Chowk, Jay, a Ditch and I

tahmad :

I find your observations to be quite true. Indeed, the way you describe the world coming together is quite a possibility. But taking the US of A as an example of the melting pot that we are dealing with, I see quite a few things wrong with the model. The problem simply stated is : assimilation vs. annihilation. From macroscopic levels to microscopic levels, the only way of survival is identification with a particular kind. (For ex: the bank mergers; hewlettpackard + compaq; cliques within a high school vs. a boy going on a shootout spree). The only way to survive it seems, is to identify with something else. In economic terms it means mergers, in social terms it means forming groups. Indeed the group/company that is big in impressions/strength will come out on top. The rest will be cursing their stars.

Ofcourse, some say this is an extremely healthy thing, meritocracy, competition, these are all healthy for the evolution of a man. But I see the toll it takes on people in the current generation who are left to the sidelines, and it isnt very pretty. Some re align themselves and form ``interest`` groups to combat such ideology, some become extremely caustic and even sadistic, others just lose themselves.

So the question I have for you : What do you define as progress? Is survival of the fittest a good philosophy? Is it worth it to put people through misery to acheive this progress?

It would indeed be nice to live a society that you describe which has no discrimination but currently there are issues that need to be addressed. Maybe they will disappear over time, but that only time will tell.

Times` (Asia) selection of 20 greatest men had taken place through voting, and the choice they had given included Muhammad Ali Jinnah.... at one point during the voting Jinnah was ahead of Gandhi by a 100 votes.... and then Indians got their email circuit going ... after all who can beat the population bomb.... I know because I got an email from the local Indian association urging me to vote for Gandhi...

Naive little fools like Rsaxena can be happy all they want at this triumph.... but beyond this, the huge Indian population really amounts to nothing.

Urstruly,

I personally think your plan is workable if

1) No discrimination is carried out against Non muslim Minorities...

2) Leadership Positions dont bar anyone.

I dont think anyone would have any qualms with what you have suggested.

-YLH

Urstruly,

I personally think your plan is workable if

1) No discrimination is carried out against Non muslim Minorities...

2) Leadership Positions dont bar anyone.

I dont think anyone would have any qualms with what you have suggested.

-YLH

Fallacies, and invalid arguments:

Bong Dongs` fallacies:

What I have seen so far of the Indian interactors?? so far on this board is very sad and shameful. Bong Dong is accusing me of claiming 1 Muslim = 10 Hindus when I had only presented the facts by a Hindu Indian statistician ... and in which both sides had christians and parsis ... had he contended that I am saying 1 Pakistani = 10 Indians ... that would have been different not that I claimed that, but my secular contentions were hurt.....

Veeresh`s Arival:

Out goes Harimau, incomes Veeresh, welcome back... maybe now you will give the UNCHR figures that you promised....

Rsaxena`s erroneous False Claims:

Rsaxena makes a claim that `the sources you will present will be Pakistani Newspapers` .... ironically enough, I am the one who always presents unbiased western sources, whereas Rsaxena has seldom presented anything more than Hindu Propaganda... in any event, Rsaxena failed to produce his Newspaper quotes.

Rsidhar`s impassioned appeal:

Rsidhar asks me to put up the URL of Gandhi`s comments... ironically enough he misses the fact that I am quoting from Gandhi ji`s own works in the 30 Volume `Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi` and that I have presented the complete context... but once again there are blinders on Indian eyes..

He also asks me to present the evidence for Indian History Books saying `India defeated China in the 1962 war and marched on Beijing,` dear sir, I will present to you the evidence for that as soon as Indians present the evidence for K for Kafir and Z for Zalim from Children`s text book, a lie that has been repeated by every responsible Indian from the Prime Minister down to the Indian Consul General in New York.

Anarayan`s Bogus logic:

Ironic as it is people like Anarayan are trying to present some concocted explanation for Yeager`s statements in his biography where he praises wholeheartedly the Pakistan Air Force.... Anarayan contends that Yeager wrote that because he wanted to get the debris of the Migs.... Ironic isnt it that Yeager wrote the book 15 years after the 1971 war, ... Anarayan was Yeager still collecting debris in 1986....

Vicklyer contends:

If equipped and trained IAF is the best in the world.... yes that is exactly why it has not received the same attention as the PAF in the west... and more importantly, IAF lost over a 100 planes in flight in the last 5 years ... 5 years?

Some training you have buster... also please explain why the ratio in the great war that IAF won in 1971... is still 1 Pakistani Plane to 4 Indian Planes?

