automatically lead todiscrimination and extreme violence like in gujarat where people were avenging not the injsutices of today but the assumed injustices of 1000 years ago, because they were taught this false history and taught as if this had happened yesterday

"On what evidence do you think kashmiris want to establish an islamist govt"

borivill_express, first of all , any group of muslims in a majority in any region, no matter how moderate, are extremely susceptible to the appeal of political islam.

Basically there is something about Islam that sanctifies a religious state, which is why the overwhelming majority of muslim countries are Islamic states.

Then when you add to that the fact that armed wing of the separatist movement is explicity Jihadi and non armed wing is based on explicit appeals to religious identity, the probability that plebescite is anything other than Islamic state is negligible.

Do you seriously believe that given the option Kashmiris will establish anything other than an Islamic state on the lines of Pakistan ?

Bori, the history of Hindu-Muslim interactions is so conflicted that there is bound to be some discrimination on both sides. Probably Hindus in Pakistan face some discrimination too.

The question then becomes does discrimination always lead to alienation or is it sufficient to cause alienation by itself? Or can alienation be a product of historical relations and identities themselves - with objective discrimination playing a rather non-decisive part?

I am just thinking through these things, so what do you feel?

eklavya because identities in developing countries are religously defined and these religous identies are antagonistic to wards each other because of historical baggage and repeatedly reminding people about that, what children are taught by parents and societies. consequently people discriminate.

bori, you said something interesting.

"no hindu majority state will agree to live under muslim rule either."

I am trying to think - why? What would be the problem?

I spoke with a kshmiri woman recntly she told me that they face discrimination in both govt and pvt sector henever they come to the plains in delhi and bombay. she claimed that the boys are harrased and on any pretext are arrested, tortured and detained indefinitely. Itried to explain to her that that happens with non kashmiri muslims as well, but she said it was much more with kashmiris, and soon youwill also become militants, now what reply can one give.

Bori

This is EXACTLY the problem - of alienation and sense of helplessness and frustration.

pinku "What is their logic for demanding separation from India" see refer to my post below the reason for alienation as I see is that India rigged elections, because it didnt trust them. They faced the discrimination in the rest of india that all muslims feel, in their case they can often be even visially distinguished, most muslims cant do anything about it and dont feel that they have a seperate language or national identity, they could do some thing about it because they were in a majority and always had a sense of idntity by virtue of their language, ethnicity, and culture which is by definition religously based.

so they deicded to revolt India tried to put it down by force and killed, coomitted violations didnt rein in the troops nor punished them, then the daily humiliations of check points, searches, misbehaviour of troops who are ultimately indian and hndu.

budhists didnt participate because they are in ladakh and dont consider themslves kashmiri, hindus as I explained in my post below didnt participate for the same reason that muslims in say Hyderbad would not had it been part of pakistan. Anyway the muslims are in the majority and they are now alienated.

The parliament has no rela autonomy India has steadyly whittled it from 48 onwards and doesnt aloow it any measure to regain that, what ever little resolutions are passed even that is ignored for example farooq abdullah who is supposed to be nationalist and antipakistan wanted to fly the state flag along with the national flag, which is common in the US, India didnt allow even that.

Pinku Indian majority is not as nondiscriminatory as you imagine when dealing with muslims and no hindu majority state will agree to live under muslim rule either.

I dont see this as an islamist problem, currently the problem is alienation, people cant lforget the violence, the rapes, encounters, custodial deaths and tortures, the 60 to 80,000 deaths in a pop that is only 7 million would be equivalent to 11 million deaths in a country the size of india, If the british had killed as many it would have been difficult for the indians to reconcile themselves except under duress.

there is also the problem of helplessnes iwth such a huge army presence, upper admin in the hands of the IAS and as the problem of road blockae during the Jammu showdown showed, crores worth of their fruit and commodities just rotted away, basic supplies ran scarce since no imports were allowed.

So the question is what can be done to solve this problem of alienation and helplessness.

Pinku, we have to realize that this is ONLY a matter of one's values. So the only thing that keeps this vision from being implemented in Kashmir or anywhere else is relative powers of different groups at any point time.

#1163 Posted by Eklavya on

Perfect, it is not just will of people, it is validity of that will that matters... muslims all over world want Islamic state, if possible they will create nations in each 1 square kilometer they can find majority????

#1161 Posted by Eklavya on

[[
The question is - do you allow the creation of separate country to a religious group unless the religious group is being officially discriminated against (not just that it feels it is being victimized or discriminated against)?
]]

Well, the answer is simpler.... till you can not give a valid reason you should be slapped hard enough if you try to separate. So if both Kashmiries and Indians give reason why Kashmir should or shouldn't separate from India the better one should be chosen.

Kashmiries have no valid reason except for complete idiotic ones that Pakistanis on chowk here will give you. Like everybody has a right to determine when he wants to die or separate and so please let them separate. In India you can not even take divorce on will like that (but in Islamic system you can say "talak" thrice and can be done with rest of the process)?

In such a case you should slap those who give such reasons as well. They may go on to say that everbody has a right to kill anybody, till they realize that it gives me right to slap them as well (if somehow i can manage)??

You can see how stupidly Pakistanis here justify why Kashmiries should get freedom, while most of them have not yet freed themselves from Islamic mentality. Only reason they can think like this despite having good enough intelligence is because their intellect is still trapped in Islamic group ego. If Kashmiries were Christians, it would have been ok to let them separate even if there reason was invalid because in future the situation would not have become worse that easily. But with China, Pakistan and Bangladesh on periphery, and with extremely great potential of Pakistan to create hell of all sorts, it is deadly for whole of Souith Asia. It is like creating another safe haven for Islamists. Who the hell in Kashmir will stop Islamization? Another terror hub on Indian periphery??

That is what I would think so. I would reject that as fundamentally wrong and unacceptable.

It doesn't matter if such religious people propose to build an utopia for themselves and for others.

Nor can it be done on the basis of self-determination. This is not self-determination, it is determination for all others.

Re: # 1161

The answer is an obvious NO.

Pinku, it IS a religious issue alone.

The question is - do you allow the creation of separate country to a religious group unless the religious group is being officially discriminated against (not just that it feels it is being victimized or discriminated against)?

#1156 Posted by Eklavya on

[[
My view would be that the problem in Kashmir is much deeper than not letting Muslims in the Valley create an Islamic state.
]]

It can't be deeper than the religious stuff, because that is the deepest thing that is still above burried lands... So the more you try to understand Kashmir problem the more it will seem like a religious one.. there is no reason for Kashmiries to separate from a federation like India which takes little from them and which gives or can give a lot for free...


1. the overall history of Kashmir and India doesn't allow much to be given to Islam... It deserved nothing from India (and nothing from Kashmir) and got a lot.... This is understood by USA/Europe and any non-muslim interested in Kashmir... The results of conversions are not understood by muslims but every non-muslim understands what happened to India/Indian sub-continent because of this conversion...

2. the overall strategic situation of Indian sub continent doesn't allow anything to be given to Islam... close to 1 billion people get offended by any more donation of land and civilization to land/people hungry Islam.... This is understood by USA/Europe and any non-muslim interested in Kashmir...

3. It is not just a political issue, the parent issue is creation of Pakistan which was originally a religious issue that created all sorts of seemingly political issues. Before partition, the political class of muslims was not willing to live as a minority in India despite having such a huge population of muslims. There is no country on earth where muslims live happily as a minority. That is the root cause of creation of Pakistan and then all political problems arising out of it. The problem is with Islam, it doesn't know how to let a muslim to be a good human.

4. All such problems will be properly resolved only when religions in general lose relevance and majority of people understand that they are good for nothing.

Re: # 1155

If that's the case why do only Kashmiri sunni muslims want to secede from India (note that it is not the Hindus, Buddists or even the Shia Muslims)?

#1155 Posted by borivili_express on
What is their logic for demanding separation from India, if all they want is democratic setup?
Can they list any reasons? What is it that India gets from Kashmir?? If they can not give any good enough reason then as India is a democracy the assumption that Publius made can be valid suspicion (in any case it has to be assumption because till it happens we can't be sure) and his argument still remains valid. It reflects insanity of Kashmiries if they can not give valid reason and still want to separate (and yet claim they will make democratic state of muslim majority from where they have already tried to eliminate Hindus). With two such failed experiments in the form of Pakistan and Bangladesh, India should slap separatists hard and do what North USA did to south.

Re: # 1154

While that is the fundamental reason for not holding a plebiscite in Kashmir (the "freedom" struggle is purely religious) I think I was arguing technicality.

I will wait for Publius' response. My view would be that the problem in Kashmir is much deeper than not letting Muslims in the Valley create an Islamic state.

Publius I agree with your logic but I have a question about one of your assumptions,

On what evidence do you think kashmiris want to establish an islamist govt? they have never voted for Jamat Islami, even in the hurriyat, the islamists are the weakest party.

"No way the plebiscite will yield any proper results after the atmosphere has been so vitiated"

MaheshG the strongest argument against plebiscite is not that it will not yield "proper" resulsts but that no group has the right to establish a rights violating system by replacing a (relatively) rights protecting one.

For instance when the American south asked for separation the north so that it could maintain slavery the north did not allow it to do so.

Kashmiris or any other group have no right to replace a democratic semi-free setup with an Islamic dictatorship as such.

The so called right to self-determination is a conditional right( qualified by the type of political system that you wish to establish) not an unconditional one.

MaheshG, supposed advani should be tried. And suppose he isn't. So suppose there is injustice in India.

Then what?

I don't know about Mukti Bahini but Advani should be tried for murdering thousands of people.

Re: # 1140

No way the plebiscite will yield any proper results after the atmosphere has been so vitiated.

Ok, just saw those questions.

Romair, there is no equivocation.

If Mukti bahini did what LeT does, then it was a terrorist organization.

If Advanis does what Hafiz Saeed does then Advani is an outright terrorist.

Romair:

1. "what are your views on mukti bahani....do your consider it a terrorist organization?...."

Why just Mukti Bahnini, Manachem Begin, Bhagat Singh and many more who brought or were catalyst of change can be included. Yes, at the early stage they were all regarded as terrorists. Even Gandhi for not looking after his cows, and concentrating on the opposition to the British was held for sedition.

My point is movements, historically have stages, the question is did they win or loose. I am certain if those whom Mohammad fought, had prevailed, Mohammad would not have been the prophet. Obviously Mohammad won and forever changed 25% of humanity to this day.

You may believe these chickens who according to me, are producing rotten eggs, can win and be counted the category that includes the above.

I do not see that is possible. I see them as rearguard reactionaries, who are trying to gain power and influence one way or the other.


"...do you think it was able to succeed in implementing india's plan in bangladesh..."

The only thing it succeeded was in implementing its own ideology and used India opportunistically very well. Could it have succeeded if India was not in its neighborhood? I doubt it.

"... how would you compare it to LeT and kashmir..."

I would call LeT as mindless lunatics (I do not mean to hurt, but you asked me speak). I for one do not believe that even if they bomb every week people in Indian cities they will gain their objective. If there objective is total victory and complete rout of India from Indian Kashmir.

If they think these acts would help them gain international support, again they are mistaken.

All that they have done, as bollywood actor, Salman Khan said that they take young kids and innocent minds from Gurbat, and teach them wrong message. Now Pakistan has 200,000 of these trained people. If 1 million Pakistani army could not cross into Indian Kashmir, you think 200,000 Pakistani will be able to.

As an observer of Pakistan, I can say there have two leaders who really were trying to address Pakistan's problems. These are Musharraf, and Zardari. I know India would not want Zardari to fail, just as the U.S. would not either. Taliban may be handful, but LeT is 200,000 well trained. I am very surprised by Pakistanis delude that these 200,000 Pakistanis will only go into Indian Kashmir to kill and win.

"2. Mr. L. K. Advani could very well be the next indian PM....from what i have read in various indian newspapers, he is the person behind the ayodhya massacre.....how would you compare Advani to Hafiz Saeed?....."

I would call Advani a very shrewed politician. The man knew when to get on that Rath, and when to get off. Like a polotician he changes his position and has no ethics (I am not saying he is corrupt).

I have to read more about Hafiz Saeed, but he looks to me more like "my way or highway" kind of person. There is no room for such persons in politics for sure.

In summary, if some organization wins or prevails, it is not a terrorist. In today's world single-minded jihad will not work, as "end no longer justifies the means". The world is too complex from Mao's time. Also "power does not come out the barrel of the gun", Iraq was proved it for the doubters.

What is terror? From my little corner, terror is act committed against the innocents with all intentions to kill the innocents to make their point or settle scores with those who have power or perceived to have power.



"....if we assume that hafiz saeed masterminded the whole mumbai act of terrorism, and if we assume advani masterminded ayodhya, should they both be banned by un?....... what if hafiz saeed were to become the PM of pakistan?......how would that be viewed in india?

Please keep the above in mind and honestly answer where do you put, LeT and Hafeez? According to me, if he becomes a Prime Minister of Pakistan then the UN will not put it on the terror list. Till then at the very least jury is out to yes is a terrorist (for me), and for you (he is not a terrorist).

"comparison of mukti bahani and LeT"

The purpose of LeT: Break a democratic semi free setup and repleace it with an Islamic dictatroship.

The effect and purpose of mukti bahini: Break a dictatorial setup and replace it with a semi-free democratic setup.

(LeT = mukibahini) = moral idiocy

Pakis...

India occupies kashmir... china occupies Tibet... you pakis occupy balochland... so what?... occupation happens, so move on...

Sure, romair. Would be happy to help if you framed those questions more clearly. Are you asking if we think those are the same situations, or something else on your mind?

Anil #: "All I said that "ballot is more powerful than bullet".

... i believe this is what everyone from pakistan seems to be suggesting......hold a ballot and let the kashmiris decide (instead of subjugating them through bullets)

"I wish I know why logic of even some of the most rational Pakistanis stops on Indian Kashmir."

.....i think it is their rationality which leads them to this......they have rationally anlayzed the situation in south asia, and have come to the conclusion that it is the occupation of kashmir which is at the core of all the problems.....

what other problem is there between india and pakistan?....fishermen fishing in each other's areas?......lack of cricket?......

Eklayva/majumdar #: would be interested in both of your's objective views on the two questions, posted below, as well:

1. comparison of mukti bahani and LeT

2. what if advani became pm of india and hafiz saeed became pm of pakistan (assuming the former masterminded ayodhya and the later masterminded mumbai)

i have found it very difficult to get any objective views from any of our indian colleagues here (i am hoping you two will be objective and not nationalistic)......

Re: # 1139

Hamidm sahib:

All I said that "ballot is more powerful than bullet". Someone from your neighboring state of Illinois had said it. If Indians voting in elections during the British time, then you know what it can achieve. I wish I know why logic of even some of the most rational Pakistanis stops on Indian Kashmir. May be you have the answer.

Anil #: .....would be interested in your views on two items (kindly try to be objective and not nationalistic)....

1. what are your views on mukti bahani....do your consider it a terrorist organization?.....do you think it was able to succeed in implementing india's plan in bangladesh, through infiltration......how would you compare it to LeT and kashmir.....

2. Mr. L. K. Advani could very well be the next indian PM....from what i have read in various indian newspapers, he is the person behind the ayodhya massacre.....how would you compare Advani to Hafiz Saeed?......

if we assume that hafiz saeed masterminded the whole mumbai act of terrorism, and if we assume advani masterminded ayodhya, should they both be banned by un?.......

what if hafiz saeed were to become the PM of pakistan?......how would that be viewed in india?

...once again, kindly be objective.....

hamidm i agree muslims have to be better integrated in the state but when will u guys stop screwing us over?

Anil #: "India had seen the solution and it was corrected in 1971 (LOC), and may need minor correction here and there"

...your comment supports my whole point.....i don't see india budging from its stance on kashmir....there are 12 resolutions in the un, which india has violated for decades (this is the same un to which india has taken the case of LeT).....

nothing much has happened to india, due to these violations.....my feeling is that pakistan will also violate all resolutions related to kashmir, in some manner (be it related to LeT or to any other organization).....quite unfortunate....

"f you believe LeT can deliver Indian Kashmir out of India's womb, all I would say please think again"

...i am not sure how you concluded that i think LeT can deliver kashmir.....there is only one terrorist movement that has, "delivered" anything in south asia.....and that was mukti bahani......however, that was in the pre-nuke days......

i don't think LeT will succeed.......and i don't think india will be able to hold on to kashmir militarily, through state terrorism, either....south asia will remain stuck in this quagmire for ever.....

and the circle of state and individual terrorism will only increase in the region.......

"Afterall 55% Indian Kaashmiris went out and voted in the latest elections."

....what did they vote for.....they came out and voted because they want to ensure that the same horrific govt. isn't imposed on them.....

if however you are sure they voted for india, then why not ask them to vote in a plebescite for india.....would you be willing to agree to that?........consider it a challenge......

anil mian,

"55% Indian Kaashmiris went out and voted in the latest elections" ........

wah mian wah! ..... are you suggesting that since indians voted in all sorts of elections from 1909-1947 they wanted the british to stay on ? ......... why don't you let the kashmiris decide for themselves whether they want to remain part of india ..... sounds fair to me

Re: # 1135

Romair:

"....i dont see india ever agreeing to settling kashmir......"

India had seen the solution and it was corrected in 1971 (LOC), and may need minor correction here and there to honor what Nehru may have offered Dulles in 1950s.

The problem is that Pakistan blows hot and cold and see the solution then does not see the solution. India has to remain firm, and patient with Pakistan, and delink Kashmir's development from terror. Afterall 55% Indian Kaashmiris went out and voted in the latest elections. I do not know what has been the participation in Pakistani Kashmir or entire Pakistan for that matter.

If you believe LeT can deliver Indian Kashmir out of India's womb, all I would say please think again, and watch out for 200,000 LeT (almost of 20% of Pakistani army) all inside Pakistan. They can bring the role reversal and may decide not to remain non-state actors.

At this stage, Pakistani leaders need to be firm with such non-state actors who have admirers, supporters and believers in Pakistani army, judiciary and bureaucracy. The cancer may not look cancer, but may look the entire body.

Re: # 1128

Hamidm sahib:

Where was Christianity during crusaders period. Violence was indeed "tied" to the religion then. Most all belief systems go through this period of reform. When Islamic societies start producing more Hamidms, Tahmeds, Cliftons, Scouts and Salims than Masadis, HPs, to OBLs that is when you will see a change in that part of the world too. Till then it is your battle and has nothing to do with Indian Kashmir or horrible hindoos in Mumbai to Detroit. It might feel good to many like Masadis and HPs that now India got hit and Indian economy will suffer, or bring forward conspiracy theories. This ignores that your home is burning and I did not start the fire.

