PERSONAL EXPERIENCE = childhood freinds who are now colonols in the INDIAN army stationed at the LOC.
Can you get more personal than that? Unless you happen to be stationed there.
And NY has a proud history of robbing blue collar workers.
Go ahead and be a proud Indian while it lasts.
I promised myself I wasn't going to respond to you, but I have to do so just once more. This is the last time.
The brother of my father's best friend, who is like an uncle to me, was a POW in Pakistan for two years. He was a career IAF officer. BTW, he has been happily married to a Muslim for years.
My father's uncle (i.e., his father's brother) was a very senior officer in the Indian military. He fought on the front lines in WWII as well as in the various India-Pakistan and India-China conflicts. On the same day that JFK was assasinated, his helicopter was shot down near the India-Pakistan border in Kashmir, killing him and other senior officers. Nonetheless, many of my grandfather's closest friends are Muslims.
While my personal connection with these events may be remote, they certainly give me as much credibility as you claim to have with your supposed childhood connections.
I have no idea of what is meant by your comment regarding New York and blue-collar workers.
And finally, I am a born American and have no need to be a proud Indian. While my ancestry is part Indian, I do not presume to tell real Indians (i.e., those who live in India) what they should be doing in this critical situation.
Last edited by Gandhi90s; Nov 30, 08 at 7:21 pm.
Reason: removal of identifying detail
I did not see anyone in your government preaching such restrain eight years ago, when US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan under the ridiculously named 'War on Terror'. I did not see your government enter talks with the Iraqi Government.
Believe it or not, India has shown commendable restrain over the last decade as far as attacking Pakistan is concerned. Not for a moment do I believe that the US would've shown similar restrain if The Capitol was attacked in a manner similar to the Parliament House, New Delhi. India has fought three wars with Pakistan, and has never been the aggressor, because, I suspect, the brains trust realises that declaring an all out war against a country that you share a land border with, is best left as the last resort. A concept probably lost on the United States because never once has it fought a war on its own soil.
With evidence coming forth that the terrorists were in fact trained in Pakistan and received logistical support from elements based in Pakistan, elements enjoying ISI's hospitality, it'd not surprise me if surgical strikes are enacted on certain locations.
US would do well to not preach something that it can not practice.
I am not the government, nor did I support the current government, so your tirade is misdirected.
India was not blameless in its conflicts with Pakistan. If you really believe so, there's no point in discussing it with you.
As to your second-last point, the posters I took issue with were not advocating "surgical strikes", but rather annihilation. I don't think surgical strikes, if India is even capable of that, would be useful, either. Given the tensions between the two countries, it could only lead to another war. That would not be good for either country, and the death toll would easily exceed that of this terrorist attack.
Irrelevant to the issue at hand. India IS blameless for this attack. Pakistan? Well, not so much...
Your point is irrelevant to my reply to SQ421. He quoted history and portrayed India as blameless in its wars with Pakistan. I disagreed with that assessment. I said nothing about Pakistan's culpability in this attack, because the facts aren't in yet.
You seem to want to get a zinger in, but that's beneath you. I respect your views even when I disagree with them, which isn't that often. Please don't try for cheap shots.
I am not the government, nor did I support the current government, so your tirade is misdirected.
India was not blameless in its conflicts with Pakistan. If you really believe so, there's no point in discussing it with you.
As to your second-last point, the posters I took issue with were not advocating "surgical strikes", but rather annihilation. I don't think surgical strikes, if India is even capable of that, would be useful, either. Given the tensions between the two countries, it could only lead to another war. That would not be good for either country, and the death toll would easily exceed that of this terrorist attack.
I don't believe India was blameless in its conflicts with Pakistan. At the same time, I do believe that Pakistan was the initial aggressor in 1948, 1965 and 1999. Military action in present day Bangladesh (that led to the 1971 war) was initiated by India after it became clear that the scores of refugees fleeing to India as a result of tyrannical West Pakistani policies towards East Pakistan would destabilise the Indian Economy in short order, if not prevented in time.
If you think there are more instances where India was the provocateur, please feel free to share.
