Enough is Enough

Romair,

{{There seems to be some confusion in your mind, on where I stand on various issues. This confusion could be due to a lack of explanation on my part, or because you are making assumptions}}

By & large, I agree with your post. Maybe, my PERCEPTIONS about where you stand on issues were skewed. I appreciate the effort you took in clarifying them.

Youre right, I`ve never interacted with Pakistanis at such a level. Indians & Pakistanis, in my personal experience, tend to give topics like politics & religion a very ``wide berth`` in order to avoid hurt feelings, in ``real life`` :)

After coming to Chowk, I have a much ``healthier`` opinion of Pakistanis---& you have played a large role in it--along with several others.

I think someone like you should play a larger role in Pakistani politics. (Maybe become ylh`s information minister--lord knows that kid needs someone mature to guide him:))

IT has no shortage of S.Asians; but politics in that region have been screwed up by too many idiots. Since the very survival of that region is at stake, your talents are needed there, much more than in IT.

This thread will soon disappear from the front page. For me, personally, it has ended on a positive note--at least a hopeful one.

Peace & Rgds

Shankar

``Mullah Urstruly, of course firmly believes we hindus dont have a conscience. O well, people who worship sticks & stones & penis` cant very well have a conscience, can they?!``

This is character assasination and a balatant lie. Where the hell did I ever said or implied with words or even inuendo that Hindus are bad people or they dont have a conscience because they worship ``sticks & stones & penis```. What the hell do I care what you people worship. Germans were bad because they gassed millions of Jews not because they were white Aryans. Serbs are bad because they condemned thousands of helpless people into death camps and not because they were nationalists and Hindus are bad because they have murdered 80,000 kashmiris, raped thousands of women, and killed their babies and not because they worship......laholwila quwwat. The sin that Hindu has committed is still redeemable-Germans and Serbs are condemned to the history.

Unless you have something positive to say, please dont mention my name in your posts-especially with such poisonous, venomous lies.

Thank you.

shankar #95: There seems to be some confusion in your mind, on where I stand on various issues. This confusion could be due to a lack of explanation on my part, or because you are making assumptions. I clarified some of this in my previous reply. Here is my stance on the other issues you have highlighted:

``Ummm...Ok; maybe except for India..``

I have only criticised India on two issues: 1) Its handling of Kashmir (even there I have pointed out that if Kashmir is opened up to human rights organizations, and I am proven wrong, then I would accept that India was correct). 2) The massive arms race which India is a carrying out in South Asia, including the nuclear arms race. The whole world, through the UN, supports the above two points.

On the other hand I have criticised Pakistan and its leaderships on all kinds of issues, i.e. economics, politics, military, Kashmir, education, corruption, feudalism, etc. My criticism of India is only on issues with effect Pakistan. Apart from that, what difference does it make to me what India does inside India. I don`t live there.

``You have supported Pakistan`s ``low intensity war``; ``war of a 1000 cuts``, ``they are not terrorists; they are freedom fighters``, ``they only target military, not innocent civilians`` & other assorted bs.``

You are again making incorrect statements. My stance is as follows:

- AI and other human rights organizations, including the international press, should be allowed into Kashmir (both Indian Kashmir and Pakistani) and present a clear picture of the situation.

- All the freedom fighers and the Indian military should vacate Kashmir, and a UN force should be delpoyed like Afghanistan.

- A plebescite should be held, and results should be accepted by all.

Could you point out exactly where in this is the word, ``violence.`` I only support in Kashmir, what the Kashmiris want. If they want Pakistan`s help, then they should get it. If they don`t, then Pakistan should stay out.

If India is unwilling to allow self-determination for fifty years, then I think people have a right to forcefully get rid of their occupiers, if they want to. If your neighbor occupies your house and family, and won`t leave, then you have a right to fight him. The moment India agrees to a plebescite all violence will automatically stop. After all, there are always many times more freedom fighters that get killed than the occupying soldiers.

In every single freedom struggle in the world, there are terrorist acts (far far more by the occupying forces, by the way). It is inevitable. These acts should definitely be considered terrorism, and the terrorists should be tried. However these acts by themselves do no take away the legtimicy of the freedom struggle. I have a friend whose whole family was killed by Mukti Bahni. Does that mean Bangladesh should not be independent?

I have always stated anyone who targest civilians is a terrorist, while anyone who targets an occupying army is a freedom fighter. This is the defintion given by Amnesty International also (did you know that the founder of Amnesty International, Mr. Sean McBride (the only man ever to win the Noble Peace Prize and the Lenin Peace Prize) was a former chief of staff of the nationalist Irish Republican Army (IRA)).

On the other hand, I hope you are not suggesting that India has a right to occupy Kashmir, violate the UN resolutions for fifty years (not to mention, violate the basic human rights of Kashmiris), and then also has the right to tell the local population to not fight back. If China attempted to, or actually did, occupy India, would Indians be in thier right to fight China? If yes, then if India occupies someone, don`t they have a right to fight?