Kashmiris need to be taught the history of Kashmir... So they need to pass a history course before they can think of giving their opinion about themselves or Kashmir and UN should take up this Job... Once they know who the hell they are... how and when they got converted to Islam, what the hell Kashmir meant for last 2500 years, their opinion about themselves can be more humane and realistic... currently they feel that being in the valley of one of the highest mountains and receiving so much of attention from India had given them a very high status....

borivilli#: "i think the US will agree to limitd sanctions while advising india to settle kashmir"

....i dont see india ever agreeing to settling kashmir......settling kashmir basically means losing kashmir.......and all indian leaders know that kashmiris have no interest in staying with india......

as for putting sanctions on pakistan, the only country that can do that is the usa....and the usa is falling all over itself, increasing aid for pakistan.......pakistan, at the moment, is getting more aid and more potential aid than at any time i can recall, from usa......

......the usa has no one agreeing to assist it any longer in afghanistan, other than pakistan.......

...the circle of conflict for the past 60 years, in south asia, centers around kashmir......and i doubt india will want anything other than status quo.....

Re: # 1132

There might be some people cheering for the Pakistani team but with so many Indian muslims in the cricket team I don't see them cheering anybody else.

Re: # 1129

Hamid mian, if Pakistan finishes Saeed off I have no objections. He doesn't have to be handed off to India.

I have no interest in airing Pakistan's dirty laundry as long as Pakistan is serious about turing the Jehadi spigot off.

Re: # 1130

borvili,

i can empathize with you, but if indian moslems want to be treated right they should start cheering for the indian cricket team instead of the paki team .....

i think the US will agree to limitd sanctions while advising india to settle kashmir

hamidm pakistan has made the life of indian muslims pretty ugly thanks to the history of the last 60 years, so if you have animus towards us, we are not overflowing with sympathy either, if it were not for the immense loss of life i wish sometimes there would be an all out war and over with.

the other way is to impose sanctions against pak but the us doesnt want a collapse in pak and in the long run that isnt good for india either. but if things go like this india will have to exert whatever pressure it can for sanctions, there isnt much of a constituency in india for a deal with kashiris.

Re: # 1127

mahesh mian,

.... i agree with you on this one .... unfortunately the government of pakistan will never hand over anyone to india - they wouldn't last two weeks if they did - but they could have easily eliminated this guy in a staged police encounter .... he will come back to haunt us all ........

Re: # 1126

anil mian,

... don't be fooled .... islam is not a very tolerant religion - ask the people of mecca ... why do you think grandpa gopinath converted? nobody in his right mind wants to be circumcised voluntarily .....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7778074.stm

Lahore police chief Pervez Rathor said that Mr Saeed and four other officials of the charity would be held at home for three months. He did not say whether the men would be charged.

WTF?! India can not settle for this. Pakistan can show it's serious by handing him over to India. Otherwise, these are just gimmicks.

Clifton:

As long as people like you, Scout can come up and express their views openely - despite vulgarity and hostility of Zeemaxs; and Hamidm are not thrown out of Islamic fold, would you not agree with me that the regligion is as tolerant as any other. Personal pursuits of leaders (look at Saudis) and their ability to manipulate masses is quite remarkable. It it the latter that concentrates disproportionates power wealth in fewer hands. Then again this too happens wherever humans step in. So what is the core issue, may be people like to talk and it has become talk of coffee tables as over the world. What do you think?

Re: # 1122

clifton,

... i am already ashamed of being a paki - that is why i always try to pass myself off as an indian .... unfortunately most people don't buy it because i am too white and fat :)

... i too wish obl would go back to bedouin land and shoot up a camel caravan or something instead of riling up our tribals and blowing up my favourite restaurants in islamabad ...... personally i don't have much use for ayrabs and keep on telling mrs hamidm that i will take her for umrah once the province of hejaz has been liberated by un forces - i don't know how much longer i can put her ...... i do like dubai though - the moslems over there seem to be a lot less hyper .......

.... like i said, the problem with desi moslems is poverty and ignorance ..... they are a bunch of gullible fools who are easily led astray by people who speak with an arabic accent, let alone arabic ..... people like dr zakir naik, dr amir liaqat hussain and other charlatans who spew nonsense on television day and night ....... have you ever ssen shows like alim on line, aghaz, alif, ghamdi, etc, etc ..... it is enough to make you puke .... i watch them regularly because even though grandpa gopinath converted a long time ago, i still have the hindoo obsession with bowel movements and puking is a better alternative than enemas ....

borivilli:

Sorry I misunderstood your earlier post. As far as why partition occurred, I don't think either of us wants to go there again.

hamid
[...HP sain, tahmed, captain cluless, mad masadi, ahmedmadani, me ...]

Yep, quite a bunch of delusional pakis - ha ha...

Kashmir may be "common" delusion among all pakis, but when jihadis take over, you hamid gopinath will be the first one to be beheaded in public stadium full of cheering pakis...

hamidm sahib your pakistaniayat is showing nowadays. In a few weeks you will be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

Vaise say what you want about desi muslims ...for all the hysterical chest and head thumping at least women are not OFFICIALLY forbidden to drive or vote in our pathetic blackfaced slumdwelling part of the world.

Ayrab govts OTOH have ensured that many ayrab countries with all their whitenes fatness and riches are still a bunch of spitoons and i hope OBL gets to shoot up a few arab leaders before his next dialysis.

Re: # 1105

eklavya,

..... the ayrab was right ........ desi muslims, including bangladeshis, pakis and indians are the most rabid ...... and of the three the indians, specially those from hyderabad, are real nutcases - they think pakis have betrayed the ummah by not being good muslims ..... they scorn our women for wearing short sleeves and mock our men for not praying like the bedouins and think that we are ingrates who deserve the wrath of al-lah ....... in short indian moslems are insufferable ..... i am glad they got left behind

... i think the basic reason desi moslems are rabid is because they are poor, ignorant and miserable - their faith is the only thing they have ...... they also suffer from an acute inferiority complex and want to be more ayrab then the ayrabs who are richer, fatter and whiter ....

cheema sahib,

... sorry - what are you doing with a feminine nick? ....and how come you were banned; i never get banned ... you must have been really really bad ... chowk staff needs to lighten up ... would you recommend prunes?

.... doesn't it scare the hell out of you to see that all pakis reagrdless of their school of thought (and those without a thought) agree on kashmir? ...... hp sain, tahmed, captain cluless, mad masadi, ahmedmadani, me - there could not be a more disparate group of folks and we seldom agree on anything ....... yet on kashmir, there seems to be no disagreement .......

I also know a Bangladeshi Hindu background Atheist who wrote an article on Kashmiri history that was a completely Islamised history of it wherein all of the villains were Hindus and Sikhs and the victims were all Muslims. You guys haven't exactly had an unbiased education on the issue. You don't even know much beyond the propaganda you were fed in your formative years.

Read the history of it again:

http://history.world-citizenship.org/baharistan-i-shahi

Somebody found my email and added me to report press and blasting me with Pakistani propaganda

Zardari, Gillani Working with Indian RAW and US CIA to Divide Pakistan�

From: reportpress@googlegroups.com on behalf of Press Commentary (presscommentary@gmail.com)
You may not know this sender.Mark as safe|Mark as unsafe
Sent: Wed 12/10/08 9:28 PM
To: Report Press (reportpress@googlegroups.com)

- INFORMATION PRESS - News Views Media - USA- Chief Editor: Journalist SYED ADEEB- http://www.SyedAdeeb.net -- http://www.InformPress.com================================================== Zardari, Gillani Working with Indian RAW and US CIA to Divide Pakistan India and America exploit Mumbai attacks for propaganda againstPakistan http://www.war-on-pakistan.info By Taji Mustafa (InformPress.com) - While ordinary people across the world have beenshocked by the Mumbai attacks, [corrupt] politicians in India and theUnited States have chosen to exploit the [tragic] situation for theirown political ends. In response, [PPP] President [Asif Ali] Zardari [acorrupt mercenary of the U.S. CIA] and [PPP] Prime Minister [YousafRaza] Gillani [another corrupt mercenary of the U.S. CIA] haverepeated their unconditional cooperation with [the Terrorist MafiaTyrants of] India giving the Indians [Hindus] what appears to be ablank check to do whatever they wish with Pakistan.

"Choking off the water supply for a lower riparian state ( a state that lies downstream ) is FORBIDDEN under International Law and is deemed an act of war"

Since Pakistan is already engaged in a proxy war with India , morally the point is moot.

Legally we should examine all creative legal theories, ( and I am not an expert here), say Pakistan's state sponsorhip of terror , to withdraw or violate.

"2. Moreover, in my opinion, it would be a crime against 150 million people, just as if China stopped the Brahmaputra"

A predominant majority of these people are indirect participants in Pakistan's war against India. Some by actively supporting Jihad, some by denying that it even exists. There is a level of moral culpability there( not equal to prime movers, of course , but it is there). So a level of punishment is morally justified.

Secondly in situations based necessarily on collective like these it cannot be an absolute crieterion that no innocent person ever get hurt.

"noticed how many times "secularist" is actually code word for "racist" "

ha ha, I won't get into that right now. That is a full-blown can of very big worms right there. Except to say that I agree 100%.

Speaking specifically of this gentleman, he began his historical narration from much before Maudoodi, going right to Mughal days. Anyways, if I can find something on the web on it, will share it.

GTG for now. Later.

Cheema bibi, stop pretending, you've been caught by the eagle eyed Costello of Abbott and Costello. It was good while it lasted. Sigh.

WM i know he didnt invent the wheel.... but he was a big player in promoting a particular school of thought and AQ did give him props.

Kaal you may have noticed how many times "secularist" is actually code word for "racist". This is b/c you cant be islami (pro ummah) and racist at the same time.

I will see if I can find something on the web with that view. Haven't seen that before...

Clifton, that is PRECISELY what it was, IMO.

As an outsider, I felt he was playing the same game that people invariably play, but he seemed hardly aware of it. Instead of looking into basic ideas and how they could manifest themselves differently in different contexts, he was simply externalizing problems as he saw them. It couldn't be Arab Islam, not HIS Islam, but someone else's Islam that caused all the 'problems.' And who better to blame but an Indian when speaking to an Indian.

Still, the theory was compelling - as it always is (otherwise people won't be able to convince themselves of it).

Re: # 1110

maudoodi's ideology wasn't original ... he was(in turn) influenced by Haan-ul Banna and subsequently Syed Qutb (who was his contemporary) ... both from the arabic speaking world (Egypt)

Well maudoodi did inspire the AQ apparently. But I dont see why all muslims of indian origin or even most should be held accountable for that.

Kaal you may want to ask the bona fide ayrab what he thinks of turkish muslims or persian muslims or for that matter other ayrab muslims who dont agree with him.

If you put any two muslims in a room and they dont agree upon anything strongly enough you will soon find they dont consider each other muslim, this is not breaking news is it?

I mean, this guy was giving references to various ullahs to maudoodi and stuff, which I was hardly listening to, but he seemed to weave a darn good story!!

matilda, but do you think there is something to that seemingly crazy idea - that 'Indian' Muslims pretty much invented the new Islam we know around the world today?

(I think that is a bit of a cop out on the part of secular arabs. don't you? 'Indians' are smart but not THAT smart so as to force all of the Muslim world to readily take up something if it didn't make good sense to them. :))

Re: # 1105; eklavya

there you go ... you have yourself 'two' different Islams already ... and you were still insisting on the notion of a united "nation of Islam"!!

... and since it was an arab saying it, must be right eh?

you really need to do something about your headache sir (I know you want to!)

hamdim, matilda

Last evening I spoke with an ayrab Muslim 'secularist' (don't know how one could be all that at the same time) and my head, already hurting badly, has been reeling since then. He said two things:

(1) He was speaking of 'India' and 'Indian mentality'. And he seemed to include under that label - everything from Pakistan to India proper to Bangladesh to even parts further east!!!

(2) And he seemed to blame 'Indians' for all the problems in the arbaic world today! He said 'Indians' made up an Islam that the ayrabs didn't earlier care for!


Now, it does gibe with some things I have speculated upon earlier - that 'Indian' (which includes Pakistani and Bangladeshi) Muslims can be exptected to be among the most hyper Muslims, but coming from an ayrab, that was a shock.

Am still trying to figure out what all that means!

'Indians' teaching 'ayrabs' what Islam means - that's quite a thought!

Who gives a shit about who converted and when. It's who's blowing up who now that matters and why.

But knowing the past history on Kashmir is very relevant to the present. The present is merely a continuation of the past in which Jihadi violence and intolerance has been the norm since its arrival to the present. Seriously read that book, it's interesting reading.

I'm a big meat eater myself including.....beef.

Re: # 1101; hamidm sahib

sorry I got abit alarmed about the "bibi" and the insinuation that I might be a hindoo!! (astaghfirullah!)

I am yours truly akram cheema (banned by the hierarchy!)

Re: # 1100

kisan mian,

... get over the fact that some hindus converted to islam centuries ago ........ i didn't like the fact that my grandpa gopinath converted, but now i am glad that he did because i like eating meat ......

Re: # 1099

matilda bibi,

..... we all know that that there are a lot of idiotic moslems who live in the past and talk about nonsense like the the crusades and whatnot ......... but that is no reason for horrible hindoos to behave the same way - remember, you guys are supposed to be better than that ....

.... personally, i don't give a flip about the arabs, palestinians and other members of this imaginary 'ummah' ..... the fact of the matter is that most arabs don't give a flip about pakis or madrasis or bengalis .....try going to dubai without a visa .... unfortunately, the pakis don't get it and keep on making a fool out of themselves by trying to be more arab than the damn arabs ......... it is a fatal condition .....

Re: # 1096

Get over what?

It's not me that is raiding Karachi with fidayeen units shooting up people in stations or blowing up trains, markets, buses etc over Kashmir or the creation of Pakistan etc.

I don't need to get over anything. I'm just trying to live my life when even close friends of mine have almost been killed over the issue.

You get over it.

Re: # 1096; hamidm sahib

I think some hindus firmly believe there is some unfinished business from centuries ago (Ayodhia etc are a manifestation of this in recent times) ... this menatility reminds me of the muslims making references to 'the crusades' at every crisis they face in the modern world

... do you see that analogy by any chance??

Re: # 1097

aha snark mian,

.... that was really nice of you

On the question of Indus Water

Simply put,

1. Choking off the water supply for a lower riparian state ( a state that lies downstream ) is FORBIDDEN under International Law and is deemed an act of war.

2. Moreover, in my opinion, it would be a crime against 150 million people, just as if China stopped the Brahmaputra.

3. The Indus Water Sharing agreement is not a contract or a lease that can be negotiated and renegotiated.

4. The treaty allows India use "run-of-the-river" projects, i.e., it is allowed to store a minimal amount of water for projects that do not interfere with the flow of the rivers. We cannot make any appreciable change in the amount of water released downstream to Pakistan.

5. As in any situation of imposed hardship, the brunt of any water shortage would be shouldered by the very poor. The rich elites will still be living in Defence and watering their lawns with Perrier.

Summary : We cannot (and should not, but that is another matter) twist Pakistan's arm using the Indus river water system.

Re: # 1095

kisan mian,

.... now you are beginning to sound like a serb! ..... some of them are still fighting the war with the 'turks' ..... get over it!

Creation of Pakistan was wrong. Adding more to it is also wrong. The population have been brutalised and indoctrinated by Jihadi Islam and that isn't the basis for free and fair referendum.

Why don't you hold a referendum in Baluchistan?

Even you Hamid don't even know the real history of Kashmir. Read this book in its entirety and see how Kashmir became Islamic and the pogroms and violence that begot that transition:

http://history.world-citizenship.org/baharistan-i-shahi

Re: # 1092

bubba mian,

......... all i can say is that you are better off with a paki cab driver in new york than a chinaman who doesn't speak any english, cannot read a map, doesn't know east from north and takes three hours to get from jfk to la guardia ...... paki cab drivers are the backbone of the public transport system in america and are a national asset ..... code coolies are a dime a dozen, it is hard to find a cab driver who knows what he is doing ........

..... i do agree with you on punjabi paindooism and have often called for a ban on the punjabi language and paye - there is nothing more disgusting than fingers glued together with gelatin and animal fat ...... unfortunately, if we banned punjabi and paye india might use it as an excuse to 'liberate' punjab .........

....... i agree that we pakis have been rather erratic in our behavior and things have gone from bad to worse, specially in the last couple of years with this taliban phenomenon .... where the heck did they come from! ..... unfortunately, nobody - including america - knows how to handle them ..... i have advocated killing them all, but i don't know if it is possible to kill a million people without getting some ngo really upset ....... there is some merit to the argument that if we leave them alone, they will leave us alone, but i am not sure - these guys now seem to have a bigger agenda ..... in the sixties and seventies the tribal areas were the safest places in pakistan ...... my father, who was the subarea commander, used to drive in the wee hours of the morning from places lkie d.i. khan and wana to peshawar after a night long game of bridge and never thought anything about it ..... now these same people are launching rockets at kohat! ...... what the ... !

....... any way, i am still looking forward to having dinner at the dynasty in the mariott islamabad; that is, if the indians don't blow it up again ..........

Re: # 1089

pepe,

.... doesn't it scare the hell out of you to see that all pakis reagrdless of their school of thought (and those without a thought) agree on kashmir? ...... hp sain, tahmed, captain cluless, mad masadi, ahmedmadani, me - there could not be a more disparate group of folks and we seldom agree on anything ....... yet on kashmir, there seems to be no disagreement ....... so why don't you guys be reasonable and settle the issue by agreeing to a referendum - what are you guys afraid of ? .... let the people decide with their vote ....... learn from history: pakistan could have avoided a lot of bloodshed if we had done the same in bangladesh .........

Re: # 1058 Posted by hamidm2 on December 10, 2008 7:31:51 pm

hamid mian,

How dare you put me in a lot with the horrible hindus, when you wrote [... don't worry, you guys can keep hyderabad and delhi .... all we want is kashmir - ] What did you mean "you guys?"

Is there some sort of an insignia that those of us who care about pakis and there well being should be getting? Or was that just a slip in your otherwise healthy rational mind?

