Obama Inauguration Brings Hope, Scepticism
Beena Sarwar January 22, 2009
#1 Posted by Ally on January 22, 2009 12:54:53 pm
Beena ji
Indeed policies are made from behind, tho i think Obama much better than Bush, i'm not too sure about him yet, he may just be a black veneer to the same old same old, or he may surprise us with positive change... anyways regardless of the change in amreeki sadar, we need to be our own change and not wait or rely on anyone else...
you reap what you sow, its the basic law of the world, and we are reaping it... its only us that can change it not some far away sadar in another country...
the basic change in attitude has to come from within us, and the good news is that that is happening albeit slowly!!!
Indeed policies are made from behind, tho i think Obama much better than Bush, i'm not too sure about him yet, he may just be a black veneer to the same old same old, or he may surprise us with positive change... anyways regardless of the change in amreeki sadar, we need to be our own change and not wait or rely on anyone else...
you reap what you sow, its the basic law of the world, and we are reaping it... its only us that can change it not some far away sadar in another country...
the basic change in attitude has to come from within us, and the good news is that that is happening albeit slowly!!!
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#2 Posted by Shah2 on January 22, 2009 3:34:38 pm
Re: # 1
Some support him b/c he is darker some b/c we need change fed up with blunder after blunder of rt wing v neo con
Forget he is, has middle name Hussain ,Youngest ,Comes fom average back ground'
He has repeatedly warned stressed path to fulfillment will be very slow and painfull
Where does he promise he only hopes .
Some support him b/c he is darker some b/c we need change fed up with blunder after blunder of rt wing v neo con
Forget he is, has middle name Hussain ,Youngest ,Comes fom average back ground'
He has repeatedly warned stressed path to fulfillment will be very slow and painfull
Where does he promise he only hopes .
#4 Posted by ajeya on January 22, 2009 4:41:26 pm
While all kinds of people are fainting at Obama rallies, the truth is that he would NEVER have gotten elected if Bush had not messed up things to THIS extent. Obama had thought he would get a few years in the Senate under his belt before trying his luck, but the current situation was just too ripe and inviting. There have been many political figures like him before, but the timing was what ruined their careers. But for Obama the time was perfect, and he is, if nothing else, a smooth talker, at least in long-winded speeches.
And it is ironic to see the Indians swooning over him. This is the same guy that had said that Indonesia is a great example of a "democratic Islamic state" - an idiotic and self-contradicting comment to begin with. And his plans about India are slowly coming to light. As as I had predicted, they will be hard for India to stomach. Bad days are ahead for India. Here's how I expect it to go:
He has run on the platform of anti-outsourcing. But US and Chinese interests are too interlinked. So he's going to kill two birds with one stone. He's going to follow these steps:
1) Explain to the Americans that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won without the Kashmir terrorism being solved (he's already started on this).
2) Explain to the Americans that "Kashmiris" deserve democracy (he's going to leave out the fact that the Hindu Kashmiris don't want that).
3) Ask Pakiland to give up POK, and ask India to give up Kashmir to form a separate country. Pakiland would have an orgasm if he does this, because India's Loss + Pakisland's Loss = HUGE gain for Pakis (net gain for Ummah).
4) Pressurize India by politicizing the outsourcing issue and holding it over India's head.
There are a few good things that can potentially come out of this:
1) ALL parties in India will unite as one against this. Finally we will have a united country.
2) The fifth columnists would come running out into the limelight with their tongues hanging out, and then will finally be publicly humiliated.
3) Advani and then Modi would be able to mobilize a united India that would make India much stronger than it is now.
4) Hopefully, the fifth columnists will be tarred and feathered in public.
5) And most of all, maybe FINALLY the Indian government (under Modi) would be mobilized to take over POK, revoke it's illegal autonomous status, and resettle Tamils from Tamil Nadu in POK.
A lot of Muslims like Tahmed are happy that Barrack Hussein Obama got elected. I think they will eventually be disappointed. Because Obama is misreading the united will of a billion+ people (minus the muslims) .