``Please dont dare me to show which posts you have done that (with righteous indignation, to boot). I dont have the time or the patience to hunt them down. ``

If you have time to make an accusation, then you should have time to provide the proof. Otherwise, what is the point of making an accusation? How do you expect me to make a counterpoint? This seems to be what the BJP has done. Accusations, without proof, are about to lead South Asia into a nuclear war. It is not a very productive and practical way to argue a point.

````Morality`` is NOT consistent with ``pragmatism``. This only occurs when vested interests are involved. It is true and unfortunate. The world would be a much better and fairer place, if morality was always consistent with pragmatism. But our efforts should be to bring it as close to pragmatism, as possible. Not to move it furthur away.

``If you are comfortable with BOTH points of view, you are just as hypocritical as the rest of us.``

I am not comofortable with both. But I do hope that pragmatism should be based on moral principles, and I would like to struggle for it. I did state in my reply however that, ``I do so on a morality basis, and then on a practicality basis.`` This means I first look at morality and then at pragmatism.

I maybe as hypocritical as anyone, on many issues. But I lay out everything on the table, and base my views on a constant principle.

``We can judge a human being, country, idea or policy either from a moral/idealistic standpoint or a realistic/pragmatic standpoint.

Eg; The US bombing of Afghanistan is WRONG from a moral/idealistic standpoint; but RIGHT from a realistic/pragmatic standpoint.``

We should always look at everything from a moral view first. And try to base our pragmatic solutions as close to morality, as possible. This is not a zero sum gum. Infact the most successful domestic societies (like USA) are the ones where pragmatism is based on moralism. Unfortunately, very few countries (apart from Canada) follow these principles in foreign policy. Moralism will always lead to a better standard of living, than immoral pragmatism. If one just relies on pragmatism, then why not kill all the poor people in India and Pakistan. Pragmatically speaking, it is the easiest way of getting rid of poverty? Why have Social Security in the US? Just let the old folks die.

It is this sensitivity to moral issues vs. pragmatism which separtes humans from animals. Animals look at everything pragmatically. They eat their young if they can or have to. It is the survival of the fittest. But humans look beyond mere pragmatism, and attempt to look at morality. This is what makes us human, after all. It is only when we give into pragmatism over moralism that we start becoming inhumane. This should never be accpted as the status quo. Is Gandhi famous because of his moralism or his pragmatism? Is Mandela respected because he was pragmatic or moralistic? Is it pragmatic to stay locked up for 21 years. Or to take actions that get one assisinated by the RSS? No. But it is moral.

The US getting rid of the Taliban was moral, in my view. So it was not wrong. Although I do wish the US had exhausted all legal avenues first. However, the military strategy used by the US to get rid of the Taliban, (through massive high altitude bombing) was not moral. To not risk one American pilot`s life, it was willing to let stray bombs (due to high altitude) kill hundreds of innocent non-combatant Afghans.

``Pick either/or--if you pick BOTH when & where it SUITS your spin; its hypoCRISY & INCONSISTENT``

I have already picked, in my last reply. And I picked morality first, and pragmatism second. For example, I feel morally Kashmir should be free. Morally, I hope and feel that all the Indians in my office feel that way also. But I have a feeling that many of them don`t feel this way. It would be pragmatic for me to change my stance, and agree with them (since even though all of them are my subordinates, there are seven or eight of them and one of me). This may make me more popular with them. Who knows, it may even lead to higher productivity in my group. But I will stick with my moral stance. After that, I will be pragmatic, and will continue to work with my Indian colleagues, eat with them, socialize with them, and have a friendship. If they were to attack me, because I am a Kashmiri, then I will fight them back. But apart from that, I should not stop being friendly with them. Nor should I change my moral stance.

``Please do not judge your opinions of Indians based on Chowk India only. India is a vast & heterogenous country.``

I have met far too many Indians. So I do know their are many differnt types of Indians. And many on Chowk are quite balanced also. As I stated, on a day to day basis, it is quite possible I interact with more Indians than you do. And I have regularly stated, I feel India has a more educated and sophisticated population than Pakistan. Infact, the core of the educated Pakistani population are the descendants of Muslims who migrated from India (Muhajirs). India also has a higher intellectual discourse in its society. However, due to perhaps the BJP, and due to the acceptance of the influx of the Indian media, and due to the newborn openness of press, media, and thought in Pakistan (lead by Chief Muhajir Musharraf), Pakistan seems to be moving ahead of India in balanced views and introspection now, in my opinion. India seems to be really moving backwards in this area, by leaps and bounds. It is becoming too self-righteous (like Pakistan used to be). This is going to be the achilles heal of India, vis a vis Pakistan, in my opinion.

``I agree with you that there is no shortage of idiotic Indians on Chowk.``

Being an idiot is a relative term. One person`s idiot is another person`s leader. You only get attacked by Indians, and are respected by Pakistanis on Chowk. Much like SameerJB is respected by Indians and attacked by Pakistanis. I get attacked by both Indians and Pakistanis, on a regular basis. Even little Scout is after me, now :-)

My personal opinion on Chowk Indians is they, like most Indians, are intelligent, and want to learn about Pakistan. Otherwise, why would they waste their time on a Pakistani website (only a small minority are on here to just spread hate). However, when it comes to Kashmir (and Indo-Pak conflicts) most of them discard logic and obvious facts. If these people can convince me logically, then I am more than happy to admit they are right.

``Vajpayee said ``if Pakistan stops cross-border terrorism, India would walk more than half way to meet them``--if you believe him that is..``