{ i doubt india would ever agree to that ..} You are right about that. And why should they? For the rest of the world, these days India, although she has her unwashed railroad squatting masses, comes across as a civilized democracy and a well behaved society trying desperately to be involved in upwardly mobile worldly affairs.

And what has pakis done in the past 60 years, except for their punjabi paindooism? Within our own society, in every decade pakis have moved from one human degradation after another. (And our so-called leaders have made money doing just that) So much so that our own commie Tariq Ali was asking for a UN intervention in internal paki affairs. Would you call that dignified.

Who are we fooling? pakis have been killing their own muslim brothers for all these 60 years, and those unwashed masses continue to show their gangsterism in stores and cabs all across the west, no to some westerners but to their own pakis. westerners or even the arabs would not give a hoot about paki restaurant. as far as the cabs are concerned they are just stuck to use these guys because of the nature of this business and its infrastructure.

Lately, I am opining to have these paki psychos throughly evaluated when they are given visas to the west.

What say you?

snark mian,

......... paki television is saying the same thing that the press is saying - they are a litle bit more colorful and shrill ! ........ they are telling the paki government to stand up to india and tell them to go whence light does not shine .... there are a few crazy idiots like gen hamid gul who imply that it is cia-mossad-raw conspiracy to build a case against pakistan, but by and large, most commentators agree that even though the paki government was not involved there might be a paki connection (i think so too).......... there is still a lot of emphasis on proof: why hasn't the captured guy been presented, blah blah, blah ........

........ generally speaking, television has settled down after a couple of days of berating the government for being spineless ..... now that the government seems to have found a spine, most of the ex-foreign service folks and journalist who show up are fairly objective (as objective as any paki can be when it comes to india) ...... paki talk show hosts are vicious and don't spare anyone, specially the government officials who dare to show up ...... actually, it is quite entertaining ....... you can check it out yourself on geo.tv .......

Re: # 1037 Hamidm2

Musharraf is from Delhi - he is our 'man'. You are our 'people'! See, how weird that is?

Re: # 1040 Hamidm2

Do you know that you are abetting and inciting terrorism with your post? FBI, are you reading?

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".

Pakistan's offer to cooperate with India and ensure that its soil is not used for terrorist attacks eerily reminds us of a similar offer made by Musharraf in the aftermath of the terrorist strike on the Indian Parliament in Dec 2001 and the subsequent buildup of Indian troops on the border. Just a few years laters, his promise lies in tatters. Unless Pakistan explicitly shuts down the Lashkar infrastructure and takes concrete action against its leaders, India should keep all options open. Pakistan has all the time in the world to act, unfortunately we have only until the next terrorist strike. And this time, people won't be as forgiving as they have been until now.

yes, the congress can be pretty disgusting. no one does chaaploosi like they do. i'm actually surprised maya didnt do better. and i wouldnt read too much into the LS elections being congress-favoured - national issues and local issues are differentiated to some extent, in my opinion.


and majumdar, i've read ylh's posts since before he started obsessing about jinnah/gandhi. In my opinion, what has happened is that ylh read the entire collected works of MKG not as a neutral person but with a view to extract the most negative material (and there's certainly some very negative material). These few dozen quotes and actions are extrapolated and grossly overrepresented to paint a very unfavourable picture of the man who was, after all, a product of his times and his milieu but had the undeniable capacity and the vision to rise above a whole lot of traps that a lot of people fell into.


Jinnah's output of writing has been nowhere near as prodigious and no one on this board has conducted a similar exercise. I have no doubt that if you actually persuaded a serious historian to enter into the cesspool that is the MKG vs. MAJ debate on chowk, there would be a large number of hitherto-unknown unfavourable quotes and actions discovered about Jinnah as well.

This is not to say that MKG is perfect or that MAJ is the devil - its just to say the peculiar dynamics of this debate have more to do with muckracking than they have to do with any kind of rational discussion or dialogue.

Nb di/Snark,

There wud be nothing more of a peach than a full blooded TNT debate with YLH and moi battling Sadna, Harishbhai and Beej. And winning hands down (as always)

Regards

Snark,

INC's victory in Delhi (which is one of the most solidly middle class Hindoo region in India) just a couple of days after the blast is very significant. Signifies perhaps that development and local issues are more important than even something as big as the Blasts (Mumbai, Delhi, Jaipur a whole styring).

Interestingly, if u wud have noticed that INC's posters pre elections largely carried Sheila Aunty's fotos not Madame's-the implication was obvious- INC wud lose and Sheila Aunty wud be the fall guy. But Sheila Aunty seems to have carried INC through.

Regards

#1083 Exactly!

Re: # 1081

Considering how a discussion on cricket can turn into the TNT discussion, a direct two nation theory board will just have mindboggling reams of MAJ vs MKG crap.

Dear Pakistanis,

India's polls cool war fever

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JL11Df02.html


NEW DELHI - The unexpected performance of India's ruling Congress party in this month's state assembly elections has gone some way towards dampening the likelihood of armed conflict between India and Pakistan, which had peaked since the November 26 terrorist attacks on Mumbai.

Government officials have said the New Delhi government, led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, could be in pause mode following the party's surprising victory in three of the five provincial elections. The poll results seem to indicate that the electorate is more concerned with the government's performance on development and governance issues than its ability to tackle terror.

The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had strongly



attacked Congress over its failure to prevent recent terrorist attacks in India, particularly the Mumbai strike, in the lead-up to the election. But the ruling party successfully defeated it in Delhi, the northwestern state of Rajasthan, and Mizoram in northeastern India.

Many commentators had predicted a backlash against the government's failure to prevent the Mumbai attack, which left 171 dead, and even Congress leaders admitted privately they were surprised with the results. The BJP's electoral charge, led by stalwarts such as L K Advani, Narender Modi and Rajnath Singh, had focused on the government being "soft on terror".

But rather than reacting to the government's security lapses, the electorate has chosen to reward Congress chief ministers in Delhi, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh who have bucked strong anti-incumbency trends and delivered on basic promises to improve water and electricity supply, roads, and law and order. The electorate appears to have been reluctant to single out the Congress for negligence on terror, which is fair considering there were also major strikes in India during the BJP's tenure of 1998 to 2004.

The Pakistan origins of the militant group behind the Mumbai attack initially provoked the Indian government into threatening "hot pursuit" into Pakistan-administered Kashmir, the disputed mountainous region which has twice led the nations to war since their independence from Britain in 1947. India warned it was planning strikes on militant training camps there ran by the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET), the group widely thought responsible for the plot, and handed Islamabad a list of 20 terror suspects, including LET leaders, with demands for their arrest and extradition.

"If Congress was defeated in the elections it is almost certain that India would have conducted precision strikes to dismantle terrorist camps [in Pakistan], as Pakistan has refused to hand over any of the known terrorists that Indian wants,'' said one senior official who declined to be named. "New Delhi would have needed to obliterate charges it is soft on terror before the general election next spring."

Sources have indicated that India's military commanders had advised the government it would take just two weeks to launch an attack on Pakistan. The initial plan was to send unmanned aerial vehicles, possibly with the help of Israel, if Islamabad did not take concrete action against the terrorism suspects in Pakistan. The list of 20 suspects handed to Pakistan includes the notorious gangster Dawood Ibrahim, Masood Azhar, the leader of the Jaish-e-Mohammed - LET's parent organization, and Hafez Mohammed Saeed, the LET chief suspected of masterminding the Mumbai attack.

While the election results seem to have postponed the plans for "hot pursuit", it has not been ruled out entirely, as New Delhi has managed to convince Washington of the need to take out the terror infrastructure on Pakistan's border with India.

Since a US ultimatum on December 6 which gave Pakistan 48 hours to act, it has reportedly arrested top LET commander Zakiur Rehman Lakhwi, and struck at the group's camps in Kashmir. Pakistani Defense Minister Chaudhary Ahmed Mukhtar said on Tuesday that Masood Azhar had been put under house arrest. Intelligence sources have told Asia Times Online that most of the terror camps along Pakistan's Kashmir borders have been dismantled. But officials in New Delhi and Washington have been skeptical of the strikes, viewing them as token efforts aimed at easing global pressure.

"How is it that these terrorist leaders have been arrested so easily? India's top commandos needed more than 60 hours to neutralize 10 foot soldiers in Mumbai,'' said one Indian official. "They know that they are going to be mollycoddled and have no fear due to protection by the army. House arrest means nothing - Masood Azhar will continue to have access to every communication tool to continue with his activities and access his people.''

If Pakistan is merely trying to appear strong on the militants until international attentions shifts elsewhere, this may be a high-risk charade, given the high-profile nature of the Mumbai attacks. America is breathing down Islamabad's neck and has given New Delhi the go-ahead to strike targets beyond its borders. At the same time Washington has said it would not tolerate war breaking out between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.

Pakistan has made it clear that it will not hand over any of its recently captured terrorist suspects to India, however, its defense minister has suggested it is prepared for joint interrogations or probes with India. This could be a significant step but this depends on wether the Pakistan government's control of the country is as tenuous as has been suggested. Also, even if there is a joint probe, Pakistan's army could use the opportunity to drum up nationalistic fervor against India.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has recently said that the main impetus of the attacks could have been to stir up a Pakistan-India conflict. "These terrorists are undoubtedly unnerved by the increasingly good relations between Pakistan and India, really going back before the civilian government" but certainly since President Asif Ali Zardari came into power, she said in an interview on CBS News Radio on Wednesday.

Siddharth Srivastava is a New Delhi-based journalist. He can be reached at sidsri@yahoo.com)

Beena, congratulations on reaching almost 1100 interacts. To better this, and reach a record which will be uncontested, I suggest an article on that little discussed topic, the Two Nation Theory, and another topic which tends to languish a bit, Why Bangladesh Was Needed.
Good luck!

A request:

Can someone with access to Pakistani talk shows and tv channels, especially Urdu ones give us a sense of what they are saying?

I can't also help thinking that the Eid holidays have come at a bad time for Pakistan as the Indian media's narrative is almost wholly uncontested by the Pakistani media narrative because of the ~3 days of vacation.

Re: # 1078

... speaketh Syed MAJ Shah sahib ... chuckles!

Shoiab bhai,

I am a bit tied up today but will return shortly to clear all your misconceptions about MAJ (pbuh). Till then pls bear with me.

Btw your post 1069 should have been addressed to Bori mian not Bulleya aka Romair.

Regards

Re: # 1075
... that is true borivili

shoaib_daniyal #: "Bulleya,.....Direct action was a call to protest on streets not rioting, rioting was done by hindu underworld and thugs, most of the victims in calcutta were muslims."

...you seemed to have joined the bandwagon of individuals who attempt to associate items to me, which i never stated....

please highlight where i stated the above.....if you cannot highlight it, then i believe an apology would be in order......

matilda by the way they dont have anything positive to say about pakistan either, they believe pakistan is using them but their alienation with India and their angst makes them ready to accept assistance from it

Re: # 1073; borivili_express

I agree with that statement of yours ... most Indian muslims I have met are proud to call themselves Indian ... and I do know a number of Kashmiris (from the Indian side) ... they'd always introduce themselves as Kashmiris and either have nothing positive to say about India, or would rather keep quiet than contribute in any political discussions (involving Indian/Pakistani politics, that is)

dost mittar if you want to know the current situation in the valley read the series of articles in the hindustan times published recently in their kashmir special, what will strike you immediately is how alienated these people are. even when they meet you outside india an indian muslim will say I am indian but they say we are kashmiri.

#1069 Posted by shoaib_daniyal

Yaar Shoaib, you should ask this chut!ya how is the fact that more Muslims were killed proof of Jinnah's (and the Muslim League's) innocence? Does a higher casualty figure automatically mean innocence? Months before the Direct Action Day, Jinnah's cohorts were making provocative speeches threatening to shed blood and tear India asunder. Suhrawardy, the Bengal CM declared a holiday to the police and all law enforcement authorities on that day, setting the stage for the brutal violence that followed. Jinnah ominously proclaimed "Direct Action means any action against the law". What could have all that meant? Only Pakis would believe it meant peaceful non-cooperation.

dost you are misunderstanding me completely, there is nothing I would want more than Kashir staying with India, Infact I want all of pak to be made part of India, because I have relatives there and culturally we are the same, my family came orignally from that part. also it would improve the position of muslims in India.

Kashmir being part of India is so important for me that I would like any deal be cut with them as long as they stay in the union. But the wrost of all possible worlds is the current one where due to the dispute actions done by Pakistan, the terrorists or the kashmiris rebound on the indian muslims every year or two. The hindus take out all their frustration vis a visa pak on indian muslims, it provides the BJP wih a ready made bait and they never hesitate to use it, even if they will not create riots, there are daily problems where loyalty is questioned, people are suspicious, discrmination occurs.

It is in my utmost personal interest that this problem be resolved by giving them free access to the other kashmir or through autonomy or any other way even if they have to for once be severed though i think that will never happen, anything is better than this daily wound which is scabbed by pak or BJP or kashmiris or terrorists or whoever.

ANd rathar than talk about the muslim in me let us see it from the point of view of a third party, if muslim majority areas were to remain part of india and hindu majority of Pakistan than why did partition occur? if princly states were to decide why were junagadh and hyderabad invaded against the wishes of their rulers? and bear in mind the example I gave below of say the situations being reversed and Pakistan having taken over Hyderabad, would we have made the same arguments about non hindus wanting to be part of pakistan, no we would have spoken of the desire of the majority hindus wanting independence because of cultural differences.

But i repeat neither do I want Kashmir to be made independent nor to be made part of pakistan nor was i in favour of partition nor am i worried about glories of islam.

I only want the problem resolved and mostly for my own selfish reason.

dost-mittar #: "And they enjoy a high level of support among the masses who will come out on the street in their favour while no demonstrations have taken place against them or their organizations."

...to a great deal, what you are saying is correct.....i am not sure, if many people in india have understood the dynamics of pakistan's support for kashmir.......

...take a look on this site.....kashmir is the only thing hamidm mian and masadi agree on ....it is the only thing mantolives and urstruly agree on.....everyone from one end of the liberal/secular spectrum to the other end of the mullah spectrum in pakistan agrees that the kashmiris have a right to self-determination......the way each group wants to take action on it differs, but they all agree with the concept.....

the rest of the world, through the un agrees also.....

.......thus, organizations like LeT are not mere armies or movements.......they are philosophies......and philosophies can only be countered by more powerful and more humane philosophies......not by force.....

....even if the pakistan govt. wanted to act against LeT, it could not......not because people will come out into the street.......but, because they have no idea on whom to target.....

.....the cadre of such organizations are not just religiously motivated madrassah students.....that is the core group.....however, their cadre include bankers, and college students, and small businessman, and uk-based kashmiris and what not.....

people who will fight in kashmir against indian forces for a few weeks, and then come back to their 9-5 jobs....99.9% of them have no interest in planting an islamic flag in new delhi or imposing shariah in madras......they simply feel that kashmiris are occupied and suppressed and killed.......and want to liberate them......

...... .1% of them may have gone off and developed links with al-qaeda etc. or with other organizations like that.....but the overwhelming core group is focused on kashmir.....

.....and on the whole, they don't cause much problem in pakistan (the groups causing problems in pakistan are taliban, al-qaeda, lashkar jhangvi (killng shias) etc......

....so i think groups like LeT are there for the long run, until kashmir is settled one one way or the other.....there isn't much anyone can do against them.....unless the govt. decides to interrogate every shopwalla, taxi driver, banker etc. in pakistan......

if india wants to defeat LeT, it will have to make a philosophical stand....it won't be able to do it through force.....i.e. prove and convince everyone that india's policies in kashmir are just, humane etc.........and that the kashmiris actually support india, and not independence......

the day india can do that, successfully, LeT will disappear on its own, as its philosophical stand will be defeated.....

Bulleya,

Direct action was a call to protest on streets not rioting, rioting was done by hindu underworld and thugs, most of the victims in calcutta were muslims.

Yes, and the VHP's bandh was an expression of their democratic rights.

Don't be thick, my good man. In the Calcutta of 1946 "a call to protest on streets" was nothing short of lighting a powder keg.

Secondly, its no use going into who suffered more, Hindus or Muslims; it's a never ending and futile argument.

If it is true that Muslims suffered more, then all it does is incriminate Jinnah all the more. Even getting Muslims killed in order to achieve Pakistan wasn't beyond him.


secondly jinnah accepted cab mission plan and it was cong that rejected because they felt they could pressurise and out manuever the muslim league without british interference in an asembly where they had majority otherwise it was better if partition occured because anyway the coalition govt was difficult to work because of muslim league intransigence. Jinnah rejected after congress only to save face. nehru and congress knew the plan had to be accepted in its enitrety it was a final settlement between hindus and muslims, even a child will tell u that u cantaccept a part and reject the main body of an agrement, that means rejecting the agreement as a whole.

As I said, I actually thought it prudent to decide on the further course of action as decided by the assembly. IMO, I'd rather accept a plan thought up by my own reps rather than the Brits.

by the way this has been india's approach through out that foreign interference will get them a worse deal than direct exertion of hegemony. this strategy is only changing slightly now when hey feel US and India have a common enemy in extremist islam.

And a good approach it is. Check out the meaning of the word 'sovereignty'.

: ) I crack myself up...ha ha another classic!...both as goddamned unattractive as they are unintelligent, these peons of the West...

TNI Masadi

hamid writes ".. when i was growing up and the hormones were raging and i had had a joint or two, i would get recklessly brave and call my father a petty bourgeois and try to lecture him on the dictatorship of the proletariat and the proper use of the means of production ..... he would just ignore me and tell me to go get him a cup of tea or just simply to shut up ...."

Salam and greetings of peace Hamid sahib,

Neither you nor your father knew anything about the proletariat or the means of production. As far as 'hormones' go, I don't think any study has established the relationship between raging hormones and leftist rhetoric but I can tell you from experience that left leaning people (like myself) are manly men, just as left leaning women are womanly women, on the other hand right wing loons like you are womanly men and the right wing women like Ann Coulter are manly women, both as unattractive as they are unintelligent.

Have a nice day and take it easy,

TNI Masadi

#1058 by hamidm2

... don't worry, you guys can keep hyderabad and delhi .... all we want is kashmir - it has been an issue since day one and has to be settled one way or the other .......

Hamidm2 Sahib, quit being a recalcitrant kid and accept the reality that Kashmir will never fall into Paki laps. The reasons?

1. The UN resolution on Kashmir clearly specified that a plebiscite could only be held once Pakistan had withdrawn its forces from the parts occupied by it. Pakistan refused to do so.