Once again Indian fallacies, lies and BS have been exposed for everyone to see.

Have a Nice Day

YLH

FACTS

1) Pakistan`s defeat in 1971 was due to the civil war, it was waging against its own people.

2) All reliable sources including country area studies released by the US state department (which are found in every single University Library in the US) on India, and a seperate one on Pakistan contend that 1965 was a stalemate, with credit to Pakistanis for holding out against a numerically superior Air Force and Army.

3) New York Times Coverage of the war of 1965

Archives 6th September-22nd September contends that Pakistani people have stood bravely in wake of aggression...

Re: Godot

Yes, Ahmedis are pious and say 5 prayers regularly but trouble is they themselves conside them different from other muslims, e.g. sunni. Like jew they are kinda exclusivist. Many moons ago an ahmedi girl told me to convert to ahmedia in order to marry her and I asked her how could one muslim convert to become another muslim as conversion to my knowledge, takes place inter-religion not intra-religion!!!

Re: Zafar, #452

Like you, Zafar, destruction of a House of Worship is abhorring to me, irrelevant of whose House it is.

In my post, which was read by some, especially the ignorant ones, the way they ``wanted`` to read it, I was not justifying the destruction of an Ahmadia Mosque in Pakistan by pointing out Babri Masjid. Like rape, there can be no justification for it. But that Jay pointing out Ahmadia Mosque smacks of hypocracy; it is akin to a pot calling the kettle black. That`s all.

Zafar Al-Talib #1657 and 1663:

...twice in the same day!...first you condone drumz` use of ‘choice’ language which is a no no in my book...and then you have the audacity to chastise hamidm my fellow dot club alumnus.....
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
hummmph!

and instead of my customary regards,

.............. & more ...........

t


PS: ...and aren’t you glad I avoided the issue of your propagating ‘un-balanced’ views and that of your apparent fiscal association with RAW!;)

id #1627 When someone on chowk reminds people on the need for respect and appreciation for other nationalities, religions, etc., then that person is striking a blow on behalf of civilized behavior. You therefore have my thanks for reminding your fellow Indian interactors on chowk about this. The same of course goes for Pakistani interactors when discussing Indian culture.

I must disagree though when you refer to Indian vs. Western culture: these concepts belong to the past. In the future cultures based on ethnicity and/or georgraphical boundaries will be no more. The days when one nationality would enslave another nationality are coming to an end as a result of fundamental population shifts that are beyond the power of any nation to change: these shifts are in terms of a declining populations in the west coupled with increasing migration and increasing mobility across the world. We must therefore change our thinking to rise above the divisions of the past and start getting concerned with the real problems that our children and their children will face.

So: while thanking you for expressing appreciation for Pakistanis, I would suggest you take the next step and extend this appreciation to the other 6 billion brothers and sisters on this tiny planet of ours (I would extend that to expressing appreciation to all life on this planet, but then I would simply be repeating what the wise ones have been saying for the past thousands of years).

hamidm #1643:

``you fail to understand that morality and law are one and the same thing ... and since there is no question of morality changing with time and space, how can the laws change ?...... morality is pre-ordained and the laws that govern it cannot and must not be changed .......``

Hamidm, morality and law are two different things. Morality is individual - what is morally acceptable to one (eg eating meat, pork, beef etc) may be immoral to another, whereas the law is the same for everyone in the society. In most societies, laws do reflect the moral values of the dominant section of people - if it is a democracy, then it reflects the morals of the majority... but morals do change and so do laws with time. Eg: our moral views on slavery, child labour, gays etc has changed and with them, laws have changed too.

Hamidm, my problem with your posts is that I read them after skipping others, so I`m not sure of the contect and whether you are joking or serious, in this case I assumed the latter.

Pakistan`s flying ace`s .

This is in reply to certain individuals, prone to gloating over the so called superiority of the PAF vis-à-vis the IAF .

As the certain individuals do not belive in cold logic and belive more on books written by some individuals especially people of fairer complexion .

I am quoting verbatim from ``The Encyclopedia of 20th century warfare ( The complete reference to 20th century air combat) edited by Chris Bishop .

Pg 382-385 .

Wrt to a gentelman by the name of Sql Ldr Mohammed Alam :-

Many of Pakistans victory claims were denied by the Indians, and were later found to be unsubstantiated . Sql Ldr Mohammed Alam was credited with downing 5 Indian hunters in a sigle engagement over Sargodha during the 1965 war, but the IAF lost only 3 hunters that day, two of them to enemy action . Two of the hunter pilots named by the PAF as victims actually flew Mysteres on another strike .