I have been openly stating for a long time that I like and respect Vajpayee. You will rarely, if ever, see me making any statements against him. I think he and Musharraf have the Kashmir situation solved between them (seriously). And it is as follows: POK to Pakistan. Ladakh and Jammu to India. Valley (only 2100 sq. miles) independent. Vajpayee is having a tough time selling it to Advani and co. That is what frustrates me. Because, this is the best leadership India and Pakistan will have to solve this issue. Once Vajpayees goes, it is all downhill. Hopefully Musharraf will be around, because BB and NS will back off, if anyone in Pakistan threatens them. If Vajpayee today states that, India is willing to, in some form or manner, allow self-determination in Kashmir, I think all violent freedom struggles in Kashmir should stop. It will, infact, automatically stop.

You also need to keep in mind that the main thrust, by far, of the Kashmiri freedom struggle is indigenous, amongst the millions of Kashmiris. The people who come in from Pakistan only augment the struggle. They cannot the main struggle. Regardles of what the Indian media says, they are only a few hundred in number (if that many), at any one time. After all, it is not easy to get past 500,000+ soldiers gaurding a border. And not all of them are Jehadis. Many of them are technocrat Kashmiris from all over the world. I know professional banker(s), engineer(s) etc. who have gone in and fought in Kashmir. Well-off educated and wealthy Kashmiris want freedom also. There is a Kashmiri in the UK House of Lords. There are American Kashmiri CEO(s) who want freedom for Kashmir.

``Whatever spin you want to put on Kargil, it was a backstab--pure & simple.``

I think you skip through part of my replies :-) Ever since Kargil was started, I have been stating it was a wrong action by Pakistan (even though it was a counter to India`s initial action in Siachen, which is still going on, but gets zero coverage in the Indian press). I have always stated that it is ridiculous for India or Pakistan to launch military attacks against each other. They have never worked for either side. Siachen costs India, I believe, .5 million dollars a day. It should be stopped. The current Indian military buildup should be stopped. Kargil was wrong. Pakistan`s actions in Kashmir in 65 were wrong. India attacking Pakistan in 71 were wrong. Bangladeshis should have been allowed a plebescite based independence (even though it was not required by the UN, and even though East Pakistan was not disputed territory). And Kashmiris should be allowed a plebescite (this is required by the UN, and Kashmir is a disputed territory).

``Whether it will be perfectly acceptable to most Pakistanis``

It makes no difference whether it would be acceptable to most Pakistanis. Pakistanis would have no argument left, after a plebescite.

``do know for a fact that Indians dont hate Kashmiris``

I hope they don`t. The ultimate test of love is to let someone go, if that is their wish. Otherwise it is not love, it is obsession. That is why men stalk women who have divorced them. Here is my suggestion to the Indians,

``If you love Kashmir, set it free. If it comes

back to you, it is yours... If it doesn`t, it was never meant to be.``

``Kashmiris shot themselves in the foot by this insurgency``

This could be right or wrong. But this is a decision to be made by the Kashmiris, not by you. Wouldn`t you agree? The Kashmiris did wait patiently for forty years, before the militarism started. I don`t know of any intellectual movement in India that was willing to allow the Kashmiris a right of self-determination, in those forty years. Is there one in India, now?

``If you want to champion the rights of Kashmiris; you`d BETTER criticise Pakistan`s backing of China.``

I really don`t know much about what China is doing in Tibet. Perhaps I should know. But I don`t. I will make that my next project, after Kashmir. But I will apply my principle to China in a similar fashion as I do to Pakistan in East Pakistan, and to India in Kashmir. As I stated, if I can criticize Pakistan for its actions in 71, then why wouldn`t I criticize China`s actions. And if I criticize Pakistan`s actions itself, then of course I would criticize Pakistan for supporting any countries` human rights violations. It should be obvious.

Romair,

{{I have criticised Pakistan far more than I have criticised any other country.}}

Ummm...Ok; maybe except for India..



{{And I make my arguments on the basis of principles. I never change those principles, even it makes Pakistan a culprit.}}

Sorry; I disagree. You have supported Pakistan`s ``low intensity war``; ``war of a 1000 cuts``, ``they are not terrorists; they are freedom fighters``, ``they only target military, not innocent civilians`` & other assorted bs.

Please dont dare me to show which posts you have done that (with righteous indignation, to boot). I dont have the time or the patience to hunt them down. If I have misunderstood you, I apologise.

{{You can doubt my principle, but you cannot doubt my consistency.}}

``Morality`` is NOT consistent with ``pragmatism``. If you are comfortable with BOTH points of view, you are just as hypocritical as the rest of us.

We can judge a human being, country, idea or policy either from a moral/idealistic standpoint or a realistic/pragmatic standpoint.

Eg; The US bombing of Afghanistan is WRONG from a moral/idealistic standpoint; but RIGHT from a realistic/pragmatic standpoint.

Pick either/or--if you pick BOTH when & where it SUITS your spin; its hypoCRISY & INCONSISTENT. IMHO, you have, over the last couple of years--so join my club:)--cos so have I.

Let me tell you some examples of TOTALLY consistent guys---Urstruly & Jay! I can call them a lot of names; but I guess I cant call them hypocrites & inconsistent:)



{{What I have found is that nearly all Indians switch their principle when India is the agressor, from when India is the oppressed. This is unfortunate. Many Pakistanis do the same, and that is wrong also. However, if you look at the comments on this site, and in Pakistan, you will find that nearly all Pakistanis of the currrent generation, accept the existence of India (while many Indians doubt Pakistan`s existence) and they accept Pakistan`s faults in Bangladesh (not at the level many Bangladeshis claim, but Pakistanis do consider Pakistan the guilty party). This is a sign of an evolving society, more so than elections. Indians seem to be completely in a state of denial on Kashmir, however, i.e. Indians and Bangladeshis deserved self-determination, but Pakistanis and Kashmiris do not.}}