2. In the intervening years, the Kashmiri population of "Azad" Kashmir has been reduced to a minority and Punjabis have virtually taken it over and Punjabi is the lingua franca there. In contrast, no non-Kashmiri is allowed to buy land in Indian Kashmir and the Indian government spends crores of rupees trying to keep the Kashmiri culture alive.

3. What began as a movement for independent Kashmir was quickly hijacked by the Paki establishment and pro-Pakistan Kashmiri groups such as the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen and Pakistani groups such as JeM and LeT gained prominence by decimating the pro-independence group JKLF. Amanullah Khan, its supremo was not allowed to contest local elections because he refused to sign (as all candidates are required to do) an undertaking promising full support to the accession of J&K to Pakistan.

borivilli:

"Like it or not the agreement the congress signed with the british was muslim majority areas go to pak, hindu majority to India. That may not be right but that was the spirit of the partition Inian leaders agreed to. Kashmir being a muslim majority region like hyderabad being a hindu one should have gone via wishes of the majority"

There was no such agreement wrt princely states.

I wouldn't mind Kashmir going to Pakistan. But, as an Indian Muslim, wouldn't it be against your interest? Looks like the Muslim in you is more interested in the glory of Islam than your selfish interest, which would be better served by at least one Muslim majority state in the Indian union.

Beena:

The response of the Indian govt. so far has been quite restrained and has been praised as such by the international media. Even the BJP, after initial aggressive tone,seems to be more restrained now. The govt. has been quite careful in not criticising the Pakistan govt.

That said, the responsibility for curbing the extremist elements, including those in the state apparatus, is that of the Pakistan govt. and its civil society. If the Pakistan govt. is willing to roll over every time its decision is challenged by the army, the Indian govt. will sooner or later start dealing directly or indirectly with those who count.

The problem is that hawkish attitude towards each other is quite popular in both India and Pakistan [although it can quickly turn into one of warm, fuzzy feelings as well]. Thus, Zardari might want to be more conciliatory towards India in dealing with the likes of Maulana Sayeed, but he will get little support from the civil society who is otherwise not in favour of the army. Now, Pakistan is once again moving against JeM and its leaders under international pressure but there is no evidence that it will be any different than the previous game of arrest and release.

Paksitan can never, NEVER,really let people like AQ Khan, Maulana Sayeed, Omar Sheikh be subjected to independent interrogation as powerful elements in the state have used them as assets and they know too much. And they enjoy a high level of support among the masses who will come out on the street in their favour while no demonstrations have taken place against them or their organizations.

BJ2 it is not about religion I have spoken to IAS officers and they admit that the kashmiris are culturally different and have a different sense of their identity, they never thought of themselves as indians. it doesnt matter what the minority inhabitants think, futures of teritories are decided by majorities. Suppose pakistan had taken hyderabad as a teritory, only the hindus would be agitating for joing India or being made independent, muslims would be happier being in a muslim majority country than in a hindu majority one, but taht wouldnt mean the independence movement would become illegitimate because the overwhelming majority would be hindus and they would be agitating thus making the struggle legitimate. Like it or not the agreement the congress signed with the british was muslim majority areas go to pak, hindu majority to India. That may not be right but that was the spirit of the partition Inian leaders agreed to. Kashmir being a muslim majority region like hyderabad being a hindu one should have gone via wishes of the majority.

now I realise that is much water under the bridge and India cannot partition a part which has been its for 60 years, but now the problem is different it is that Kashmiris dont consider themselves indians due to the bloody history of the past 20years. they actually wanted to boycot the recent elections the only reason they participated was that other wise the minorites (shias, buddhists, sikhs and Jammu hindus )would impose their elected leaders who would then ignore evn municipal duties like clearing garbage and roads, water etc. basically theu participated becaise they have no choice.

India has not been able to win the people over, held rigged elections because it never trusted them enough, now with 60 to 80,000 deaths it has gone beyond elections almost evry kashmiri familiy caries scars of some family member killed or tortured and the hundred daily humilations by search parties road blocks. I will give u an innocuous example i read of an old head of the family, being stoped at a checkpoint and made to hop around and squat infront of his children and wife and grandchildren by an indian soldier who was having fun, apart from that there are serious violations too encounters custodial deaths shootings on demonstrators etc, a settlement on kashmir would have to be arrived at sooner or later the problem just cant be swept, this is also important for the teror and pak problems Indias legiimacy is compromised in the rest of the world by the kashmir issue until the early 2000s when america started facing jihadis they didnot buy India's line at all even now Indias claims of terror in Kashmir are taken incredulously by EU and China. Things have changed after sept 11 and may change further after mumbai but the problem aint going away and Kashmir needs to b sorted out for a final settlement with Pak, some kind of political deal or autonomy, otherwise 6 months or a year from now there will be another problem. and like to guys reaching for a gun repeatedly one of them will fire accidentally. it wont happen conciously because India has made good progress in the last few years but it is in the nature of the thing that if there are 10 cuban missile crises one will swing the other way, and what kind of a mature growth economy and regional leader has these crisis every year? how can we be aregional or global player when we cant even settle our backyard quarrels, we have to humiliate ourselves even in front of china, we make our weaknes apparent to all.

Re: # 1061

[that's exactly what i am saying!]

So, in other words, you agree with what I said there.

Please note the fact that I said that "Kashmir is a done deal!"

What part of "done deal" don't you understand?!

Re: # 1060

bj mian,

that's exactly what i am saying!

Hamidm2 miaN, kashmir is a done deal since 1947-48. Come off it!

If you want to come fight it out -- by all means, do so! Let's have an all-out war and settle this issue of Kashmir once and all -- or, for that matter, the issue of Pakistan for once and all!

So put up or shut up!

Re: # 1057

bj mian,

... that was a desperate attempt at obfuscation - you can do better than that .......

Re: # 1055

bubba mian,

... don't worry, you guys can keep hyderabad and delhi .... all we want is kashmir - it has been an issue since day one and has to be settled one way or the other ....... a fair thing to do would be to hold a referendum in kashmir (including paki kashmir) and let the people decide, but i doubt india would ever agree to that ....... i know that occupation is nine tenths of the law, but that doesn't make it right .......

Re: # 1055

[such as human rights withing paki context]

Perhaps accepting Pakistani ladies as human would be a good start for the Pakistani guys.

Re: # 1054

Hamidm2 miaN, I don't know what those few remaining Hindus (who have not been killed off by the Pakistani jihadis supported by the evil Pakistani khaki parasite whose acts have been condoned by the cowardly Pakistani diaspora) are doing in Kashmir now.

Perhaps you should ask those eternal buddies of the Pakistani establishment -- the killer jihadis.

Hamid mian,

Are you saying kashmiris are punjabis? or are they muslims? how did they become "our people"? and up to where in india would you go to liberate "our people"?

I do agree with you, however, that since the beginning of puristan, kashmir is a disputed territory, and their fight has been a fight for the right of self-determination. how long should pakis be involved in this fight? after all pakis have gotten 1/3 of the land in this dispute.

your comparison regarding US and cuba is not convincing because US can afford such a fight with a small country on meaninless issues such as the "cuban cigar". what are pakis looking for in kashmiri's fight? or is it some moral platitude? as a nation should we not develop some moral platitude first on a different issue, such as human rights withing paki context.

Re: # 1052

bj mian,

.... i didn't know there were any hindoos in kashmir ... what are they doing there?

aha snark wether pakistan accepts the evidence is not important, the evidence has to convince the world tht is the US EU, China etc. That is the way to build pressure and it is a fair warning as well, if the world puts pressure on pak and things improve this is the best solution if not than India's actions would not seem precipitate, because the other option of even a conventional war is extremely cotly and wil set India back, Pakistan will become chaotic and that too is not good for us, nothing good came from the afghan chaos for pak and nothing good can be expected from pak chaos.

war should be the last option we must try to increase pressure on pak through other means and for that evidence has to be presented.

Hamidm2 miaN, don't lie through your teeth.

Sajan re jhooth mat bolo -- Khuda ke paas jaana hai!

Kashmir dispute is about NOTHING other than Muslim versus non-Muslim ability to live together! It has always been about religion -- it IS about religion -- and it shall remain about religion.

Calling it as being about anything else is just as dishonest as saying that the US civil war aws not about slavery issue.

Let me remind you -- open your eyes and look! Observe!

Every Kashmiri "agitator" is a Mussulmaan!

Do you see any Hindus agitating there?! No.

Do you see any Budhists agitating there?! No.

The Kashmiri dispute is ALL ABOUT the bigotry of religion which is continuously fanned by the Pakistani establishment and promoted by overseas Pakistanis.

It is ONLY about religion! And that is why it excites the jihadis so.

So, if you support Kashmiri jihadi agitation then you are basically having illicit sex with the jihadis (whether you pretend to enjoy it or not!)

bj,

... just to show that i am not an unreasonable person, i would rather support a frontal military assault on kashmir by the paki army ....... unfortunately they are busy building housing societies and manufacturing breakfast cereal ......

[i don't understand why the paki govenment has not arrested hafiz mohammed saeed ]

Because there is minimal cost of NOT arresting him but there is substantial cost of arresting him.

Because, at its heart, the Pakistani establishment supports the "idyllic" vision propagated by these jihadis.

Because, the path of violence is integral to the Pakistani thought process.

Re: # 1046

bj mian,

... being a moslem has nothing to do with supporting the kashmiri cause - as far as i am concerned it has been a legitimate territorial dispute since 1947 and pakistan's stand is justified .... this jihadi thing is a relatively new phenomenon and has done more harm than good to a just cause ...... india stand is based on squatter's rights ......

Re: # 1045

Dear Tree, I am sure you are very proud of your medals. However, your enthusiasm is not shared by the world at large.

...... and i don't understand why the paki govenment has not arrested hafiz mohammed saeed - the man is scum and a major threat to pakistan ........ if th un has designated this man as a terorist what is the paki government waiting for? ......... i suspect they are afraid this ba&tard will spill the beans on the establishment if he ends up in court ......

Hamidm2 miaN,

The world is well aware of and horrified at the kukarams of the Jihadis based in Pakistan. What the world has not realized -- but is now beginning to (shrill, womanish Pakistani cries of denial notwithstanding!) -- it is the "educated elite" in Pakistan which enables the jihadis by sharing their agenda at heart.

The matter is rather simple -- if an "educated" Pakistani thinks that being a Muslim puts him at a higher pedestal than a non-Muslim then at the core there is no difference from the thinking of the jihadis -- the only difference is in the level of camouflage ("sophistication").

Like GWB said so succinctly -- if you (read Pakistanis) are not part of the solution then your are at the core of the stinking rot of the problem.

Re: # 1039 BJ....these are the medals that we are proud of.

........ anyway, back to this mumbai thing .......... don't you guys think the topic is getting a little stale ?

Re: # 1041

bj mian,

... i don't know what you mean by the 'jihadi kashmiri agitation' ...... kashmir is disputed territory and the kashmiri's strugggle against the brutal indian occupation is a legitimate liberation movement ......... i think obama supports them on this ... you guys are being unreasonable

Re: # 1039

bj,

.... i think this pretentious hand wringing has gone on for long enough ....... i gave this mumbai thing two three weeks and it is time to move on to cricket or something else that is a bit more meaningful ....... in the two weeks since the mumbai carnage hundreds of mumbai residents have probably died of diarrhea and falling off the trains ........... it is no big whup! ... sorry

Every Pakistani who supports the jihadi Kashmiri agitation is a bigot inside and must be exposed as such!

Re: # 1023

anil mian,

i agree and that is why i said that pakistan has to rethink and reorganize its efforts to liberate kashmir ..... let and other such groups are out of control and doing a lot of damage in pakistan without doing diddly for the kashmiri cause ........ we need to organize a new force made up of indigenous kashmiris who will restrict their activities to occupied kashmir instead of going off on a tangent and killing poor madrasis in mumbai ........ maybe we can get the cia to help us in organizing such a force, but based on the mess they made with the bay of pigs and the nicaraguan contras i don't know if that is such a good idea ........

The following facts are well-documented and need no proof.

(1) The Pakistanis have been the main promoters of jihadi terrorism in the world.

(2) They gave birth to the Taliban. They recognized its regime. They gave shelter to Taliban elements when it was on the run -- giving it the ability to outlast the GWB regime and presumably survive.

(3) Pakistanis conducted and executed the IC-814 hijacking.

(4) Pakistanis took American money under the pretext of "fighting terror" and did nothing of the sort.

(5) Pakistanis shelter the worst of the worst of criminals and smugglers and use them in their scheme to wreak havoc on civilians.

(6) Pakistanis lie at every opportunity when confronted with the results of their sordid deeds.

(7) Pakistani expatriates have been shown to be involved in many terrorist acts all over the world!

Re: # 1034

Snark, the Pakistanis are the eternal wishy-washers. They lie at every opportunity. Those who do not wish to lie are too scared for their lives to say anything.

I am afraid things will get a LOT worse before they improve. And it is one hundred percent the fault of the bigoted Pakistanis!

Re: # 1036

bubba mian,

.... it is quite simple: it is our moral obligation to help them get rid of a brutal occupation .... on a personal note, sheikh rashid is from srinagar ........ they are our people ......

Re: # 1006 Posted by hamidm2 on December 10, 2008 9:49:47 am

Hamid mian,

Since I read only your posts, I find this one sentence somewhat irrational...

[Re: # 988

pepe l'pew,

pakistan has to come up with a new strategy of how to support the kashmiri liberation movement ..]

Why? Why is it Pakistan's responsibility to support the kashmiri movement?

kaura [the only hinjra or rather Hinjri who had balls was killed in 1984 for sabre rattling at the wrong place...]


so all it took was a hinjri to pacify (or was it pussify?) sikhs?? today even the ardent sikhs are apologizing to hindoos (in broad day light) for standing up for khalistan in 1984.

what has become of this once proud people :(

Re: # 1033 borivili

I appreciate the demand for evidence. On the face of it, it is a valid one. However, take, for example, the treatment, by the Pakistani authorities, of the single most important piece of evidence raised so far: the identity and residence of the captured terrorist.

The most ludicrous of things were claimed, such as the fact that he was too dark, wore a Hindu wristband, was actually a Sikh, carried alcohol and therefore could not be a mujahid, did not have a recognisable surname. (Please note, also, that Zardari also "felt" that he was not a Pakistani a few days back).

Much was made of the Faridkot where he was not found, with the mcclatchy reporter's story that the bewildered villagers had absolutely no idea of anyone like that. This was taken as supporting "evidence" that the terrorist was actually not from pakistan.

Please read interact #431.

The very same reporter, a few days later, tracked down the actual Faridkot village, and found a number of things, including the fact that the person's mother and father had been "disappeared", that the police were telling everyone to hush up, that the clumsiest of coverups was underway.

This is the way that "evidence" has been treated. Please tell me, without references to crutches such as Junagadh and Manavadar, whether this sort of behaviour can be described as acting in good faith.

To summarise: Denials abound, coverups are attempted, and we see the spectacle of a state that proclaims it's "responsible" nature repeatedly from the rooftops bending over backwards and fighting a rearguard action on behalf of terrorists.

Let's try a different tack.

Can you tell me any piece of supposed evidence that the Indians, Mossad, the CIA and RAW *cannot* fabricate?

India should present the evidence to the international media to bring as much pressure as possible on Pakistan. The Army will not imediately abandon the lashkar but will put it on notice not to go beyond kashmir or else....

Beena,

Don't worry, there is going to be no war.....hinjras lack the balls....

the only hinjra or rather Hinjri who had balls was killed in 1984 for sabre rattling at the wrong place...

sorry, too late here, i misspelled Hafiz Muhammad Saeed's name

There you go: JuD banned, Hafiz Mahmood Saeed named.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2008/dec/113087.htm

1267 Committee Sanctions Lashkar e-Tayyiba Associated Individuals and Entities


Today the UN Security Council's al-Qaida/Taliban Sanctions Committee (the "1267 Committee") took several actions related to the terrorist group Lashkar e-Tayyiba (LET):

It listed four members of the terrorist group Lashkar e-Tayyiba (LET) for targeted sanctions (including asset freeze, travel ban and arms embargo). These individuals are Muhammad Saeed a.k.a. Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Haji Muhammad Ashraf, and Mohmoud Mohammad Ahmed Bahaziq.
It added a new alias for the group: Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD), which is an LET front operation.
It added additional aliases for Al Rashid and Al Akhtar Trusts, which have raised funds for LET.
The Al Rashid Trust aliases are: Al Amin Welfare Trust, Al Amin Trust, Al Ameen Trust, Al-Ameen Trust, Al Madina Trust, Al-Madina Trust.
The Al-Akhtar Trust aliases are: Pakistan Relief Foundation, Pakistani Relief Foundation, Azmat-e-Pakistan Trust, Azmat Pakistan Trust.
The United States is pleased that the Committee has decided to move forward on these high-priority designations. These actions will limit the ability of known terrorists to travel, acquire weapons, plan, carry out, or raise funds for new terrorist attacks. Today's listings reaffirm the Council's commitment to updating the 1267 Consolidated List to ensure it continues to serve as a tool to help member states deter terrorist activities of al-Qaeda and affiliated groups.
The 1267 Committee originally designated LET in 2005, citing its affiliation with al-Qaida. Pakistan banned LET in 2002. The United States and EU have also sanctioned the group.

2008/1035


Released on December 10, 2008

borivilli # 1026

That is a good idea.

The problem we face is that (if the reports are true) this is just indistinguishable from a military attack.

Sure, we don't want to escalate and want Pakistan to solve its problems (let's assume they want to and can), but to NOT to take decisive action against a military attack when the attack comes not from far away but from immediate neighborhood....that is so hard to fathom...what does it say about our future?

I really see no hope for any compromise, but of all the ideas thrown up until now, what you suggested seems the best. If we have enough evidence to convince the Americans and the Europeans, at least we should be able to convince a few others.

I don't know if China can or will throw surprises. I believe they stopped Pakistan from banning LeT thrice earlier (someone can confirm that piece of news)...

#1026 Posted by borivili_express on
express bhai,

what is solid evidence? who decides what is solid? And who tells UN how it should handle solid or liquid evidence in this context? Security Council?? What is this security Council...??

Aadmi ke agar par hote, to kud kud ke ek dusre par haga karte...

#1023 Posted by anil on



The easiest way to protect self-deception is through denial. Pakistan is one of the greatest countries in the world and Islam is the best religion. One is pure and the other is the creator of that purity?? What in the world can hurt such extreme purity??