On 1965 War .

……..Indian ground forces launched a counter-offensive which drove the Pakistanis across their border in some places, but generally the war became a blody stalemate, and with 2,763 Indian dead and 6,917 Pakistani dead ( and 350 and 375 tanks destroyed respectively) a cease fire was declared .

…….The PAF lost some 25 Aircraft (11 in air combat), while the Indians lost some 60 (25 in air combat) .

This was an impressive result but simply not good enough .

Pakistan ended the war depleting 17 % of its frontline strength, while India`s losses amounted to less than 10%.

Moreover , the loss rate had begun to even out, and it has been estimated that another three weeks of fighting would have seen the Pakistani losses rising to 33% and India`s losses totalling 15%. Air superiority was not achived and PAF were unable to prevent the IAF fighter bombers and recce Canberras from flying daylight missions to Pakistan .Thus 1965 was an expensive victory for PAF, and one which was tainted by ridiculously exaggerated propaganda which claimed a 4:1 or 5:1 kill ratio .

India realised that it`s Airforce had been something of a glorified flying club for it`s pilots before 1965, and that serious efforts needed to be made to improve operational readiness and training, and to provide even the most basic essentials, like camouflage netting (and even camouflage paint for some of its front-line types !) . By contrast PAF began to belive their own propaganda that the kill : to loss ratio had been about 4:1, rather than actual 2:1, still an impressive achivement, but simply not good enough in a war against India. They were completely unable to perceive that whatever had happened in the air, the war had ended in a draw. They also failed to realize that despite a slightly higher kill tally , the smaller size of their force meant that they could not win a war of attrition with India . Had the war lasted a little longer, the weight of Indian numbers alone would have defeated the PAF, even though India had retained more than half of its forces, in the east against the threat of Chinese intervention . Had India comitted its entire strength the war might have been very different . Alternatively, had India been prepared to allow the war to continue for longer, then its superior numbers would inevitably , have proved telling . Finally the Pakistanis failed to take account of the extent to which they had relied on two factors which the IAF could not take for granted – complete ground-based defensive radar coverage and an adequate supply of air-to-air missiles .Much efforts was expended in India to remedy these deficiencies before 1971 .

Basically the above lines mean that PAF was indeed superior to the IAF in 1965, but not the way most Pakistanis would hope us to believe .

The reasons were not hard to see, Independent India did not concentrate on its Armed Forces till 1965, most of the crew were not well trained and there was a genral disregard for the Armed Forces in the Nehru era, for many reasons including, a military take over .

On 1971 War .

While India`s grip on what had been East Pakistan tightened, the IAF continued to press home attacks against Pakistan itself. The campaingn settled down to a series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar and close-support attacks by fighters, with night attacks against airfields and strategic tragets by B-57s and C-130s(Pakistan), and Canberras and An-12s(India). The PAFs F-6 were employed mainly on defensive combat air patrols over their own base, bit without air superiority the PAF was unable to conduct effective offensive operations, and its attacks were largely ineffective. During IAFs airfield attacks one US and one UN aircraft were damaged in Dacca, while a Canadian airforce Caribou was destroyed at Islamabad, along with US military liason chief Brigadier Chuck Yeagers USAF Beech U-8 light twin .

Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against Pakistan`s forward air bases in the west untill the end of war, and large - scale interdiction and close-support operations were maintained .The PAF played a more limited part in the operations, and was reinforced by F-104 from Jordan, Mirages from an unidentified Middle Eastern ally (probably Libya) and by F-86 from Saudi Arabia . Their arrival helped comouflage the extent of Pakistan`s losses . Libyan F-5s were reportedlydeployed to Sargodha, perhaps as a potential training unit to prepare Pakistani pilots for an influx of more F-5s from Saudi Arabia .

Hostilities officially ended at 14.30 GMT on 17 December, after the fall of Dacca on 15th December .

India claimed large gains in territory in West Pakistan (although pre-war borders were recognised after the war), through the independence of Pakistan`s eastern wing , as Bangladesh, was confirmed .

India flew 1,978 soties in the east and about 4000 sorties in the west, while the PAF flew about 30 and 2,840 respectively . More than 80% of IAFs sorties were close support and interdiction, and abut 65 IAF aircrafts were lost (54 losses were admitted), perhaps as many as 27 of them in air combat . Pakistan lost about 72 aircrafts(51 of them combat types, but admitting ony 25 to enemy action) .