Agreed; for the most part. Please do not judge your opinions of Indians based on Chowk India only. India is a vast & heterogenous country. I agree with you that there is no shortage of idiotic Indians on Chowk. I guess its obvious by how they spit at me:)

{{With regard to international issues, specifically Kashmir, I have always stated that I don`t care what Pakistan or India get out of the deal. I have never stated that Pakistan is not at fault. .}}

Fortunately or unfortunately, you are NOT the official voice of the GoP. Personally, I think India & Pakistan would be better friends, if you were. Vajpayee said ``if Pakistan stops cross-border terrorism, India would walk more than half way to meet them``--if you believe him that is..

He did go to Lahore, you know, with the best of intentions. Whatever spin you want to put on Kargil, it was a backstab--pure & simple. Then Pakistanis call Indians bagal-mein-churi!.. So arresting the jehadis is a step in the right direction. But it will, alas, take more time for Indians to trust Pakistanis.

{{I do however, know for a fact, that nearly all Pakistanis sincerely feel for the Kashmiris, and for their lives. This is not a facade. They just want self-determination for Kashmiris. This could result in Kashmir joining India. That would be perfectly acceptable by me}}

I know it would be perfectly acceptable to you. Whether it will be perfectly acceptable to most Pakistanis--is debatable; but I`ll take youre word for it:)

I do know for a fact that Indians dont hate Kashmiris-muslims or otherwise. Nothing would please them more if they agitated their grievences through a democratic process & satyagraha. This is not a facade...Kashmir has a deep & powerful cultural & religious significance for many many Indians. My own ancestors, Saraswat Brahmins originated from Kashmir, before they migrated to Karnatak. My original ancestral temples & some of our holiest shrines are in Kashmir. So losing Kashmir, would be like losing a part of my own identity.

Its a moot issue, though. Kashmir is the ONLY state in India where a non-Kashmiri isnt allowed to buy land or set up permanent residence. And that includes Indians whose ancestors originated from Kashmir. Nobody wants to visit it when there is a guerella war going on. Thousands of Kashmiris, whose livelihoods depended on tourism are now starving. Those who openly support India (there may be about 5-10 of them:)) are too scared of the radicals to open their mouths. Kashmiris shot themselves in the foot by this insurgency & just about committed suicide when the more radical ones looked to Pakistan for support.

Be that as it may, I`d rather see it independant than destroyed like this..

{{Amnesty International is a very powerful organiztion. If it makes one statement against the US, the US govt. takes action. It is an extremely credible organization, also. That is why it is banned in Kashmir. The Indian Law Minister stated himself on CNN that 61,000 civilians have been killed in Kashmir. He blamed the killings on Pakistani terrorists. If that is the case, then Pakistan should is to blame. If they were killed by India, then India should face the blame. However, we need neutral organizations to decide that, like AI.}}

Agreed.

One last thing. Please dont say you are not an EXPERT on China. You dont have to be an ``expert`` to know what China has done in Tibet or what kind of human rights abuses are going on there. I REFUSE to believe that an intelligent guy like you is so ignorant.

Besides ``experts`` are anything BUT neutral. Even your beloved Eric Margolis. Analysts--military, political, foreign policy etc etc are NOT neutral. Each one uses their own bias when making a point. Cos these are not exact sciences like math or physics.

So you RIGHT when you support Pakistan strenghtening relations with China on a pragmatic/realistic basis; & you are WRONG to do so if you want to champion the human right for freedom on a moral/idealistic basis---thats the inconsistency I`m talking about.. If you want to champion the rights of Kashmiris; you`d BETTER criticise Pakistan`s backing of China. Otherwise.. you are a --------.

hobbytv,

{{Yet, none of this means that kashmirs freedom from India is a non issue. Kashmir will be free of India, if not today, then tomorrow, if not tomorrow then the day after - there is an inevitablity to this process. kashmir will never again a trouble free area for India - while Pakistani failure to highlight kashmir as a moral cause is accepted, what will follow, is the indian and global acceptance of Indian failure in Kashmir; a psychologically event, not without larger consequences.}}

Cant argue with you ,when you put it like that. Go ahead Indian mofos; give me all the gaalis you want--I`ll kiss up to Pakistani statements like that. You got a problem with that?; kiss my butt...

soundmeister,

{{I lost some respect for you when you failed to reply to my last post, but after reading this last monstrosity of yours, I`m more convinced than ever that you`re a wuss, a loser, a pathetic excuse for a human being who will never take any pride in what he does and spend his life with his hands in other people`s sh1t.}}

Sigh...I guess you are relatively new to Chowk. This business about what people think of me--I`ve explained several times in the past; so its getting BORING. But I guess I have to do it time & again--because ALAS; extremist Indian sh *theads like you pop your ugly heads over & over again on Chowk. I thought that maybe if I just smirk & ignore mofos like you, you will disappear--but no; you post over & over again about how much you hate me--like an annoying mosquito, buzzing in my ear.

Besides; now you`ve gone & pissed off anNY & then have the balls to talk to her in a patronising, condescending manner. BIG MISTAKE pal. I pity you now:) Chowk vetrans have learnt this the hard way--NEVER EVER get these Pakistani shernis mad at you! They`ll eat you for lunch! They are more khatarnak than their ``world famous`` military!

My good friend Saxena is too proud to admit it; but he has plenty of scars to show for it. Its a good thing that his balls have the same qualities as shark`s teeth. They`ve been chopped off several times by these shernis. Yes, he sprouts new ones everytime they get lopped off. But I know it hurts him, like crazy. Heck, he scurried into a rathole when one of them blew her stack. He absolutely REFUSES to get into a fight with another, eventhough she baits him . Then he cries that he`s being stalked by her!

So, if anNy is in my corner; a wus like me becomes INVINCIBLE!:)