Even if all Pakistan is ruled by Taliban, how does it affect that purity or how do they lose that purity.

In such purity of mind and thoughts all truths are optional and these people live for life that exists beyond truth!!



La belle dame sans merci,
tussi aadmi ki ke gat kardi??

i think india should go straight away to the UN and present the evidence if it has any thing solid and ask US to provide whatever it has, in order not to precipitate a armed strike after the next attack.

the us may not cooperate because declaring pak a terrorist state is not in US interests. but India should set itself a deadline of no more than 2 or 3 months and let the US know, so that they can also tell pak. probably all of this is allready being done, only time will tell.

some lessons from the bombings.....

The apologists for platepissers were out in full force while the shooting was taking place at the Taj hotel....the leftist fags at BBC had articles and statements of Pakis....as if they are going to admit...

They had articles of how the muslims are 'disgruntled' and 'disadvantaged'.....as if it is just in India.....they are disgruntled everywhere.....

Hinjras are 'brave' enough to torment the poor only.....they didn't come out of their holes while a city of millions was held hostage by 10 men.....Dur phitay moonh...

Hinjras can shove their achievements on the next satellite and shoot it up their rear.....they need balls more than intelligence....

some things are puzzling, how did these guys know bombay so well and the taj/oberoi floor plan?

there is very likely to be a second attack because the militants want to divert the pak army from FATA, so what will India do then? launch strikes in order to keep public opinion even thogh it is reluctnt to provoke hostilities, pak will also be forced to respond due to domestic public opinion. or does India go to the UN and get sanctions declared agaisnt pak as a state sponsor of terrorism like the us did against syria and iran.

Hamidm sahib:

This is not India-Pakistan or Indian Kashmir issue. "It is terror, stupid" issue.

Sooner Pakistan wakes up the better it will, you already have 200,000 organized LeT inside Pakistan, where do you think they will go? You may wish all of them to go to India, but you would not get your Cuban Cigars.

From Bhutto days onward, Pakistan tried to bleed India into pieces. Reality is visible to many, and India did not bleed into pieces. One billion poor vegetarians do have power to match One million Pakistan Army or 200,000 LeT.

Kashmir obsession needs to be put on the back burner, and deal with rotten eggs and chickens who are laying rotten eggs. 200,000 organized LeT is 20% of Pakistani army and more diffused into Pakistan's fabric than the army. It can not only challenge the army, but can secure power. After all there are many admiring, supportive and believing chickens in the armed forces.

Re: # 1018 Hamidm

"..india is a lot more like serbia then the union in 1865 .."

Really? How?

#1020 Posted by mohar1l on
Well, China can try??
As per today's news China thrice blocked a UNSC ban on Jamaat-ud-Dawah.

hamimd

serbia was holding just fine, until US made the move... without US intervention, Serbia would still hold on just fine...

There ain't nobody coming to help kashmir and pakis - so your wet-dream will remain so... LOL

Re: # 1018

Serbia is a country of 6 million people. No comparison dude.

Re: # 1016

pepe,

like i said, you guys are delusional ....... india is a lot more like serbia then the union in 1865 ......

Re: # 975

Why are you giving Indians advice on how to break up Pakistan? What's in it for you?

Re: # 1013 Hamidm

"...remember, no one, not even slobodan milosovic, could hold a people against their will forever ..."

The Union in 1865 certainly did! Go figure.

#1013 Posted by hamidm2 on

If Brahmins/Baniyas of Sindh, Punjab and Kashmir can be converted to idiotic musalmans that we see today, then there is no everlasting will of people. If there was such a grand will then a religion like Islam would not have survived 1400 years.

And who thinks that being muslim and fighting to get land for Islam at the cost of any truth is such a great will.. only muslims can think like that..

As past masters of the lurid crimes and guiles of what history recalls as Thugee, thugs (of India) could/can perform all the thuggery in the world that they wish to and while doing so appear very innocent and angelic to every one...as Shakespeare said "Look like the innocent flower–be the serpent underneath it“, or as the thugs might gleefully say themselves “baghal main choori, moonh peh Ram Ram�. Being the brood of their notorious ancestors, they are trying to prove to the world that they are innocent victims of terror, though themselves rousing all evil winds in the neighborhood—from helping Mukti Bahini in Bangladesh to the bombing in Bori Bazaar in Karachi two decades ago; to RAW supporting the BLA; to the Islamabad Marriott destruction, the blasts in Peshawar, to providing the TTP with weapons....in between they managed to have gotten the Chinese to badly kick their rear ends, but have succeeded bullying smaller countries in the neighborhood like Sri Lanka, Maldives and Nepal. They have only managed stalemates against the much smaller Pakistan, (1971 being due more to Pakistan's self destruct mode than anything great from the Indi's, as ever), which is no sign of greatness or smallness of the Thugs...How pathetic...What a bunch of angels!
www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/000322.html
"In 1816, an article appeared in the Madras Literary Gazette, authored by Dr. Robert C. Sherwood. Sherwood, like Sleeman, was well-versed in Hinduism, and had gotten wind of a mysterious society of assassins from a gang of suspects who had been arrested and then released by an unbelieving judge in Madras in 1815. Sherwood’s article was the first major testimony confirming the existence of a cult which committed murder in the name of Kali, and it attracted Sleeman’s immediate attention. Among other things, Sherwood wrote:
While Europeans have journeyed through the extensive territories subject to the Government of Fort St. George, with a degree of security nowhere surpassed, the path of the native traveler has been beset with perils little known or suspected, into which numbers annually falling, have mysteriously disappeared, the victims of villains as subtle, rapacious and cruel as any who are to be met with in the records of human depravity. The Phansigars, or stranglers, are thus designated from the Hindustani word Phansi a noose. In the more northern parts of India, these murderers are called Thugs, signifying deceivers: in the Tamul language, they are called Ari Tulucar, or Mussulman noosers: in Canarese, Tanti Calleru, implying thieves, who use a wire or cat-gut noose…. Skilled in the arts of deception, Phansigars enter into conversation and insinuate themselves, by obsequious attentions, into the confidence of travelers of all descriptions…. When the Phansigars determine to attack a traveler, they usually propose to him, under the specious plea of mutual safety or for the sake of society, to travel together and on arriving at a convenient place and a fit opportunity presenting … one of the gang puts a rope or sash round the neck of the unfortunate persons, while others assist in depriving him of his life.
Thus an account of the Thugs, as they came to be known, and Thugee, their body of secret beliefs and practices, was first made available to outsiders. Perhaps not surprisingly, the account was all but ignored by British officialdom. Who could give credence to such extravagant rumors? And even if there was an element of truth to them, surely this was a matter for the Indians to resolve among themselves."
The cult's presiding deity was Kali the destructive manifestation of Shiva's consort Parvati.

Re: # 1011

pepe,

.... most american's would love to smoke cuban cigars, but we don't - it is a matter of principle ...... and remember, no one, not even slobodan milosovic, could hold a people against their will forever ....... indians remind me of serbians who tried to hang on to their territory to the bitter end ..... you guys need to get over your delusions of grandeur ....

romair # 991

That is what I am suggesting, word for word, 100%.

Except one modification: India must not eye HP's coal mines. HP gets to keep them, unless he wishes to stick with Punjabis, in which case mines go to Sindhis.

Re: # 1010 Hamidm2

So, I guess that you are not smart enough to know when to quit. Be my quest.

Re: # 1007

pepe,

.... it ain't over until it is over ...... the only lost cause i know is romair mian .......

Re: # 1007 pew
[..Are you guys smart ...]

If pakis are "smart" in anything - they wouldn't be pakis, would they?... LOL

Re: # 1006

"...let them suffer at the hands of a brutal vegetarian occupation ..." - Hamidm sahib

MAJ was right when he said their heros are our enemies. Veggies are your enemies and India's greatest asset. I guess, until artries are clogged Hamidm sahib is not going to change his mind. That is the story of India Pakistan also.

Re: # 1006 Hamidm2

Be my guest. Good luck to ya'll. BUT, YOU STILL DON'T GET THE POINT!

Let me try it differently - closer to your adopted home, and then you might understand:

In 1865, just before the surrender at the Appomatox Courthouse, Robert E. Lee was asked by some of his generals to continue a guerrilla campaign against the Union, just like the one, decades earlier, George Washington successfully had successfully led against the British. Lee, having the foresight of what that meant, declined. He knew all too well that the cause was irrevocably lost, and a bloody guerrilla campaign would reduce what remained of the South to the Stone Age and resign the South to a cause that was on the wrong side of history. He, in fact, discouraged Southern dissenters from this course of action.

QUESTION: Are you guys smart enough to know when to quit?

Re: # 988

pepe l'pew,

... i agree that the kashmiri liberation movement has been corrupted and these guys have morphed into global terrorists instead of staying focused on their real mission .... also, they are out of control and the blowback effect on pakistan has been devastating ......

....... these groups need to be disbanded and pakistan has to come up with a new strategy of how to support the kashmiri liberation movement ..... it would be criminal to desert these poor people and let them suffer at the hands of a brutal vegetarian occupation .......

Re: # 1003 Borivilli

Like I said, 'Do you have a reference for your claims?' or just hot air? I'd be happy to read up on him IF YOU PROVIDE A REFERENCE. I won't go on a fishing expedition based on your hunches.

bottom line is nobody is doodh ka dhula, anyway this is not relevant today. settle the issues of today, exert your energy there.

pew read up on him, even whle he was mountbattens assist he was illegealy leaking info to the congress, and he is responsible for changing the boundaries line in gurdaspur in punjab to give a road link to kashmir, in collusion with the congress, that line was changed by radcliff after presure from mountbatten, their is speculation that nehru and menon were responsible for that.

Re: # 1000 Borivili

Do you have a reference to back up your assertion, or it another unsubstantiated assertion? If he was indeed what you claim he was, then why was he Mountbatten's political advisor?

both sides have enough dirt in their closets,
is hammam main sabh nangey hain

vp menon was a congressite and nehrus right hand man nothing he wrote can be taken as the gospel truth, he was often accused of lying by the americans and british themselves.

Re: # 994 Bulleya

A bunch of half-truths again. Anyone interested in the subject should forget Romair's rants, and instead read the following, 'The Story of the Integration of the Indian States' by V. P. Menon. Menon was a senior civil servant (in fact, he was the highest serving Indian officer in the British India government) who played an instrumental role in the Partition and Independence of India. He was a political advisor to Mountbatten. Here is a link to his eBook:

http://tinyurl.com/6cmk8b

Read the whole frikkin' chapter on Hyderabad and the Nizam's shennanigans (Chapters 17-19), Junagadh (Chapter 6), J&K (Chapter 20), and then come here and discuss this with a semblance of competence. In the meantime, IGNORE ROMAIR's BS!

He wrote another book called the 'Transfer of Power in India' by VP Menon. Here is a Google link to that book:

http://tinyurl.com/6ys5qd

Frikkin' village idiots!

buleya u are wrong it was Pakistan that first violated independence of the states when it allowed tribal invasion. u can say that it was partly a response to massacre of muslims in Jammu by state forces and refugees, but they could have exerted influence on the raja. secondly cong never accepted the right of rulers to choose they wanted the pop to decide so their actions are consistent with their declaration, except in kashmir where there was a partial violation by not carrying out a plebiscite or referendum.

shoaib I agree with u when u point the dichotomy in Jinnahs character but u are wrong and ur info faulty hehe. Direct action was a call to protest on streets not rioting, rioting was done by hindu underworld and thugs, most of the victims in calcutta were muslims. secondly jinnah accepted cab mission plan and it was cong that rejected because they felt they could pressurise and out manuever the muslim league without british interference in an asembly where they had majority otherwise it was better if partition occured because anyway the coalition govt was difficult to work because of muslim league intransigence. Jinnah rejected after congress only to save face. nehru and congress knew the plan had to be accepted in its enitrety it was a final settlement between hindus and muslims, even a child will tell u that u cantaccept a part and reject the main body of an agrement, that means rejecting the agreement as a whole.

by the way this has been india's approach through out that foreign interference will get them a worse deal than direct exertion of hegemony. this strategy is only changing slightly now when hey feel US and India have a common enemy in extremist islam.

india did absolutely the right thing in keeping junagarh and h-bad..kashmir is moot. british parliament was irrelevant..its indias future that was at stake, not britains.

there is no way india could have "created" mukti bahini to perform muslim-on-muslim violence. they were truely there..indian soldiers did conduct ops pretending to be mukti-bahini, but that is purely in the fog of war.

what india did in BD was ok since it was a quick surgery... a jhatka slaughter. paki war of thousand cuts otoh is really immoral since its too expensive in terms of kashmiri blood. kargil was a good effort.

now, this slow bleeding technique has the problem that the jaish and lashkars need halwa for a long time too..guess who has to give it to them ..all those pajeros, shia-sacrifices etc have to be continually given year after year to appease the lashkar. mukti-bahini otoh was long gone unless you count construction labor in gurgaon.

so a quick-jugular snipping op is halal, thousand itsy-bitsy cuts immoral since it does not achive goal, costs a lot of kashmiri and other innocent lives and corrupts paki society.

majumdar #: "You may not be aware of this but Patel had offered LAK Kashmir in return for Hyderabad and Lord Mountbottom had made a similar offer to MAJ (pbuh). But the Pakis turned down the offer."

.....i was unaware of such an offer....however, that is neither here nor there.....as pakis, indians and british had no such right to make such an offer.....the rule was that the nawab decides.....and junagarh's nawab decided to go with pakistan, while hyderabad's decided to be independent.......

"And with the result that India kept both"

......india did not keep both.....they did not belong to india.....one cannot keep something that does not belong to one....india threatened and then, militarily, occupied and annexed both.....

it was a pure and simply military take over....saying, "india kept both" makes it sound like they belonged to india to begin with.....

.....i have no problem with indians who say that india has played its cards better than pakistan and is a bigger power in pakistan and has thus won out.....

its a big bad world out there, and one has to learn to survive......

what i have an issue with are indians who try to put some sort of a moral spin around it.......as if india does nothing wrong, ethically.......obviously this is not true.....in any conflict the more powerful country always carries out the most unethical tasks, since it can get away with it........

...india militarily occupied junagarh and hyderabad (pakistan militarily invaded kashmir)....going by the rules of the time, kashmir and hyderabad should have been independent as that is what their maharajahs wanted......and junagarh should have gone to pakistan...as that is what its nawab wanted.....

india was more powerful and clever and got all three unethically......i respect that as a member of this big bad world......i do not respect indians who try to morally justify this occupation......

...similarly, india laid the foundations of cross-border terrorism in south asia through mukti bahni......and later through tamil tiger support.......it succeeded in bangladesh.......pakistan tried cross border activities in kashmir and has yet to succeed......

once again, i respect india's success in cross border civilian inflitrations........as a citizen of the big bad world.....what i don't respect are indians who forgot that india is the country that set the precedences of the LeT's of the region.......and try to prop up india on an ethical high ground.......

Re: # 990 Dost-Mittar

Did you do your homework before chiming in? In the Internet age, it is incredibly easy! If not, would this satisfy you?

With the passing of Indian Independence Act 1947 in the British Parliament, all the states were released from their obligations to the Crown. They became free to align their future with either of two Dominoins (i.e India or Pakistan). All the negotations that had already been held on Cabinet Mission proposal of 1946 and the transfer of power and Independence Act of 1947, made it evident that if Indian states became separate independent entities, it would create a serious vacuum between the Central Government and the States; this would effect not only political relations but also economic and other relations between the two. Taking into consideration these problems, Heartley Showcross, the British under secretary of States for India in a speech emphatically maintained that the British Government would not recognize any state as a separate international entity, and Prime Minister Atlee speaking on Independence Bill, hoped that no irrevocable decision to stay out prematurely will be taken.

hamidm mian #: "...... having said that, how do you consider what the horrible hindoos did in bangladesh - arming and training terrorist groups and then invading a sovereign country to dismember it - any different from what the pakis were trying to do in kashmir ? ........ "

...there are two points to note here.....

...india could never have broken off bangladesh......as i said earlier, indians and pakistanis both share a common dna.....and indians, like pakistanis, are too incompetent to execute something so grand......

.......pakistanis, through their own incompetence, dropped bangladesh into india's lap.....indians were themsevles surprised......had pakistan allowed mujeeb to form the govt. after he won the elections, there would have no separation movement in bangladesh and india could never have intervened......

.....do keep in mind that just six years prior to 71, bengalis had fought, hand in hand with punjabis, against indians, in 65 war.....

......having said that, your comments about mukti bahni are very accurate.......

....india is the country which set the precedence of training terrorists in its terrority and crossing them across borders to carry out terrorist activities in neighboring countries.....what mukti bahni did in east pakistan is orders of magnitude higher than anything LeT has ever done (or been accused of doing) in india.....

....in addition, india sent terrorist across internationally recognized borders......while LeT goes into kashmir, which is disputed and not a border.....

....later on, india assisted tamil tigers (uptil the iraqi war, by far the largest suicide carrying out group in the world), in carrying out terrorist activities in sri lanka.....

pakistan is, actually, a late entrant into this game......india perfected it a long time ago.....to the point that india, successfully, achieved what it wanted through cross border terrorism, in pakistan (and to some extent sri lanka) and then went into retirement (though if pakistani claims are correct, the current bomb blasts in pakistan have an indian hand from afghanistan, in them).....

so there is no moral argument that india can give against invasion of militants across borders or LoCs in south asia.....india established this mode of violence........

the only difference is that india has been very successful in such cross-border acts.........while pakistan has not.....

Eklavya #: "India's fight should only be against the Pakistani state and those individuals who attach themselves to this state inseparably."

...i don't think this is possible......actually not desirable, even if possible......at least from the indian point of view.....

.....the worst thing that can happen for india, in its efforts to defeat pakistan, is for the state of pakistan to totally collapse....

what india needs to do, if it wants to destroy pakistan, and not get affected itself, is for pakistan to break up into smaller units, in a non-violent manner.......and in a manner where india can make independent dealst with each unit.......

....do keep in mind that pakistan prepared the taliban to rule over afghanistan, thereby extending the borders of pakistan, well into afghanistan.....pakistan destabilized afghanistan to keep it under its control.....i read somewhere that the quetta telephone exchange provided telephone facilities to kandhar also.....

.....lo and behold, 20 years later, taliban have taken over part of pakistan....exactly the opposite of what pakistan planned......

the same thing will happen to india, if the govt./state of pakistan collapses, and pakistan turns into an afghanistan......who will fill in the vaccuum.....it will be radicalized anti-india religious fanatics.....who will walk straight to panipat, if not to mumbai......