And it is ironic to see the Indians swooning over him. This is the same guy that had said that Indonesia is a great example of a "democratic Islamic state" - an idiotic and self-contradicting comment to begin with. And his plans about India are slowly coming to light. As as I had predicted, they will be hard for India to stomach. Bad days are ahead for India. Here's how I expect it to go:
He has run on the platform of anti-outsourcing. But US and Chinese interests are too interlinked. So he's going to kill two birds with one stone. He's going to follow these steps:
1) Explain to the Americans that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won without the Kashmir terrorism being solved (he's already started on this).
2) Explain to the Americans that "Kashmiris" deserve democracy (he's going to leave out the fact that the Hindu Kashmiris don't want that).
3) Ask Pakiland to give up POK, and ask India to give up Kashmir to form a separate country. Pakiland would have an orgasm if he does this, because India's Loss + Pakisland's Loss = HUGE gain for Pakis (net gain for Ummah).
4) Pressurize India by politicizing the outsourcing issue and holding it over India's head.
There are a few good things that can potentially come out of this:
1) ALL parties in India will unite as one against this. Finally we will have a united country.
2) The fifth columnists would come running out into the limelight with their tongues hanging out, and then will finally be publicly humiliated.
3) Advani and then Modi would be able to mobilize a united India that would make India much stronger than it is now.
4) Hopefully, the fifth columnists will be tarred and feathered in public.
5) And most of all, maybe FINALLY the Indian government (under Modi) would be mobilized to take over POK, revoke it's illegal autonomous status, and resettle Tamils from Tamil Nadu in POK.
A lot of Muslims like Tahmed are happy that Barrack Hussein Obama got elected. I think they will eventually be disappointed. Because Obama is misreading the united will of a billion+ people (minus the muslims) .
#5 Posted by ajeya on January 22, 2009 5:31:35 pm
This is for the members of the Lahore Club at Chowk:
We must dump Lahore Club
A Surya Prakash
Though their numbers are dwindling, members of the ‘Lahore Club’ (a bunch of pro-Pakistan do-gooders who always advise India to exercise ‘restraint’ after every Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack) and some of its offshoots are still around. After lying low for some time when public anger against Pakistan was at its peak in the immediate aftermath of 26/11, these self-styled peaceniks are now crawling out of the wood work and once again thrusting their unsolicited advice on Indians, the Government of India and the political elite in our country, and urging all and sundry to avoid utterances or actions that would hinder the ‘peace process’!
Since Indians are democrats and have high levels of tolerance, some fellow citizens and their non-Indian friends have made it a habit to lecture us on the virtues of peaceful co-existence after every terrorist strike. Among the arguments often advanced in support of their pro-Pakistan stance are: India must yield and thus ‘strengthen’ democratic forces; if India takes a hawkish stance, the Pakistani Army will gain the upper hand; war will wreck economic progress and leave the population even more impoverished than it is today; and, there is no such thing as a winnable war against Pakistan because it is a nuclear weapon state.
Those who push the ‘peace with Pakistan at any cost’ line have such a stranglehold on the Indian establishment that they have successfully prevented us from retaining the gains of the wars in 1965 and 1971 and taking effective measures to secure our borders. Their latest argument is that people-to-people relations and the bonds that have developed between the civil societies of the two countries should not be weakened. Needless to say, according to them, war is no option.
We are all by now familiar with this gibberish because we have heard it from the days of partition. After Pakistan’s aggression in Jammu & Kashmir in October 1947, the Prime Ministers of the two countries met at Lahore in December that year. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru ‘urged’ his counterpart Liaquat Ali Khan to “appeal� to the intruders to withdraw. Khan pleaded his inability to do so. He told the Indians that he ran a Government of “moderates� and that if he issued such an appeal, there was every danger of his Government being replaced by extremists!