OK, seriously, (sigh.. this sounds like a frikking broken record).. I feel VERY VERY good when a guy like you loses respect for me. In fact, I`m happy you`ve now lost respect for me COMPLETELY; rather than just a little bit. It proves to me that I`m on the right track when extremists (esp Indian extremists) hate what I say. As far as I`m concerned, guys like you are much more dangerous for India than any of those Paki fundos.

Hey, I got no problem if Indians are angry at Pakistani jehadis for the attack on the parliament or the low intensity war they are conducting in Kashmir. I am too. I also feel that the GoP is responsible (directly or indirectly) for this crap. Personally, I dont feel Mushy knew about this attack. I dont care much for his anti-indian stance--but he`s not an idiot. He`s probably the most astute Pakistani leader that they have produced--in my lifetime, at least.

But that does`nt mean India is this innocent victim of terror & her hands are clean. In that respect, I COMPLETELY agree with Romair--right is right & wrong is wrong. What India has done in Kashmir is something I`m ashamed of--Pakistan or no Pakistan. Just because GoP is wrong, does`nt automatically mean that the GoI is RIGHT! What we disagree, probably, is the WAY each country is going about correcting those wrongs.

That, I feel is the MAIN reason why the rest of the world is assiduously neutral. I think both moderate Indians & Pakistanis agree that India & Pakistan are 2 fleas fighting for the same dog.

What I cant STAND about extremists like you & chandan is that your testesterone has corroded your brain cells. You want to settle this, once & for all, in a war. If I misunderstand you, I apologise, in advance.

Just use whats left in your brain cells for a minute. Romair may disagree with me, but its true India has not lost a conventional war with Pakistan. But their military isnt a pushover. Even in a conventional war, India wont be able to just walk into Pakistan. I`m sure even someone as stupid as you will agree that the Indo-Pak military disparity isnt as great as the US & her allies faced in the Gulf war. Pakistan will give us as good as they can get. Besides an attacking military is always at a disadvantage & generally takes a lot more casualties.

So, what the HELL will India win; even if it ``prevails`` ultimately in a conventional war (not to mention with horrendous casualties)? ``Stamping out the Pakistani fundos`` is just as fuzzy an objective as the US had in Vietnam (stamping out Communist fundos). Even if the Indian army, battered & bloody (though ``victorious``) raises the Indian flag in Islamabad or Azad Kashmir; they will have to continue to fight until almost every Pakistani civilian is murdered by them. Even you cant believe its a realistic objective!

And thats just a conventional war. I dont want to even BEGIN to think of the ramifications of a NUCLEAR war!

The days of Indo-Pak military ``wars`` are OVER; at least rational people on BOTH sides should ACCEPT that its over. There`s got to be a better way to score ``brownie points`` over the other side than mass military mobilisations.

Inshallah, this current crisis seems to be winding down. But, I`m afraid this is going to happen again & again. All it requires a few extremists in either military to ``settle this one way or another``. Once the ball starts rolling, NOBODY will be able to stop it.

If saying ``Enough is Enough`` is being a wus--I`m PROUD to be a wus. I wish you could look at my face; to see if I really CARE what ch---, I mean dickheads, like you think of me..

soundmister:

``First, lern to spel. It`s pathetic that you don`t even bother to reproduce my handle from the post correctly. Shows how much respect you have for your debating opponent.``

preciselee deeur...no respect

call me honey again ome more time and ill shove a dabba of prigles down your throat so hard, your brains will popout of your ears

aur fat hogee aap kee saas

anNy honey,

First, lern to spel. It`s pathetic that you don`t even bother to reproduce my handle from the post correctly. Shows how much respect you have for your debating opponent.

Second, what on earth are you doing poking your long nose in a debate between two Indians anyway? Is that the Paki way? I guess so, looking at Kashmir.

What I say to Shankar is my business. If he`s such a wuss that he needs you or someone else to defend him, he really deserves my sympathy not my censure. I sit corrected.

Meanwhile please go back to your pringles and biryani, you fat foodmonster.

SM

soundmiester:

``Shankar, I lost some respect for you when you failed to reply to my last post, but after reading this last monstrosity of yours, I`m more convinced than ever that you`re a wuss, a loser, a pathetic excuse for a human being who will never take any pride in what he does and spend his life with his hands in other people`s sh1t.``

but ofcourse...let a man speak some sense and then sit back and watch the nutcases all over him..listen really hard now u little nasty insect...you wuss, you loser, YOU pathetic excuse for a human being..YOU not him

``Wake up to the fact that Saxena and others here have absolutely no respect for your writing ability and just enjoy kicking you around like a football.``

others? who others? give me 20 names out of the hundred interactors we have here..heck give me 10..

and besides dear soundmiester, does he look like he cares? huhuhuh?

``Learn some self-respect man. It`s embarrassing.``

well hydeee ho..looks who`s talking

idiot

Ref Romair #: 84

[Similarly, should I start beating up my Chinese subordinates, or stop eating Chinese food, because of Tibet? No.]

Yes.... just 10 days back, my friend made it very clear she wouldn`t accept anything made in China as a Christmas gift from anybody.

We shopped very carefully for her.

Shankar

``What about the rest of the muslims of the world? Other than pathetic ``resolutions`` written on toilet paper at OIC conferences; why is their conscience not stirred with outrage? Please folks..I`m not talking about the vermin Al-Qeeda mercenaries; but regular muslims in the billion+ strong Ummah?!

No morchas in front of the Indian Embassy, no threats of sanctions or oil embargos? No regular editorials in Arab press like they do about Palestinians? No boycott of Indian exports--even in Saudi Arabia--which still imports more goods & services from India than gasp-Pakistan?!``

EXCELLENT! Clearly a failure of successive regimes to highlight and present the moral dimensions of the Kashmir issue within Islamia - Also a moral and tactical failure of the Ulema (and ummah) - Whereas Shia and Sunni kill each other, bomb each others Masajid in Pakistan, similar manifestations do not occur in India with the regularity they do in Pakistan. It is not just that the Indian government stance should be seen as immoral, but that the Pakistani political economy is not seen as moral or ethical.