.....india has tried the strategy of getting pakistan to collapse since before its creation.....it has not succeeded.....and now, if pakistan does collapse, india will be hugely negatively impacted.......

......india needs to get pakistani provinces to separate, and then form independent treaties with them - starting from baluchistan and sind - thereby isolating punjab (62% of pakistan's population) into a land-locked non-entity.....

and it needs to do it, in a relatively peaceful manner, so that the instability does not impact india.......

baluchistan and sind are a goldmine of unutilized natural resources......thar coal mines in sind, alone, have 185 billion tons of coal!.......more energy than all the oil in saudi arabia......

pakistan is only, now, starting to think about exploring thar......if you can be nice to hp and convince him to ditch his loyalties to islamabad and form alliances with fellow sindhi advani, the coal mines could be yours.....

baluchistan has more than 50% of pakistan's area and only 5 million people......it is a treasure trove of undiscovered minerals and gas....in addition it sits on the tip of the world's biggest oil route.......a port in gwadar with baluchistan's natural resources and land mass, could make dubai etc. insignificant.......

form a few alliances with the nawabs in baluchistan, and instead of supporting their terrorist activities, bribe them into separating.......and you are in business.......

punjan and nwfp and landlocked and have nothing to offer india.....break off sind and baluchistan, peacefully and constructively, and you are set.......

PR#988:

I think that bulleya is right on that one: when the British lifted their paramountsy over princely states, they were given the option in theory of becoming independent; however they were ADVISED to join or the other federation after taking into consideration certain factors.

But Pakistan also is not doodh-mein-dhula on this account; right until the 1960s, it claimed Hyerabad and Junagadh for itself; both the new states were using different arguments in different situations.

Re: # 987 hamid/pew

Every country worth its salt has "sponsored" rebels in other countries one time or other - India in Bdesh and Lanka, US in numerous places... sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't... but it ends without much fuss on the sponsors...

But nobody radicalises and sacrifices their own people for that purpose - except for pakiland... initial phase of kashmir insurgency was probably a "legitimate" action by pakis - in response to what india did in Bdesh... once that phase was crushed out by indian army, pakis went completely beserk and jihadised their own people to fight a meaningless war...

Result is for all to see...

Re: # 987 Hamidm2

I do think that the Bangladesh nightmare has an effect on the thinking of your military types. Bangladesh seems to be used, in part, as a justification for the Pakistani ISI strategy of using 'non state actors'. There are big differences though - the Mukti Bahini did not attack foreigners and was not a 'global terrorist' organization. Further, India is no East Pakistan -it won't quietly roll over while 'your guys' walk in. On the other hands, 'your guys' may consume you with their fire. 'Your guys' have an increasingly global agenda, and will be gut your own country to spite India. The Mukti Bahini quickly disarmed, but 'your guys' will march on to Islamabad. The Mukti did not make powerful enemies overseas, but 'your guys' have. But, that's your problem - 'you guys' need to figure it out.

I know that Havildar Clueless is a village idiot. It is the other non-suspecting guys on Chowk that need to steered clear of his pathetic brainwashed mind.

Re: # 986

pepe l'pew,

.... good point but it is not that difficult to score points against our captain clueless .......

...... having said that, how do you consider what the horrible hindoos did in bangladesh - arming and training terrorist groups and then invading a sovereign country to dismember it - any different from what the pakis were trying to do in kashmir ? ........ actually kashmir is a legitimate terrotrial dispute and the indian occupation is illegal by any standard ....... hope you will keep this in mind when you feel the urge to spew nonsense next time ....... you guys are getting too big for your dhotis - next time you are squatting on the railroad tracks look around ......

p.s. before you get your half yard loincloth in a knot, i do think that pakistan needs to crack down on these groups - not just because they killed a few madrasis, but because they are killing pakis ..........

Re: # 970 Bulleya

"...i think india is not competent enough to do anything to pakistan.....it has, only, after 60 years, now, started defeating pakistan in a cricket test match or two...."

Are you conveniently forgetting Bangladesh? Or did you guys never consider it part of 'Pakistan' and what you wrote was not a slip of the tongue?

Re: # 970 Bulleya

"...(Hyderabad) declaring indepdence was, perfectly, legal ..."

No, it was not! The only option that the Nizam had was to join one of the successor states KEEPING IN MIND geographic continuity. All these were conditions of the Independence of India Act, 1947. (Just do a quick Google search and learn the facts). It is poor scholarship to make unsubstantiated assertions.

Yes, he doesn't want to talk about it now...it's as if another man did it, maybe that's why he changed his nick.

Re: # 982 atleast on chowk, they appear to be like that. The present state has no bearing whatsoever on the other states (past or future).

e.g is his T_shirt episode. It was great at that time - but had no bearing to the past nor to the future turn of events.

Its in the here and now.

Very profound, Dots, but are you saying the great airman's thought processes are anarchic and unpredictable?
I wouldn't have thought so!

Re: # 975 Bulleya:this is the right way to go......economically, india has no influence on pakistan.....and militarily, india and pakistan are in mutually assured destruction.......

I am sure that is why all the banias in Pakistan are desperate to have trade links with the banias in India. You really are one of a kind, bulleya, I must hand it to you!

Re: # 977 now now WaltzingMatilda, do you really need show the hidden kangaroo!

I agree, he is opening the possibility of extending this to 2000+interacts. I wonder what the record is - I am sure it is YLH (he was a past master to making sure all his articles reached atleast the 300+ mark!)

Daniyal saab,
bulleya is a past master in this game. He is a Markov chain or maybe he possesses a hidden markov chain in his brains. Ask Arjun Mian or Mirza Syed MAJ Beg or Harish_Hyderabadi or any other guy here.
Listen to what Field Marshall Romair, The great Poet Bulleya says, with the required respt and awe.

p.s for your information on markov chains go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain (though I prefer to call him a Memoryless Markov Chain (its his speciality!)

romair

Thanks. Those are some good ideas.

In general (a) India should not be in the business of carrying out planned killings. So long as ideologies exist, new individuals will always replace old ones within the blink of an eye. (b) India should not resort to forging evidence. India's objective must be to help people utlimatley, not to hurt them by any means possible.

India's fight should only be against the Pakistani state and those individuals who attach themselves to this state inseparably.

Re: # 976; shoaib mian

that statement should keep this going for well over a thousand posts! ... just you wait 'til majumdar bhai gets to know about this (and no doubt yasser and harish will follow!)

Jinnah, just like, say, Modi today was a man without scruples. One states that Muslims and Hindus are so different that they can’t even live in the same country and the other calls Muslims living in India, Pakistani. Pray tell me, what is the difference?

In fact, they day VHP called a bandh after the Godhra incident reminded me chillingly of the three day holiday called by Suhrawardy in Bengal to help carry out Jinnah’s “Direct Action�.

Jinnah, just like Modi, was a horrible man. Just thought you'd like to know.

Eklavya #: ....if your aim is to collapse pakistan, then you need to change your thinking, from what india has been trying to do, for the past 60 years, to a new direction......

following is some advice:

1. build dams on chenab and jehlum in kashmir, as well as a canal system to to divert the water towards indian punjab, rajisthan etc.....

fill them with enough water to impact pakistan's crops, without enough for pakistan to declare outright war on india....keep the dispute resolutions going on with world bank.....off and on....

2. massively build up the strategic indian offensive arms, specifically targeted against pakistan (aircraft carriers, air to air refuelers, strategic bombers etc.).....and then keep, verbally, threatening pakistani generals....forcing them to, unnecessarily, build up their own conventional arms (instead of sticking with a nuclear deterent), thereby bankrupting pakistan

3. take whatever evidence you have on any terrorist attack, add some of your own, and get un, with usa and israeli influence, to declare certain prominent govt. individuals to be terrorists (instead of, uselessly, trying to get the complete country declared a terrorist state)

4. offer indian troops to the usa in massive quantities to fight in afghanistan......thereby prying away the usa from pakistan, in this conflict

5. work out some mechanism to send low-skilled labor to middle eastern muslim countries in very high numbers, thereby, replacing pakistani labor......this will be a massive blow to pakistan, as this is where pakistan gets all its money

6. use isreali influence in usa, to make it extremely difficult for pakistanis to get student and employment visas to usa......every single pakistan general and senior burecrat has their sons in usa (tahmad and hamidm mian are both sons of pakistani brigadiers)......this will also force hamidm mian to migrate back to pakistan, thereby resulting it massive damage to pakistan

7. instead of using influence in afghanistan with the northern alliance (which is about to lose to taliban) and carrying out regular explosions in pakistan........bribe the taliban heavily, and get them to stop the water on the kabul river into pakistan.......i believe they can do this legally........

after this, just sit and wait.........

this is the right way to go......economically, india has no influence on pakistan.....and militarily, india and pakistan are in mutually assured destruction.......

Re 970: A lot of what you write is general Indo-Pak rhetoric which has been discussed ad nauseam. I will, however, take this up:

//46 - india (specifically nehru) opposed the cabinet mission plan ...//

Firstly, you are only partially correct about Nehru opposing the CMP. Nehru was for it, in the sense that he agreed to the formation of a constituent assembly as stated by the Plan. He than stated that the decision of the assembly would take precedence of the plan, in my opinion, a valid point. I would rather accept a plan thought up by my own countrymen rather than a plan thought up by the Brits.

Jinnah, who was uncomfortable with the plan from the very beginning because it DID NOT give him Pakistan, actually dismissed the plan after Nehru's statement. Please get your history correct. Nehru did not reject the plan, Jinnah did.

//...which would have resulted in an autonomous federation for south asia....something close to which india, now, wants through free trade//

Wrong, again. The CMP wanted ONE COUNTRY to be formed. However, within that one country, provinces could form groups and form mini-federations.

There would still be a central govt. which would handle things like defence, communications etc.

I doubt India today wants SAARC to be like as strong a federation as that. Why I doubt that even the EU handles the defence for its member constituents!

Romair,

Pts. 5-6-7

You may not be aware of this but Patel had offered LAK Kashmir in return for Hyderabad and Lord Mountbottom had made a similar offer to MAJ (pbuh). But the Pakis turned down the offer. And with the result that India kept both

Regards

#970 by bulleya

........militarily, pakistan has a comprehensive nuclear deterent......it has enough tonnage of nukes to destroy every major city in india, with proven delivery systems, which can reach any corner of india......in fact, pakistan can totally bring down its conventional weapons to almost zero, and still be secure

Chut!ye, all that may be fine; all you need is two balls and in all these years, you haven't managed to grow them. Otherwise, how do you explain your reluctance to use nukes when India was winning back peak after peak you cowards had occupied on the sly, leaving behind the rotting bodies of your brave soldiers?

Captain Clueless, how long did you take to write this post? The whole of today?

Eklavya #: "MAXIMIZING EVERY POSSIBLE COST FOR PAKISTANI STATE, economically, most importantly."

....i thought this is what india has been doing for the past 70 years or so.......

1. pre-47 - india opposed the creation of pakistan

2. 46 - india (specifically nehru) opposed the cabinet mission plan which would have resulted in an autonomous federation for south asia....something close to which india, now, wants through free trade

3. 47 - india blocked pakistan's foreign exchange sterling transfer, which were to be moved from the british accounts into pakistan

4. 47 - india occupied part of kashmir and then asked for a plebescite

5. 47 - india occupied state of hyderabad, even though nizam of hyderabad wanted independence, which would have resulted in a large pro-pakistan state inside india.......declaring indepdence was, perfectly, legal under the agreements reached by india, pakistan and brits

6. 47 - india occupied junagarh, after its ruler had, publicly, signed over his state to pakistan......something which was legally agreed to also

7. 48-49 - india backed out of a kashmir plebescite when it recognized that kashmiris would overwhelmingly vote for pakistan, thereby violating a un resolution for the next many decades, and pushing pakistan into war

8. 49 - india blocked all bilateral trade, between india and pakistan, thereby, pushing pakistan to near bankruptcy, as india was pakistan's largest (and to some extent only) trading partner at that time

9. 50s - india threatened to block pakistan's waters into punjab, from their point of origination......even though all the rivers were in paksitan's punjab......pakistan was forced to give up the waters of two of its rivers (ravi and sutlej) to india.......these rivers run through pakistan's punjab, but india takes all their water!!

10. 63 onwards - india initiated a massive arms race in south asia......forcing pakistan to match it for its defense

11. 70-71 - india trained a terrorist organization - mukti bahni (the original lashkar -e-tayyabba) and infilitrated them across a recognized border into pakisan to carry out terrorist attacks on very large scales (far larger than anything any pakistani organization has done in india till date)

12. 71 - india invaded pakistan, across a recognized border and split the country into two........(india had invaded across a recognized border by india, after 65)

13. 80s - sent 700,000 soldiers into kashmir, on the pakistan border, to suppress a legitimate un recognized freedom struggle, resulting the in the formation of LeT and J-e-M on the pakistan side of kashmir, to take on these 700k soldiers

14. 90s - indian lobby in usa went into overdrive to get paksitan declared a terrorist state (unsuccessfully)

15. 2005 onwards - established multiple consulates on pak-afghan border to assist taliban and baluchistan separatists in carrying out multiple bombings in pakistan

.....i am not sure what india can do beyond what it is doing......and has done......somehow or the other pakistan survived and prospored......the worst situation for pakistan was in late 40s, when india broke off all bilateral trade with pakistan and refused to transfer its foreign exchange reserves which were due to it by the british.......

i have no idea how pakistan survived that, but it did.......quite amazing......

india cannot do anything to pakistan today, either economically or militarilty........militarily, pakistan has a comprehensive nuclear deterent......it has enough tonnage of nukes to destroy every major city in india, with proven delivery systems, which can reach any corner of india......in fact, pakistan can totally bring down its conventional weapons to almost zero, and still be secure

....india can carry out terrorist attacks inside pakistan......but pakistan can do the same in india (with much more intensity).....india's society is more hetrogenous, and is thus, far more vulnerable to the after-affects of terrorist attacks, than pakistan's......

....economically, india cannot do anything to pakisan either.....india and pakistan have no trade......hence india has no influence there......india does not sit, geographically, on any of pakistan's trade routes (on the contrary, pakistan sits, in between, india and energy reservoirs needed by india).....pakistan does not get any aid from india, which can be cut off......india does not have enough influence on int'l lending institutions - imf etc. - (like the usa does) to restrict loans to pakistan.....

in fact, till mid to late 90s, pakistan's per capita income was higher than india's (despite pakistan's massive defence budget).....

......india could block pakistan's water into chenab and jehlum rivers (which it has started doing)......however, this is under a int'l treaty.....it won't be able to get away with it......if it does do it somehow, pakistan will declare war on india, and bomb the dams, as its people will starve.......

so, india has two options: - one is to influence the usa to do something to pakistan

- the other is to pray very hard that pakistanis, themselves, carry out certain actions, that collapse pakistan.......

since, usa needs pakistan desperately, option one will not work.....however, option two does have a chance of succeeding......as, for the past 60 years, india hasn't been able to do anything to pakistan......despite its massive efforts to make pakistan collapse.......however, pakistan, itself, has damaged itself a lot......

so your best option is to sit and wait, and see what pakistan does to itself......i think india is not competent enough to do anything to pakistan.....it has, only, after 60 years, now, started defeating pakistan in a cricket test match or two........(and that two, because the pakistan team is far too busy infighting and doing drugs).....

Re: # 964

masadi mian,

..... i apologize for my earlier behavior ........ after the rabid response of the horrible hindoos i wouldn't even turn you in even though i think you are a certifiable looney ........ the only paki who i would even consider turning over to the indians is romair mian ........ you have bought yourself a reprieve - so be good before i change my mind ..........

Re: # 967

bubba mian,

... i agree with you when you say, "Pakis must not have any cordial relations with veggie-eaters, as long as they have this notion that they can subjugate their neighbors. " ..... i assume you are talkig about india's desire to be the regional hegemon - no self respecting people would accept that .......

..... when i was growing up and the hormones were raging and i had had a joint or two, i would get recklessly brave and call my father a petty bourgeois and try to lecture him on the dictatorship of the proletariat and the proper use of the means of production ..... he would just ignore me and tell me to go get him a cup of tea or just simply to shut up ...... once in a while when i was feeling really suicidal, i would question the quaid's wisdom and the whole partition thing ..... lid that evoke a reaction?..... lord have mercy! .... .....the old man (god bless his soul) would thunder, "bewakoof, tum hindoo baniay ki asliyat nahin jantey .... hum us kay saath reh chukay hain ..... agar pakistan nahin hota to aaj tum station per pani bhi nahin pee saktay " ..... i guess he was referring to the "hindoo" and "muslim" water taps at the railway station ......

....... rightly or wrongly, most pakis still believe that the hindoo baniya is out to get us and the events of bangladesh and kashmir don't give them a lot of reason to believe otherwise ....... by the way, to this day i really don't know what exactly is a petty bourgeois; but i think i do understand the bania ...........

Re: # 943 Posted by hamidm2 on December 9, 2008 11:31:48 am

Hamid mian,

I never thought that you are wrong. [.. don't get me wrong ..] Actually, IMO you are the only reason I come this web site, and read the wisdom in your posts. I agree with you all the way, Pakis must not have any cordial relations with veggie-eaters, as long as they have this notion that they can subjugate their neighbors. On the other hand, it is the pakis who have gotten themselves into this whole mess for a long time. Punjabi paindoos are not decent people, not matter you cut it. These punjoos are loud, abrasive, rude, have no brains whatsoever, and as you have said many times they are unwashed. Frankly, nowadays, I have find pathans any better. So, it is tough for you to side with your own half-DNA. Which one would you chose? And the mohajirs are no better than any of the sons of soil.

What is wrong with these pakis?

[.. also, it has to be done by the paki state without any nonsensical dictation from vegetarians and other riff raff ..]

The other riff raff is going to be the friendly countries of the UN. Just like what happened in Lebanon where Syria was invited by the Labanese government, paki govt. would be asked to approach UNSC, to invite friendly international forces, because pakis can no0t afford to become a failed state, like Somalia.

Hamid mian, pakis are on the brink of complete implosion. I know this thought hurts you, as it does to me. Whosoever, pakis I meet these days are saying almost similar words. Punjoos have had it for 60 years, and they blew it. We need to invite the friendly international interventionist forces who can show us what it means to form a law and order society. They will show pakis to create millions of jobs, by providing fast, quick and cost effective justice. Pakis can add their own sharia laws when it relates to the terror mongers, by hanging them in public on ever light post in the country. They can provide swift Islamic justice to the uncivilized and unwashed masses.