Atleast 16 of the Pakistani lossesand probably 24 fell in aircombat( although only 10 air combat losses wre admitted, not including any F-6s, Mirage-IIIs or, the six jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors ).

But the imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAFs considerbly higher sortie rates, and its emphasis on ground attack missions . On the ground Pakistan suffered most, with 8000 killed amd 25000 wounded while India lost 3000 dead and 12000 wounded . The losses of armoured vehicle were similarly unbalanced . THIS REPRESENTED A MOJOR DEFEAT FOR PAKISTAN .

This I belive is more or less acurate and logical explanation vis-à-vis 1965 and 1971 wars over the sky.

Granted PAF did indeed perform better than IAF in 1965, but 1971 was a tottally different story . The IAF improved by leaps and bounds(learned from its mistakes) and 1971 in all fairness was IAF romping home with a vengence .

Endgame :-

A) The supposed superiority of Pakistani pilots is more a mith than a fact . It`s more a function of fantasies than reality, even otherwise Pakistan as a nation has lived on some fantasy or other from time to time , the latest being a military dictator wanting to create a perfect democracy, but the fantasy part is most Pakistanis including the educated ones believe this crap .

B) PAF was better prepared and trained so they won 1965 over the sky.

C) IAF when equiped with better aircrafts and well trained pilots is as good as anybody else in the world as shown by their domination of 1971 .

D) The IAF MIG-21 accidents that most people talk about are more due to old aiframes than pilots or their training or for that matter maintainance . The life of an airframe of MIG-21 is about 2400 hrs and most of the MIG-21/FL/ML that IAF operates are well beyond that figure . The BIS are relatively new, so have accident rates which are more acceptable by international standards .

And finally the game of chess is all about winning the WAR not small BATTLES .

IAF WON THE WAR …………………….. :-)

Endgame brief:-

IAF till 1965 was not even having a proper ground control radar, due to which it`s aircraft`s could not be vectored to approaching enemy aircrafts, but PAF in contrast had a very good ground based radar system . Also PAF had AAM(air to air missiles), which IAF did not posses .

Also the only mordern aircraft possed by the IAF in 1965 was hunters, rest most of its aircrafts were more fit for museums than flying .

Many of these issues were remedied by the IAF in 1971 and hence better result .

Today technologically IAF is far more advanced as compared to PAF .

Just on something as basic as AAM(air to air missiles), the PAF has only sidewinders (with a range of 10 Km) but does not posses any BVR(Beyond Visual Range) capability . Where as both the Sukoi and Mig –29 posses a BVR capability of 220 KM . This is the main reason why the PAF aircrafts maintained a very healthy distance from the IAF during Kargil .

I really can`t understand why most of the Pakis always talk about the past .

Damit, past is past and what matters is the future .

I only hope and pray may our Airforces never ever fight . May all of us fight economically and in the field of education and research .

And may India always win :-)

@@VICKY_iyer}}

re sattar2 1649

``Even in the good old USA, where the constitution declares all men to be equal...``

The US Constitution makes no such claim. What you are referring to is probably the part of the Declaration of Independence which says that `...all men are CREATED equal`.

It is the height of absurdity, nonetheless, to engage in polemics that puport to compare the US Constitution with other organic laws. Please...Ghazzali, Ibn Khaldun and the rest of them were no James Madisons!

re saxena 1634

Saxenaji, I`ve run into similar problems myself. For whatever reason the NYT believes in milking you for every word read. Please don`t go to a library microfiche (that`s another headache I know too well) just for this. The only thing I can suggest is that you try(in your spare time)an educational institute library that has the PAIS database. It is not that old but is often quite useful. I have not found PAIS as the public library systems but they seem to have it in colleges etc.

If not, I`ll be happy to wait till the next board. Nonetheless, please understand that I have the utmost respect for your thoughts even though often we disagree more than a 180 degrees.

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

Reply RSaxena #1641

“… there will be nothing but a charred piece of radioactive land in place of Pakistan if India ever gets attacked by Pakistan. (Yes, we will lose a few states too.)”

And which states might those be?

South Indian Conspiracy Uncovered!!!!!

(Or perhaps Bangladeshi.)

Reply Hamidm #1651

``I see that now you have started hiding behind your women. It aint a surprise. It was expected.``

...see mr hamidm....you have to be a bonehead to be man...please also stop using big words...and fewer dots...