AND, the success of the Indian governments to see the true nature of governments in Islamia and the success of the Indian government (incredibly, even a Hindu nationalist government) to project this not as a moral issue, but one of national security.

Truth is that Pan Arabism is stronger force within Arab countries, than is Islam or the idea of Ummah - we cannot deny this, it is the truth. And it is also true that Pakistan, by virtue of it`s civil, religious, political and economic strife, it`s inability to muster political will, to build concensus, under civilian governments, to face national challenges and to resolve them -shows itself or is percieved as, unworthy of the support of the Ummah.

Yet, none of this means that kashmirs freedom from India is a non issue. Kashmir will be free of India, if not today, then tomorrow, if not tomorrow then the day after - there is an inevitablity to this process. kashmir will never again a trouble free area for India - while Pakistani failure to highlight kashmir as a moral cause is accepted, what will follow, is the indian and global acceptance of Indian failure in Kashmir; a psychologically event, not without larger consequences.

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

Re: Romair

Romair, you are entitled to your opinion, not to your facts. You say that the Indian law minister said on CNN that India has killed 61,000 Kashmiris. You are wrong, and even after I have pointed this out once in post #230 on the `Running Naked` board by Anwar Iqbal. This is what the `Indian law minister` said on CNN:

``...the number of people who have been killed on our side of the border, in our country, in the last 10 to 15 years is as high as 61,000 civilians...``

Notice -- he did not say Kashmir. Our side of the border includes Punjab AND Kashmir -- both states in which the ISI has had many successes.

``...In regard to the Naval Aircraft case. This was a historic case for India and Pakistan...``

Again you are displaying selective amnesia -- by failing to mention that the aircraft was in violation of an Indo-Pak agreement to not allow military aircraft to fly within 10 kms of each other`s borders without prior consent of the other party. The fact that this provocative incident took place within a few months of Kargil, escapes you completely.

``...Should I stop watching Indian movies, or eating Indian food? ...``

And frankly we don`t care even if you did. But, we do care and take notice when you get up on the soap box here and advance the cause of infiltration and terrorism in India, and the cause of `bleeding India through a thousand cuts`. You are again suggesting that `bleeding India` is a viable strategy when you made the odd comment, ``What if it (Pakistan) then says, it doesn`t want a Kashmir solution? It could just bleed India.`` That won`t fool anyone of us. We all know that that is exactly what Pakistan has been doing for the last 20 years. Shankar knows it too.

``...With regard to international issues, specifically Kashmir, I have always stated that I don`t care what Pakistan or India get out of the deal...``

No, that is not all that you have said in the past -- you have also said that India cannot win, and Pakistan cannot lose. Thus, your mask of neutrality is not very effective, and won`t wash.

``...You can doubt my principle, but you cannot doubt my consistency...I have very little knowledge of the Tibet/China situation...``

Then how can you claim to be consistent when you do not even know the facts?

soundmiester:

``Shankar, I lost some respect for you when you failed to reply to my last post, but after reading this last monstrosity of yours, I`m more convinced than ever that you`re a wuss, a loser, a pathetic excuse for a human being who will never take any pride in what he does and spend his life with his hands in other people`s sh1t.``

but ofcourse...let a man speak some sense and then sit back and watch the nutcases all over him..listen really hard now u little nasty insect...you wuss, you loser, YOU pathetic excuse for a human being..YOU not him

``Wake up to the fact that Saxena and others here have absolutely no respect for your writing ability and just enjoy kicking you around like a football.``

others? who others? give me 20 names out of the hundred interactors we have here..heck give me 10..

and besides dear soundmiester, does he look like he cares? huhuhuh?

``Learn some self-respect man. It`s embarrassing.``

well hydeee ho..looks who`s talking

idiot

shankar:

``I`ve never watched Al-Jazeera. Can anybody tell me what Al-Jazeera is saying about Kasmir? They are counterbalancing the Western media re Al-Qeeda.``

al jazeera comes in Arabic...so while we can see whats happening on the screen, it makes no sense

shankar #83: When I argue a point, I do so on a morality basis, and then on a practicality basis; and on no other basis. What other way is their to argue a point? Either something is morally and ethically right or its wrong. There are many rapists in the world. My argument is that raping someone is wrong. Will that stop the rapists of the world in their crimes? I doubt it. But does that make my argument incorrect? Should I not say that rape is a crime, just because I know that their are Pakistani rapists also? Should I stop saying that rape is crime, because my saying so will not stop any of the rapists? And even if I stop saying rape is a crime, will that make it moral?

I argue my points not as a Pakistani, but as a human being. I have criticised Pakistan far more than I have criticised any other country. Primarily because I am more interested in the improvement of Pakistan, than I am in the improvement of other countries.

And I make my arguments on the basis of principles. I never change those principles, even it makes Pakistan a culprit. As a principle, I believe people have the Bhagwan-given right of self-determination, regardless of religion, creed, ethnicity, or international standing. Based on that, I have on every occassion stated that the following were wrong:

- The enslavement of Indian Hindus, against their will, by Muslim conquerors (or even Hindu conquerors, before that)

- The colonisation of the Sub-Continent by the British.

Based on that, I have on every occassion stated that the following were right:

- Indian independence from the British

- Pakistani independence from the British and separation from India

- The creation of Bangladesh

- Kashmiri independence from India