#965 Posted by CoolAL on December 9, 2008 2:36:43 pm

[[
Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheded in Pakistan by Pakistanis. They have the a**h**e responsible arrested AND convicted and is probably living better & more securely now under the protection of the ISI and Pak Army.
]]

:-) that is what Pakistan was created for, to help muslims live happily in pure muslim way... So that guy is so happy to be convicted by Pakistanis... Pakistan can always ask USA/India to question perpetrators in their presence, later if you convict them they can ask to put them in their jails, so they can let them enjoy the fruits of being a pakistani terrorist??? And untill people tell them striaght-forwardly (arm-twisting way), they think that everybody believes in their deception.

OK, Let us take stock of Paki justice....

Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheded in Pakistan by Pakistanis. They have the a**h**e responsible arrested AND convicted and is probably living better & more securely now under the protection of the ISI and Pak Army.

Let Zardari & others tapdance their way out of that one.

Finally, India will do what is necessary to inflict maximum damage to Pakis and their puppets while sustaining minimum possible damage to themselves. If it means waiting for an opportune time to strike, then that is what will happen.

At this point ALL options are on the table. Overt & covert strikes. Getting military aid cut off...allowing the paki soldiers to get shaheeded fighting allah's worriers on the western front. Who knows we may even put all our consulates to better use.

The only people talking about war are people here on chowk and the internet and the media, we serve a useful purpose...it will keep you all guessing.

However, I recognize that we stand the risk of absolute military and pure geniuses like Romair and HP to out think us poor "Dal & Bhaaji Eaters". Romair is probably already meeting with Obama and asking him to fire Hilary and appoint him as the secretary of state while simultaneously getting appointed as the UN secretary general and the Paki Chief of Army. I mean with his IQ and management skills this should be child's play for him. He of course has HP's help who is several thinktanks rolled into one.

WOW!!! How can anyone stand a chance against this. I have heard that they are so bright that people have to wear welding glasses to see them. Also, the air around them gets so hot that if they step onto a balloon it rises naturally.

I am afraid -- very very afraid to be honest -- but I guess we have no choice......

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

ha ha ha, array aha_snark bhai, the Pakistan state is said to be the only state that talks with a gun to its own head.

That's why there is no point in talking to any one interested in Pakistani state (except to preserve and sequester nuclear weapons etc).

-------------

What would Pakistani state do as its people begin to move away from it? Launch a nuclear attack on India because India does not want to have anything to do with it economically?

And if that is true, should such a state, living right next door, not be helped melt away (instead of being allowed to get stronger) when it is at its most vulnerable?

This is the time. All the stars are aligned for a beneficient new regional paradigm if India stepped foward and took a bold ncessary step.

Times won't wait for India. Either India decides now, and acts over the next 10-20 years, or both we and people living under the heels of Pakistani state will suffer forever - wasting decade after decade with an actor that is neither a state nor is stateless. Let's all work to replace it with something more rational.

Muhammad Ajmal Amir gives all the details of him and all the terrorists with him. He has given pretty detailed description.

Confessions of a dangerous mind

DNA - Mumbai - Confessions of a dangerous mind - Daily News & Analysis

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1212765

I have resided in Faridkot, Dinalpur tehsil, Ukada district, Suba Punjab state, Pakistan since my birth. I studied up to class IV in a government school. After leaving school in 2000, I went to stay with my brother in Tohit Abad mohalla, near Yadgar Minar in Lahore. I worked as a labourer at various places till 2005, visiting my native once in a while. In 2005, I had a quarrel with my father. I left home and went to Ali Hajveri Darbar in Lahore, where boys who run away from home are given shelter. The boys are sent to different places for employment.



One day a person named Shafiq came there and took me with him. He was from Zhelam and had a catering business. I started working for him for Rs120 per day. Later, my salary was increased to Rs200 per day. I worked with him till 2007. While working with Shafiq, I came in contact with one Muzzafar Lal Khan, 22. He was from Romaiya village in Alak district in Sarhad, Pakistan. Since we were not getting enough money, we decided to carry out robbery/dacoity to make big money. So we left the job.



We went to Rawalpindi, where we rented a flat. Afzal had located a house for us to loot… We required some firearms for our mission... While we were in search of firearms, we saw some LeT stalls at Raja Bazaar in Rawalpindi on the day of Bakri-id. We then realised that even if we procured firearms, we would not be able to operate them. Therefore, we decided to join LeT for weapons training.

There were 32 trainees in the camp. Sixteen were selected for a confidential operation by one Zaki-ur-Rehman, alias Chacha, but three of them ran away from the camp.
Chacha sent the remaining 13 with a person called Kafa to the Muridke camp again.


At Muridke, we were taught swimming and made familiar with the life of fishermen at sea… We were given lectures on the working of Indian security agencies. We were shown clippings highlighting atrocities on Muslims in India. After the training, we were allowed to go to our native places. I stayed with my family for seven days. I then went to the LeT camp at Muzaffarabad. The 13 of us were present for training.
Then, on Zaki-ur-Rehman’s instructions, Kafa took us to the Muridke camp. The training continued for a month. We were given lectures on India and its security agencies, including RAW. We were also trained to evade security personnel. We were instructed not to make phone calls to Pakistan after reaching India.


The names of the persons present for the training are: n Mohd Azmal, alias Abu Muzahid n Ismail, alias Abu Umar n Abu Ali n Abu Aksha n Abu Umer n Abu Shoeb n Abdul Rehman (Bada) n Abdul Rehman (Chhota) n Afadulla n Abu Umar


After the training, Chacha selected 10 of us and formed five teams of two people each on September 15. I and Ismail formed a team; its codename was VTS. We were shown Azad Maidan in Mumbai on Google Earth’s site on the internet… We were shown a film on VT railway station. The film showed commuters during rush hours. We were instructed to carry out firing during rush hours — between 7 am and 11 am and between 7 pm and 11 pm. Then we were to take some people hostage, take them to the roof of some nearby building and contact Chacha, who would have given us numbers to contact media people and make demands. This was the strategy decided upon by our trainers. The date fixed for the operation was September 27. However, the operation was cancelled for some reason. We stayed in Karachi till November 23.


The other teams were: 2nd team: a) Abu Aksha; b) Abu Umar; 3rd team: a) Abdul Rehman (Bada); b) Abu Ali; 4th team: a) Abdul Rehman (Chotta); b) Afadulla; 5th team: a) Abu Shoeb; b) Abu Umer.


We reached the LeT office and told a person that we wanted to join LeT. He noted down our names and address and told us to come the next day. The next day, there was another person with him. He gave us Rs200 and some receipts. Then he gave us the address of a place called Marqas Taiyyaba, Muridke, and told us to go to there. It was an LeT training camp. We went to the place by bus. We showed the receipts at the gate of the camp. We were allowed inside… Then we were taken to the actual camp area. Initially, we were selected for a 21 days’ training regimen called Daura Sufa. From the next day, our training started.

The daily programme was as follows: 4.15 am — Wake-up call and thereafter Namaz; 8 am — Breakfast; 8.30 am to 10 am — Lecture on Hadis and Quran by Mufti Sayyed; 10 am to noon - Rest; Noon to 1 pm - Lunch break; 1 pm to 4 pm - Rest; 4 pm to 6 pm - PT; instructor: Fadulla; 6 pm to 8 pm - Namaz and other work; 8 pm to 9 pm - Dinner


After Daura Sufa, we were selected for another training programme called Daura Ama. This was also for 21 days. We were taken to Mansera in Buttal village, where we were trained in handling weapons.
The daily programme was as follows: 4.15 am to 5 am - Wake-up call and thereafter Namaz; 5 am to 6 am - PT; instructor: Abu Anas; 8 am - Breakfast; 8.30 am to 11.30 am - Weapons training; trainer: Abdul Rehman; weapons: AK-47, Green-O, SKS, Uzi gun, pistol, revolver; 11.30 am to Noon - rest; Noon to 1 pm - Lunch break; 1 pm to 2 pm - Namaz; 2 pm to 4 pm - Rest; 4 pm to 6 pm - PT; 6 pm to 8 pm - Namaz and other work; 8 pm to 9 pm - Dinner.
After the training, we were told that we will begin the next stage involving advanced training. But for that, we were told, we had to do some khidmat for two months (khidmat is a sort of service in the camp as per trainees’ liking). We agreed. After two months, I was allowed to go to meet my parents. I stayed with my parents for a month.
Then I went to an LeT camp in Shaiwainala, Muzaffarabad, for advanced training...



We were taken to Chelabandi pahadi area for a training programme, called Daura Khas, of three months. It involved handling weapons, using hand grenade, rocket launchers and mortars.
The daily programme was as follows: 4.15 am to 5 am - Wake-up call and thereafter Namaz; 5 am to 6 am - PT; instructor: Abu Mawiya; 8 am - Breakfast; 8.30 am to 11.30 am - Weapons training, handling of all weapons and firing practices with the weapons, training on handling hand grenade, rocket-launchers and mortars, Green-O, SKS, Uzi gun, pistol, revolver; trainer: Abu Mawiya; 11.30 am to 12 noon - rest; Noon to 1 pm - Lunch break; 1 pm to 2 pm - Namaz; 2 pm to 4 pm - Weapons training and firing practice; lecture on Indian security agencies; 4 pm to 6 pm - PT; 6 pm to 8 pm - Namaz and other work; 8 pm to 9 pm - Dinner


On November 23, the teams left from Azizabad in Karachi, along with Zaki-ur-Rehman and Kafa. We were taken to the nearby seashore… We boarded a launch. After travelling for 22 to 25 nautical miles we boarded a bigger launch. Again, after a journey of an hour, we boarded a ship, Al-Huseini, in the deep sea. While boarding the ship, each of us was given a sack containing eight grenades, an AK-47 rifle, 200 cartridges, two magazines and a cellphone.
Then we started towards the Indian coast. When we reached Indian waters, the crew members of Al-Huseini hijacked an Indian launch. The crew of the launch was shifted to Al-Huseini. We then boarded the launch. An Indian seaman was made to accompany us at gunpoint; he was made to bring us to the Indian coast. After a journey of three days, we reached near Mumbai’s shore. While we were still some distance away from the shore, Ismail and Afadulla killed the Indian seaman (Tandel) in the basement of the launch. Then we boarded an inflatable dinghy and reached Badhwar Park jetty.
I then went along with Ismail to VT station by taxi. After reaching the hall of the station, we went to the toilet, took out the weapons from our sacks, loaded them, came out of the toilet and started firing indiscriminately at passengers. Suddenly, a police officer opened fire at us. We threw hand grenades towards him and also opened fire at him.
Then we went inside the railway station threatening the commuters and randomly firing at them. We then came out of the railway station searching for a building with a roof.



But we did not find one. Therefore, we entered a lane. We entered a building and went upstairs. On the third and fourth floors we searched for hostages but we found that the building was a hospital and not a residential building. We started to come down. That is when policemen started firing at us. We threw grenades at them.



While coming out of the hospital premises, we saw a police vehicle passing. We took shelter behind a bush. Another vehicle passed us and stopped some distance away. A police officer got off from the vehicle and started firing at us. A bullet hit my hand and my AK-47 fell out of my hand. When I bent to pick it up another bullet hit me on the same hand. Ismail opened fire at the officers in the vehicle. They got injured and firing from their side stopped. We waited for a while and went towards the vehicle.



There were three bodies in the vehicle. Ismail removed the bodies and drove the vehicle. I sat next to him. Some policemen tried to stop us. Ismail opened fire at them. The vehicle had a flat tyre near a big ground by the side of road. Ismail got down from the vehicle, stopped a car at gunpoint and removed the three lady passengers from the car. Since I was injured, Ismail carried me to the car. He then drove the car. We were stopped by policemen on the road near the seashore. Ismail fired at them, injuring some policemen. The police also opened fire at us. Ismail was injured in the firing. The police removed us from the vehicle and took us to the same hospital. In the hospital, I came to know that Ismail had succumbed to injuries.


My statement has been read to me and explained in Hindi, and it has been correctly recorded.

You're not suggesting war??? Eklavya, this is a country that is so imbued with the idea of India wanting to break it up that even a hoax caller can cause it to go to wartime alert! A country that starts making threats of nuclear suicide if some random hotheads in India stroke their turgid wish-fulfillment fantasies.

And it's this country that you think you can just "destabilise" and break up ?

It might be helpful to keep in mind one more thing:

None of this state's traditional 'friends' came forward to help it recently. Once it gets in even further significant trouble, and Iran and Afghanistan stand to directly benefit from its disappearance, and if ideally, though not necessarily, china can be brought to be table, this faux state will have absolutely NOWHERE to turn. It can keep sending its citizens to kill Indians but how many and how often can it kill as the ground from under its own feet begins to slip away?


----------

Even saudi arabia and turkey and other sundry islamist forces might not come to its rescue. I have a feeling they have all had their fill of this state, its global ventures, and may be ready to let go of it.

Aha, that is a good question, to which only experts in the field of nuclear weaponary can provide an answer.

Does the United States have any control/say over those weapons? As the state begins to crumble in five years, US/India/Russia etc might have to work jointly to contain/sequester those weapons. The US will not leave those weapons alone just because the state begins to melt away. (they won't like it either, but that is why dealing US-India rlationships will have to be managed within the framework of a comprehensive new regional program.)

In a nutshell,

1. Our national costs of continuing with same failed paradigm of the last 60 years are too high

2. Our opportunity to help fashion a better alternative for all is too large to miss and may never come again

3. There is always some risk, none greater than in letting things slide as they are now.

eklavya, i'm still sceptical of your plan. What is your plan for detecting and sequestering nuclear materiel?

This is not the time to be squeamish or cowardly. After all, we are not even suggesting war.

Just make Pakistan economically unviable in every way possible. Raise its costs in every way we can without folliwng its own or Hindu liberal model - mumbai.

GT, nothing to with my fuse. :)

-------------------

This is a time of great opportunity to bring down a state that has failed its own people and has been a source of existential struggle against India.

NOT to take that opportunity will be a crime against Indian people as well as against people currently deprived of their rightful opportunities by Pakistani 'state.'

Pakistani state needs to be replaced by a more logical arrangement, and this is the only time to do it.

Kaal bhai,

It seems that your fuse has snapped again? Or is about to?

aha, the problem with trusting someone with the wits of a fox is that he or she is as likely to outwit you as cooperate with you (even if the fox was able to overpower the fierce lions and tigers and leopards not known to ever change their colors).

Given the stakes involved, and game-changing, epoch-creating opportunity we have, everyone in the region has, should we squander it potentially, again, on the word of a known fox?

hamidm2

yes, I agree completely that to have muslims feel that they need to make these public, baroque displays is almost as worrying as silence on terror on their part would be.

We live in baroque, brutish times, however, and just as I have no objections at being seen as comical, if dialogue ensues, I think that broad symbolism, political theatre and broad messages, even if theyre a bit performative are welcome in these times if they serve to a) silence or quieten those who would implicate all Indian Muslims in the attacks and call for retaliation against them and b) send a broader message to those claiming to fight for Muslim's rights that terrorism is not an weapon that is acceptable to those they claim to fight for.

Don't you agree?

eklavya

your call for the destabilisation of a nuclear state, with no clear plan as to how one will safeguard nuclear materiel during such an exercise makes it doubly disturbing.

as far as i can see, your proposition hinges on the assumption that the government of pakistan cannot and will not disarm elements linked with terrorism in India.

Its clear that Musharraf made huge concessions on Kashmir - no 2 other rulers would have made the concessions he has made, alone. Zardari has actually hinted at moving further, with his talk about offering a NFU deal. So the position of the Pakistani state is not static by far.

One thing that we should credit Zardari with is political acumen and the wits of a fox, to so deftly outmaneuver so many constituencies. From the mullahs to the PML(N) to the lawyers' movement/Aitzaz Ahsan, he has had his way with all of them - and it's only been 10 months since he took office.

Considering that we bore several years of a bumbling Nawaz Sharif (who almost misused his Heavy Mandate to make himself Amir-ul-Momineen) and bore almost a decade of a stultifying dictatorship, and that Zardari has only grown stronger as time has passed, vis-a-vis his enemies in the military and on the right.

Would it not be worth your while to suspend your final condemnations of the state ? Let's see how much dumm Zardari has in his pichwada, hm?

aha_snark

The response of Indian Muslims (and of Hindus too, overall) has been one of the best things to have happened.

The last thing we want to do is to accuse THEM of perpetrating these crimes by tying them too closely to Pakistanis who actually did do it. This urge we must avoid, no matter how beneficial it might seem to different groups at this time.

No one can force Pakistan to change their attitude towards India due to their bomb. Pakistanis have to ultimately realize the benefits deep down in their hearts and do what needs to be done.

However, we can expedite that process by not doing any business with them to convey our narazgi. In addition to no import/export, no cricket, no visas, no corporate alliances, India can also exert pressure on many global corporations by saying 'either you are with us or against us'. Most would not like to give up huge Indian market for smaller Pakistani market. All it needs is a set of stronger balls than our rulers have.

We don't need a war with Pakistan (we can't win it anyway). We just need to apply enough pressure on our own businessmen who might worry about that last ounce of profit slip away due to restrictions. I say expose these guys and shame them.

"motivations and morals have very little, if any, effect on actual consequences"

I am perfectly willing to go by the standard of actual consequences( in so far as they can be calculated).

But I am not willing to adopt, as you seem to imply, policies whose only consequences are either amoral or immoral.
And just to clear when I say morality I mean it wholisitically as referring to all the proper ends of action( therby necessarily encapsulating legitimate interests).

snark mian,

.... i applaud your efforts to maintain communal harmony and preventing another massacre, but you appear to be rather comical .......... here is another view from an india moslem:

THE Mumbai attacks have opened a season of rare confabulations among Indian Muslims, but these cannot be described as introspective. Let me explain why. Every other day there are invitations on the mobile phone or email by Muslim groups or individuals to join their discussions. I haven’t been to one yet, but their cogitations have so far produced band-aid to cover a deep gash.

And TV channels are deriving easy pleasure from the fulminations. A few channels showed a typical scoop in motion at the expense of the image of Indian Muslims. For example, they repeatedly telecast sound bites of a mullah in Mumbai who seemed so outraged because the terrorists were Muslims that he refused to have them buried in the community’s cemetery.