I don't think annihilation is the logical answer. At the same time, no way can the Indian government be seen to just do "jaw-jaw" when all evidence points to Pakistani involvement in the latest round of terror strikes.
__________________
The single biggest problem about communication is the illusion that it has taken place - G.B. Shaw
Really? Have you gotten it out of your head that North Vietnam and North Korea were not tigers?
Your point would be more appropriate in regards to Pakistan, if India were foolish enough to invade it. The Indian government is not, as far as I can tell. They know such a move would be unlikely to be successful, unless you consider more dead people on both sides a success.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMSN
I am not the government, nor did I support the current government, so your tirade is misdirected.
India was not blameless in its conflicts with Pakistan. If you really believe so, there's no point in discussing it with you.
Which conflicts are you talking about?
The 1948 war was started by Pakistan.
The 1965 war was started by Pakistan under Field MArshal Ayub Khan and planned by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto
The 1971 war took place as a consequence of 10 million refugees coming to India following genocihe in East Pakistan, that the U.S. Government, nay, Nixon refused to condemn. Nixon was in love with General Yahya Khan just as Reagan was in love with General Zia-ul-Haq and Bush with Musharraf. I am not sure what you are talking about.
The 1999 war was started by General Musharraf while NAwaz Sharif was the Prime Minister.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by uastarflyer
Correctly put. Pakistan's chief export is pure unadulterated terror, and has been for some time. Finally the "rest of the world" is figuring this out.
And let's be honest, they have no other real unique export capability to speak of, other than terror. Which leads me to this: This however is probably not the best long-term solution, though I understand from where such a hope comes from. I wholeheartedly agree with disrespecting Pakistan's so-called "territorial integrity" if there is a credible target at hand however.
Terrorism has been an instrument of foreign policy of Pakistan. Pakistan does not have the military might of the U.S. to use it's military openly as an instrument of foreign policy.
In the Past, the U.S. just turned a blind eye to terrorism exported to India from Pakistan. That has changed now. That has made terrorists more desperate as their Government has to make overtures of opposing terrorism to placate the U.S. For Pakistani military, spectre of India is a matter of survival As long Indian thread is highlighted their position is secure. That's why there is a natural alliance between Pakistani military, especially ISI and the Islamic fundamentalists, who both see India as an enemy.
United States has done a great disservice to the cause of fighting terrorism by refusing to call a spade a spade until very recently in rather mild terms. Whether to call a nation a sponsor of terror was determined not by facts but by political expediency. That was one of the reasons I was skeptic about claims made prior to invasion of Iraq.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMSN
The poster used the article as a base for advocating war with Pakistan. I pointed out that the article does not support his position that the Pakistani government was involved in this. That is mere supposition on the part of both of you. Yes, the Pakistani government could be involved, but so could it also be the work of non-government agents. Or rogue agents on either side.
I also pointed out that another war is stupid. I hope you agree with at least that.
The poster is not the only person pushing for war. More and more Indians, those living in India, will feel that war is the only choice if this goes on. This is likely put a lot of pressure on any Government to seek a military solution.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by UA Fan
Dude, sorry but have to disagree with you here again. I would never do this on a personal level. There are authorities who take of justice which is so much more efficient in the US. But on the intl scene it everyone for himself/herself, so just like the US did to Afghanistan, India can do to Pak.
Except Afghanistan has no nukes. Big difference.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
Programs: Chairman MC, HH Gold, AA GOLD, PC RA, TAJ Innercircle Silver
Posts: 2,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by UA Fan
Dude, sorry but have to disagree with you here again. I would never do this on a personal level. There are authorities who take of justice which is so much more efficient in the US. But on the intl scene it everyone for himself/herself, so just like the US did to Afghanistan, India can do to Pak.
That all depends...do you have kids? Are you married? Even I would never do such a thing on personal level, but after being married and having my 3yr old daughter with me, my views have changed towards protecting my family.
Same reason why I started getting emotion involved with Muslim issues. Reading about 13yr old girls getting stoned to death because she tried to report a rape by THREE men and her even her OWN father condems her to death shows me this religion can never be helped nor will they see the ways of the western world no matter how educated they become.
__________________ STRANGE is a necessary evil required to refresh and renew the NORMAL.