You can doubt my principle, but you cannot doubt my consistency. What I am looking for are Indians with consistency, who are willing to apply one principle, on all these issues. If they do not believe in self-determination, then they can just flip my first list with the second. What I have found is that nearly all Indians switch their principle when India is the agressor, from when India is the oppressed. This is unfortunate. Many Pakistanis do the same, and that is wrong also. However, if you look at the comments on this site, and in Pakistan, you will find that nearly all Pakistanis of the currrent generation, accept the existence of India (while many Indians doubt Pakistan`s existence) and they accept Pakistan`s faults in Bangladesh (not at the level many Bangladeshis claim, but Pakistanis do consider Pakistan the guilty party). This is a sign of an evolving society, more so than elections. Indians seem to be completely in a state of denial on Kashmir, however, i.e. Indians and Bangladeshis deserved self-determination, but Pakistanis and Kashmiris do not.

With regard to international issues, specifically Kashmir, I have always stated that I don`t care what Pakistan or India get out of the deal. I have never stated that Pakistan is not at fault. I do however, know for a fact, that nearly all Pakistanis sincerely feel for the Kashmiris, and for their lives. This is not a facade. They just want self-determination for Kashmiris. This could result in Kashmir joining India. That would be perfectly acceptable by me.

Amnesty International is a very powerful organiztion. If it makes one statement against the US, the US govt. takes action. It is an extremely credible organization, also. That is why it is banned in Kashmir. The Indian Law Minister stated himself on CNN that 61,000 civilians have been killed in Kashmir. He blamed the killings on Pakistani terrorists. If that is the case, then Pakistan should is to blame. If they were killed by India, then India should face the blame. However, we need neutral organizations to decide that, like AI.

The only alternative to what I have been suggesting is the status quo, i.e. Indians and Pakistanis continue fighting each other, forever. And Kashmiris get killed forever. That is not a reality I want to live in. And it is actually worse for India than it is for Pakistan. After all, everything is happening in Indian Kashmir. There will be great blowback from that in India. What if tomorrow Pakistan gets back to its economic growth rates of 6%+? What if it then says, it doesn`t want a Kashmir solution? It could just bleed India.

I am actually happy Bangladesh had no common border with West Pakistan. Otherwise, Pakistan would still be facing the same situation there, as India is facing in Kashmir.

The more comments I hear from Indians and Pakistanis, the more I am begining to realize they barely understand each other, or the situation in Kashmir. I have grown up in Pakistan, and have spent the last ten years professinally with at least five to ten Indians, on a daily basis. It is quite possible that in the past ten years, I have probably spent much more time with Indians than even you have (not counting your own family). I will go out on a limb and state that I understand the interactions between both groups better than 99.99999% of Pakistanis and 99.99999% of Indians. Infact, had it not been for an Indian professor, I would be driving a cab in Florida in the best of circumsrtances, and driving one in Pindi, in the worst of circumstances. Similarly, there are more than a handful of Indians, who are prospering in the US, specifically because I helped them out directly with their Green Cards, visas, and scholarships. So I have seen the good side of the relationship, as well. And hope that someday that can be achieved. That is why I always support a neutral UN, ICJ, AI type of solution to Indo-Pak conflicts. Because I am convinced the two countries and Kashmiris cannot come to a soluution on their own. Hence my frustration at India`s continous sidelining of these organizations. I would be more than happy if these organizations gave a solution which pointed to Pakistan as the culprit. As long as it is from a neutral source.

What other solutions are there than the ones I have presented? Whether they seem too idealistic or too optimistic is only important if there are any other solutions available.

In regard to the Naval Aircraft case. This was a historic case for India and Pakistan. India argued that the ICJ was not authorized to listen to India-Pakistan cases. It received a ruling in its favor. So the case never was discussed. India would have lost, since the aircraft wreckage landed in Pakistani airspace. Now, this avenue is theoretically locked out also, i.e. if India has evidence against Pakistan, and presents it in the ICJ, Pakistan can use the Indian precendent, and say that India by its own admission, does not consider the ICJ to have jurisdiction. The only alternative to legal proceedings of some sort (any sort) in Indo-Pak conflicts is the current state of war. This moves us one step closer to an all out war.

I am personally interested in the above case, because one of my very close friends was on the Naval aircraft that was shot down.

``So how come you are advocating that Pakistan should continue & strenghten relations with China? For a person who believes so passionately for the human right of freedom--how come there is no peep from you when China has trampled the rights of Tibetans, denies religious freedoms to its citizens & even crushes Chinese muslim ``freedom fighters``.``

I have very little knowledge of the Tibet/China situation. I am not an expert on all freedom struggles. I am just attempting to become an expert on the Pakistani and Kashmiri freedom struggle, and to some extent the US freedom struggle, since they effect me directly. However, my principle remain constant. If I apply it on even Pakistan in case of East Pakistan, why wouldn`t I apply it on China? What Pakistan (or India) says about freedom struggles, other than their own, is immaterial. It is what the people in the struggle say themselves, that is important. Even if Pakistan stated that the Kashmiri freedom struggle or that of any other group is wrong, it doesn`t make it wrong in my eyes. After all, Pakistanis in 1971 did state that the Bangladeshi freedom struggle was wrong.