Having thus declared this witless cleric as a model Indian Muslim, the channels didn’t feel the need to inform us what then became of the bodies of the gunmen. Their titillation over, the anchors couldn’t care less if by showing an ignorant man’s rant they had applauded the travesty of a civil society. They should know that no Constitution, other than perhaps the Taliban’s, endorses the abuse of dead bodies. The henna-haired mullah needs to be made aware of this.

In this moment of national grief let’s not turn sorrow into vaudeville of jingoists. It’s not patriotic to deny terrorists a quiet burial, and the din over it most certainly doesn’t solve the problem at hand – of isolating and arresting the growth of mindless killers. Bury those boys somewhere in unmarked graves and let them rest there so that we can move on to more urgent firefighting. Don’t provoke silly comments and pass them on as patriotic.

The other symbolic gesture that Delhi’s Muslim “leaders� have reportedly agreed to is to wear a black armband on Eidul Azha to mark their anguish at the carnage in Mumbai. Nothing could be more cosmetic, meaningless and distractive than to make the token observation.


http://www.dawn.com/weekly/jawed/jawed.htm

New voice of moderation

India’s Islamic clergy and political leadership deserve applause for the dignity and steadying restraint they have shown in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Mumbai, when emotions ran high. It would have been all too easy for any one of the denominations of the wide variety of Islamic leadership in India to have succumbed to religious rhetoric. Instead, the moderation from the community as a whole has stood out with distinction from, say, the hysteria of the UK cleric Anjem Choudary, who praised the terrorists, saying any Britons or Americans among the dead were targeted legitimately because they should not have gone to India. Their behaviour also contrasts sharply with the Bharatiya Janata Party, which transparently sought to build political capital out of the event. India’s Islamic clergy, which wields considerable influence on believers, chose to distance itself from radical Islam, joining thousands of ordinary Indians regardless of religious hue, in mourning Mumbai’s dead. It was a compelling reminder that religion and nationality are not incompatible.

A joint statement from the All-India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat, the umbrella body of Muslim organisations, also unconditionally condemned the attacks and urged people not to exploit the situation for political ends. It is notable that no matching statement appeared from any saffron group, including the Mumbai-centric Shiv Sena — although the need for restraint in a city that has seen much communal violence in the past decade-and-a-half is urgent. In a world in which the rhetoric and weaponry of Islamic fundamentalism are drowning out moderate Islam, India’s Muslim leadership demonstrated courage by declining to bury the nine terrorists who were killed in encounters with commandos in Muslim graveyards and calling for a Black Eid at which none of the customary celebrations were to be observed as a mark of respect for the Mumbai tragedy. Indeed, it is in India, which has emerged as a communal vortex in recent years, that the voice of moderate Islam has been heard most forcefully in recent times. Just over two weeks before the attacks on Mumbai, over 6,000 Muslim leaders converged on Hyderabad — including from the radical Deobandi school — and approved a fatwa against terrorism.

It could be argued that such conciliatory moves are merely reactive and only to be expected from a religious minority in India that stands threatened by an increasingly assertive religious majority. This may undoubtedly be a motive. It can also be argued that the Muslim community’s leadership has failed the community at several points in the last half-century, leading it as a consequence into a succession of cul-de-sacs, especially as the sufi tradition that has been predominant in Indian Islam has been challenged by other schools like the Wahhabis. So it is gratifying that, even if somewhat belatedly, the voices of moderation have begun to be heard loud and clear. Indeed, it is rare in a religious conflict for the radicalisation of one denomination to be countered with moderation from the other, a claim that in fact the Hindu community was able to make for so long. If the various Islamic groups overlook canonical divergences and demonstrate a unity of purpose, it is possible to hope that the increasing distance between the two communities that has been evident for two decades can begin to be closed. Indian politics has increasingly been fraught with a shrill stridency. India’s Muslim leadership has shown that moderation and mutual respect and understanding have not lost their relevance, and can therefore be reclaimed in the political space.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/editorial-new-voicemod erat ion/23/56/342767/

Re: # 944

Hamidm sahib:

" ... i think that pakistan has to get rid of these terrorists, ..."

Pakistan has to ready to throw those rotten eggs out, and then go for selected target shooting of chickens which have been laying rotten eggs. There are simply too many chickens in Pakistan laying these rotten eggs that even if you negotiate with India with few to keep India under check. Before this to happen, Pakistanis need to realize Indian Kashmir is not a dream, it is the nightmare that so has brought Pakistan to this cross road.

Satish Chandra sahib is still too hopeful that 'civilians' will "tell" Pakistani military anything.

This hope (which has absolutely no justification) can be everyone's undoing at this critical juncture.

We must move beyond hoping for unlikely pigs to finally fly as promised before to actually taking direct action - MAXIMIZING EVERY POSSIBLE COST FOR PAKISTANI STATE, economically, most importantly.

ANYthing that reduces any economic cost for Pakistan on any front is simply an unfriendly act toward India and lives and liberties of Indian citizens.

---------

There is an american angle to it, which must be actively managed. Our abilities against them are limited but we are not without option. They too are looking for a "comprehensive regional solution." Let this be it. There can be a meeting of minds.

Re: # 943

bubba mian,

... don't get me wrong ...... i think that pakistan has to get rid of these terrorists, not because they killed a few insignifcant madrasis in bombay or mumbai or whatever you are calling it these days, but because they are killing pakis in karachi, lahore and pindi ........ also, it has to be done by the paki state without any nonsensical dictation from vegetarians and other riff raff .......... if they need indian participation they should summon them to islamabad ........

.... as for all these cbm's, cricket and other cross border footsie, i have always been against it - it is nonsense! ........ all that can wait until the core issue is settled ...... most americans love cuban cigars, but they have been doing without them for a long long time ........ we can wait too

Re: # 942

bubba mian,

....okay, bring it on ..... that's all folks!

...... what flea, what flea soup!

Hamid mian,

Let us see if you can counter this daal-khor's cogent argument:

"Pakistan's involvement with terrorist activities directed against us can only be curbed by making it extremely painful to pursue such a policy. This can be achieved only through use of all the instrumentalities of state power and could entail the following specific measures:

* Suspension of the composite dialogue process in order to make it clear that there can be no business as usual with Pakistan till it mends its ways;
* Undertaking of a sustained and well prepared campaign to project Pakistan as it is, notably a terrorist state, so that harsh international sanctions are imposed on it;
* Termination of many of the CBMs, particularly those designed to help Pakistan economically. In fact, we should not hesitate to take actions that undermine Pakistan's economy
* Exploitation of the faultlines of Pakistan as it has consistently done vis a vis India;
* Serve notice for the renegotiation of the Indus Waters Treaty, thus indicating our resolve to use water as a pressure point against Pakistan; in the meantime minimise the release of Indus waters to Pakistan through maximum use of water in India as permitted under the Treaty
* Address terrorist outfits through covert action and if need be through focused military strikes.

Some of the arguments adduced against such robust action are that the US will force Pakistan to give us satisfaction, that we need to distinguish between the civilian regime and the military in Pakistan and not penalise the former, and that Pakistan is a nuclear weapon state. In this context, the following may be mentioned:

* We should not expect the US to pull our chestnuts out of the fire. Their record hardly inspires confidence. The US promises much and delivers little. We must not be satisfied by the cosmetic measures that Pakistan may take such as the arrest of the odd LeT commander or a raid on a LeT camp in PoK. India must ensure the complete shutdown of the infrastructure of terror in Pakistan.
* While there is some merit in making a distinction between the military and the civilian regime in the ultimate analysis reactions to Pakistan have to be dictated by what its government, whether civilian or military, does. Everyone knows that, in the instant case, the military calls the shots in Pakistan and, therefore, the regime in that country is civilian only in name. The civilians in Pakistan can hardly expect India to fight their battles for them against their military. It is up to them to tell the military to refrain from patronising terrorists not only because it hurts India but Pakistan as well.
* Pakistan's nuclear capability should not push us into a paralysis of action. India, too, is a nuclear weapon state and use of such weapons against us is unlikely because of our deterrent capabilities.

Finally, let us recognise that no one is going to fight our battles for us, that only we can safeguard our security and integrity through our own actions, and that any outside help, whether by a super power or the international community, can only be supplementary to our own efforts."

Satish Chandra is former deputy National Security Advisor.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/dec/09mumterror-pakistan-should- be-made-to-pay-the-price-for-terror.htm

Re: # 926 publius

motivations and morals have very little, if any, effect on actual consequences.

We need a correct, updated:

NOW OR NEVER!

thamedji, not at all. There is no insult in learning from anyone. :)

----------------

Om, look we are not Pakistanis. We must play by our rules. We must limit the loss of life as much as possible. We DON'T want a Karachi for a Mumbai. That is for Pakistanis and Hindu liberals who believe that killings of innocents is the right and just way to address political differences.

We simply have a better vision - of a peaceful, progressive, friendly region that is liberated to best utilize the potentials of its good and hard working people, potential that has been bottled up and wasted for the last 60 years.

Sure there will be some 'Pakistanis' who even if they could see what we want, would continue on their current path. We will hopefully have much smaller area for them, and much more limited set of operational, financial abilities, with greater specificity of responsibility.

But there are millions upon millions of people trapped in what is now called Pakistan who would prefer the option we offer, even if they do not see it right now, of freedom.

Instead of doing a Karachi for a Mumbai (as Hindu liberals who think in terms of justice might suggest), we need to offer freedom.

That offer will not come without cost to us - in terms of money, effort, and many more lost lives as Pakistani state goes berserk and begins to do its very worst, but THIS IS THE TIME WHEN THE STATE IS NEARLY BANKRUPT to push it over the edge.

Few years down the line, it will be much more difficult to deal with this state.

I repeat, COOPERATION WITH PAKSITANI STATE AT THIS point in time IS A CRIME AGAINST India and Indian citizens.

eklavya: i think om prakash just insulted you by saying your proposal is a mirror image of pakis wishes.

What are you going to do about that? How? And will you need GTs help in liberating Pakistani energies, hanging criminals engaged in brutal acts of cooperation? When? How so?

Eklavya, not too bad. Your proposal is the mirror image of what many Pakis wish for India. They can't wait for Assam, Kashmir, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and what have you to break off from the Union. They will faciliate whatever they can in this cause of freedom. If there's some collateral damage, then be it so.

Assuming anyone can make out what any of that means, given it has more typos than words. :)

Agreed, our proposals vary only in details, and those details need to be flushed out.

Ideally, my goal would be to

(1) liberate the energies and potentialities of people who do not wish continue down the same line Paksitani state has taken for the last 60 years.

(2) limit their abilities in the unfortunate case they continued to persist on current paths. Or of those who chose to stay the Pakistani state.

Broadly, the goal shold be to replace the Pakistani state (or leave it to Punjabis should they so wish to continue this down this path) with smaller units. These can either be independent or can be absorbed into more rational other larger units such as Iran or Afghanistan. India should not and must not covet/accept any territories just to keep itself honest, but we should aim for friendly relations with all those units that decide not to persist the Paksitani route.

How do we achieve that goal? Haven't considered that much, but what I see is a bankrupt state. It's EVERY COST OF SURVIVAL should be RAISED.

That means COOPERATING WITH PAKISTAN AT THIS STAGE is a CRIME against India and Indian citizens.

We do that for 10 years, I think the Paksitani state will being to come apart. Of course, it will go haywire and begin to do its very worset in its death struggle, but we should take that as cost of creating a saner, more productive environment for all.

Yaar kaal,

Am I making the point or you are? Am very confused these days. Anyway, why do I make a point .... why not something like I sketch a picture?

tahmed
I don't know about our charming company. Most of us are hindus after all.
I am starting to think Pakis are a different breed altogether and you sir, are an exemplar of that.

"will not mind altenative arrangements, IF we could create options for people and put resources behind them."

Eklavya, you will have to spell out very specifically the alternative arrangements and how India acn convince Pakistanis to accept them before I can judge whether that will work or not.

"An open assault or attack will naturally unite people who have no reason to unite (other than fear) but if you offer them incentives, outcomes better for all can be promoted over the long haul"

But remember that we are talking of a very very long term policy(lasting decades if necessary). Unity is something that lasts only so long. Eventually it is internal issues that dominate because people are ultimately focussed on their lives ( the success and failure of it).

And in any case the goal is not disunity as such but something else.

Actually, GT makes a very important point.

The nature of Indian state is such that it is limited in what it can do. It is very open to Pakistani mindset, which is shared by Hamid Gul and LeT. It basically says: Terrorism? Arrest Advani!!

So a major part of responding to Pakistan has to be responding to Pakistani mindset. Can we do that? How?

Publius bhai jan,

"In India's case the main reason being lack of clarity about what needs to be done."

I always suspected so. Now that kaal, you and me are here India need not worry ... there is going to be clarity on top of clarity. I really want these guys to hire me. I hope they give me a flat in R.K.Puram. Great place to have dope. Our first act will be to covertly get rid of hamidm ... he donates big time to the dawa ngo.

#928 om_prakash: "Begin with cutting off cooperation with Pak at all levels, including people to people"

Oh no please no!! That is cruel!! What will Pakis do without your charming company!!

The "crackdown" on LET is just an eyewash. It was a symbolic action meant to coincide with Zaradari's opinion piece in the NYT, aimed squarely at the US.

If India feels that Pak is not acting in a way that would prevent FUTURE terrorist attacks, then all options should be on the table.

Begin with cutting off cooperation with Pak at all levels, including people to people. It's clear that Pak awam in general sees the terrorist attacks as well deserved and it does no good to continue to humor it. If Indians deserve to be bombed and shot by Pakis in our streets and homes for encouraging (by our indifference) acts that Pakis don't agree with, then Pakis deserve to be bombed by the taliban and oppressed by their military for supporting these terrorists through THEIR inaction. There can be no sympathy.

It would not be immoral to spawn our own actors in Pakistan that helps educate the Paki elites that their lives are not secure either.

Aha_snark, Publius

IMHO, there are two issues.

(1) Realization that while there are many many good people in Pakistan, "Paksitani state" has become irrelevant because it either will not or cannot do anything of any substance as far terrorism against India is concerned.

One can satisfy oneself on this score by talking to as many Pakistanis as one wants, and then seeing what influence they carry within the Pakistani state.

(2) If we reach a conclusion that Pakistani state is irrelevant to stopping (if not actually promoting) terror against India, then what should be our response?

(a) Do we cooperate? With whom and for what purpose?
(b) Do we look for other means and choose the best combination of those.

One thing we should keep in mind is that while Pakistani state is extremely dear to Islamists, some Punjabis, and few others, it is essentially a hollow state (also on the verge of bankruptcy) and at least some "Pakistanis" will not mind altenative arrangements, IF we could create options for people and put resources behind them.

An open assault or attack will naturally unite people who have no reason to unite (other than fear) but if you offer them incentives, outcomes better for all can be promoted over the long haul.

"Do you have any examples in similar situations where increased assault upon a state from an external entity has done anything except unify it against the external entity"

Aha_Snark, the policy is not motivated by attempt to create disunity in Pakistan( were the Russians disunited by US policy). The moral objectives of the policy are Justice and Deterrrence.

Hamidm sahib:

A bania in me would have traded rottent eggs for something better, like long term security.

Re: # 922 snark

publius is talking about "non military" assault... the proverbial bania knife-in-armpit tactics... :)

this paki cry for "co-operation" is just cop-out... pakis don't no help from anybody to cleanup the jihadis they themselves created and nurtured...

paki stupdity knows no bounds...

Re: # 913 publius

What India needs , most of all, is a systematic and prolonged non military assault upon the Pakistani state using every element of statecraft that is available( including covert action).

Do you have any examples in similar situations where increased assault upon a state from an external entity has done anything except unify it against the external entity?

Re: # 918

anil mian,

... bacon or egg - in either case it sounds like a threat ...

Re: # 918

Or, may be these Jihadis are not the eggs Pakistan wants to deliver.

Re: # 916

Was it a stink bomb? Did you serve daal at your party?

Really... or is because I quoted often used choice of bacon and egg?

Do you really believe that India or Pakistan press that button, party or no party?

Re: # 913

Any co-operation that India can get from Pak army within that paradigm is welcome. Any co-operation that is offered in lieu of that paradigm should be thrown back in their faces.

Zigackly!

Re: # 911

anil mian,

"1. Pakistani government wanted to be the pig who is taken to the slaughter house, rather than the chicken who lays the egg, as India wanted them to be."

.... thanks for reminding me why i threw the bomb party

"If Indians were not doing so, then it must have been because they could not"

Not at all GT, one may not to do a thing because of many reasons.

In India's case the main reason being lack of clarity about what needs to be done.

Publius bhaijan,

"What India needs , most of all, is a systematic and prolonged non military assault upon the Pakistani state using every element of statecraft that is available( including covert action)."

1. If Indians were not doing so, then it must have been because they could not.

2. If they were doing so, then they were/are bad at it.

Where does that leave intelligent and patriotic Indians like you?

"Who is against co-operation? India should co-operate if Pakistan is serious"

A strategy cannot be based on lies. As long as Indians continue to believe the foolishness that Jihad against India is now an unintended consequence they will continue to propogate such idotic notions such as "co-operation".

What India needs , most of all, is a systematic and prolonged non military assault upon the Pakistani state using every element of statecraft that is available( including covert action).

Any co-operation that India can get from Pak army within that paradigm is welcome. Any co-operation that is offered in lieu of that paradigm should be thrown back in their faces.

Re: # 910

Who is against co-operation? India should co-operate if Pakistan is serious.

BTW, the Indian government inspite of being bitten 100 times is still extending its hand hoping this time, somehow, the experience will be different.

Hamidm sahib:

Consider this:

1. Pakistani government wanted to be the pig who is taken to the slaughter house, rather than the chicken who lays the egg, as India wanted them to be.

2. Therefore, Rice, MaCain & Company struck this formula to let Pakistan the way it wants.

3. Do you think has Pakistan considered what if 200,000 strong LeT volunteera, plus their sympathizers, admirers and supporter in Pakistani army and ISI constitute a decent strenght in percentage ( = 20%)?

4. What can they do against Pakistani establishment that Taliban & Company could not do?

5. My only request is that please do not blame India and the U.S., for this choice that Pakistan made.

6. Enemy within wants to take Pakistan back to stone age, what can others do to bring it back to present and put it back on the course back to future.

5. Please do not spend fours weeks listening to Mian Masadjis, or HP sahibs while you are in Pakistan. Please give more Rs. 10,000 for the right cause like that school, and not to blow them in marriages.