But at the same time, I support at least whatever good relations can be achieved between enemy countries. There are many mistakes Pakistan has made, and is still making. There are many human rights violations in Pakistan. Does that mean, I should turn in my Pakistani citizenship? The US has killed the most innocent people outside its borders, directly and indirectly, in the past ten to fifteen years. Should I destroy the US? Similarly, there are many human rights violations committed by India and China. That does not mean that Pakistan should not attempt to have trade relations or other relations with these two countries, wherever it can. Should I start beating up everyone of my Indian subordinates, because of Kashmir? Should I stop watching Indian movies, or eating Indian food? No. Similarly, should I start beating up my Chinese subordinates, or stop eating Chinese food, because of Tibet? No.

At the same time, just because I have Indian friends and some Chinese ones, and many Pakistani ones, doesn`t mean I should accept the human rights violations committed by these countries. The reason I discuss mostly Kashmir is because that is part of my heritage. If I were from Tibet, I would more than likely discuss Tibet, and be on the Tibetan version of Chowk.

Rigth will always remain right, and wrong will always be wrong. How you or I, or India or China or Pakistan attempt to portray it is immaterial. I believe in the end, right does win out. Perhaps that is why I seem like an optimist to you. But if my optimism is wrong, then the world would have destroyed itself a long time ago.

Romair,

{{Pakisatan would have gotten a decision in its favor in the ICJ for the Naval aircraft case, however India sidelined the ICJ.}}

Paki satan?! Now was that a Freudian slip?!:)

The problem with optimists like you is that you yearn for an ideal world. Not that thats a bad quality--more power to you, I say. However, sad to say, it doesnt exist & it will never exist. It has never existed since Adam & Eve ate that bloody apple. Life has never been fair; no matter how much idealists like you try to make it fair. Sometimes, I think you should step back & learn to accept the fact that policy should be based on pragmatic interests. The minute you bring ``morality`` into it--EVERYBODY becomes a hypocrite.

Ofcourse, I`ll have you know, its because its ALL ISI`s FAULT!:)

The GoP is shouting on the rooftops of the world about LEGALITY--ofcourse on behalf of the poor, oppressed Kashmiris.

Could you tell me, my fair friend, how the GoP has respected LAW in its history?

-not a SINGLE leader of Pakistan has ever relinquished power by its OWN laws.

-Consitutions are changed by the whims of the prevailing leaders--military & civilian.

-an electrol victory was answered with a bloody massacre in 71. Pakistan is INTROSPECTIVE?!

BULLS *IT!! You & a few responsible Pakistanis maybe introspective. Have ANY of the perpetrators of that sad history ever been arrested, or made to answer for their war crimes?! Tiger Niazi lives in glorious retirement! For every one of you, there is also a Urstruly who lives in denial & totally unrepentant about what happened!

You think Mushy has?! Why did he get so angry at the Bangladeshi PM at the UN & cancelled a meeting with her?!

I wont belabor the point anymore..

Its hypocracy (screw you, Saxena) for a country to start crying about legalities, when it has & continues to blatantly flount its own laws. Its like a burglar being caught red handed & cries how unfair the legal system is because the cops didnt read the Miranda rights in Spanish, because he doesnt understand English.

I think its the MAIN reason why there is NO sympathy for Pakistan in the eyes of the world--even the Islamic world--when it stands on a moral high horse & cries foul.

Dont get me wrong, it doesnt mean that Indians are angels either. Lord knows they have plenty of skeletons in their closets. No cigar for Indians either. Thats why the world is taking a hands off policy; where Kashmir is concerned. Its a polite way of telling India & Pakistan ``both of you have F-ed up``.

I`ll tell you why I think youre as big a hypocrite as I. When it comes to Pakistan, you justify ``morality`` & ``pragmatism`` exactly when & where it suits Pakistan`s interests.

So, you believe in standing for the rights of oppressed people no matter where they are; eh?!. So how come you are advocating that Pakistan should continue & strenghten relations with China? For a person who believes so passionately for the human right of freedom--how come there is no peep from you when China has trampled the rights of Tibetans, denies religious freedoms to its citizens & even crushes Chinese muslim ``freedom fighters``. And your hero Mushy even has the gall to admonish them to be patriotic Chinese citizens!!! Yup; & you were cheering Mushy`s policy all the way!

AHA!! What the HELL happened to your MORAL stance about standing up for HUMAN RIGHTS?! When it suits your ``spin`` all that goes out of the window--now Pakistan should be realistic & pragmatic! Cant have it both ways, my friend..

YOU, of all people should have taken a stance of denouncing Mushy`s policy towards China!

C`mon Umairr; sometimes I think you actually believe your own bs:)

anybody,

I`ve never watched Al-Jazeera. Can anybody tell me what Al-Jazeera is saying about Kasmir? They are counterbalancing the Western media re Al-Qeeda.

The way Pakistan talks about India--Hindians are executing & raping Kashmiri muslim civilians by the thousands. Of course, they are quick to point out AI to bolster their claims.

Mullah Urstruly, of course firmly believes we hindus dont have a conscience. O well, people who worship sticks & stones & penis` cant very well have a conscience, can they?! I would like to tell him that the main reason why we hindus dont have a conscience is because we dont want to spend even a second in Heaven with people like him & Mullah Omar--burning in hell for an eternity is a preferable fate; but I wont.

What about the rest of the muslims of the world? Other than pathetic ``resolutions`` written on toilet paper at OIC conferences; why is their conscience not stirred with outrage? Please folks..I`m not talking about the vermin Al-Qeeda mercenaries; but regular muslims in the billion+ strong Ummah?!

No morchas in front of the Indian Embassy, no threats of sanctions or oil embargos? No regular editorials in Arab press like they do about Palestinians? No boycott of Indian exports--even in Saudi Arabia--which still imports more goods & services from India than gasp-Pakistan?!

Urstruly,

Since you take great pride in not ducking questions--Please explain to me why such a lack of conscience in the Ummah?

We hindus are idol worshipping heathens, we are SUPPOSED to be evil conscienseless kafirs. But what about the strange silence from the majority of non-Pakistani muslims?

Gee..maybe theyre terrified of bania anger; more than Allah`s wrath; huh?!