The Indian leadership, prompted by the then members of the ‘Lahore Club’, fell for this ploy and agreed that it would be inappropriate for Khan (the man who sponsored this infiltration in the first place) to “appeal� to the infiltrators to backtrack. Thereafter, we have seen many repeats of this story leading to dozens of such examples of Pakistan’s aggression and India’s pusillanimity. Every time we got ready for the kill, rationalists came out of the woodwork and urged us to give in so that there is ‘lasting peace’ and the ‘danger of extremists gaining control in Pakistan’ is averted.
We should not fall for this gambit any more. We must end this habit of pathetic submission to Pakistan’s criminality and warmongering, but we cannot do that until we deal with these pseudo-patriots and expose their hypocrisy. If we fail to do so even after 26/11, we will forever lose the capacity to protect our borders, our democracy and our way of life, and renege on our responsibility to hand over a secure India to future generations.
Therefore, the first task should be to confront members of the ‘Lahore Club’ and its many mutations and ask them to find a more appropriate location to peddle their wares. For example, they could open shop in Islamabad and direct their unsolicited advice towards citizens of a country who are in dire need of basic political education. If these professional advisers are truly committed to peace and modern constitutional ideas as they pretend to be, they ought to read the Constitution of Pakistan or what passes for it and urge the citizenry across the border to drop the term ‘Islamic Republic’ from this basic document.
Side by side, they could suggest that provisions which require the President, the Prime Minister, Ministers and other constitutional functionaries to solemnly swear their allegiance to the Quran and to commit themselves to the preservation of what is described as ‘Islamic ideology’ should go. When the peaceniks achieve this goal, they will acquire the right to advice secular India and promote peace.
Also, once Pakistan is re-built on a secular foundation, our so-called ‘friends’ across the border will have taken the first step towards removing the dehumanising logic on which their nation rests since its inception in 1947. Since many members of the ‘Lahore Club’ are closet Communists who have hailed the dismantling of the Hindu Rashtra in Nepal and the advent of democracy in that country, we must presume that they have similar commitment to the dismantling of the Islamic Rashtra in Pakistan!
After this task is achieved, there are many more chores for these so-called ‘friends’ of India. The ‘Lahore Club’ can take up a task in which its members claim to have expertise — detoxification of school curriculum. Pakistani textbooks contain vulgar abuse of Hindus and Hinduism. Surely, the detoxification of Pakistani textbooks ought to be a noble undertaking for secular beings?
Further, many of these worthies are aware that the Pakistani state ensures that the seeds of jihadi violence germinate in young minds. Since 2007, a new Islamiat curriculum has been introduced in Pakistan and the teachings begin from Grade III and go on till Grade XII. Students are taught the full concept of jihad as also the virtues of monotheism. This is where hatred for Hindus, Hinduism and India is injected. When textbooks contain such rubbish about 800 million Hindus, how can there be harmonious people-to-people contact between these nations? Any way, who are these ‘people’ in India who are shamelessly maintaining contact with such uncivil people across the border?
We often respond in anger when the Americans or the British talk of India and Pakistan — two countries which are from a constitutional, moral and humanitarian sense, poles apart — in the same breath. Then, why do we put up with this twaddle from these so-called Indians who are hell bent on perpetuating the hyphenated approach between a modern, secular, liberal, democratic India and a medieval, Islamic, theocratic Pakistan? Those of us who value our freedom, our safety and the well-being of our children, must expose their humbug and impose sanctions on these hypocrites. What we need today is zero tolerance towards those who are weakening our resolve and rendering us vulnerable to state-sponsored terrorism from across the border. We can deal with Pakistan later.
We must dump Lahore Club
A Surya Prakash
Though their numbers are dwindling, members of the ‘Lahore Club’ (a bunch of pro-Pakistan do-gooders who always advise India to exercise ‘restraint’ after every Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack) and some of its offshoots are still around. After lying low for some time when public anger against Pakistan was at its peak in the immediate aftermath of 26/11, these self-styled peaceniks are now crawling out of the wood work and once again thrusting their unsolicited advice on Indians, the Government of India and the political elite in our country, and urging all and sundry to avoid utterances or actions that would hinder the ‘peace process’!
Since Indians are democrats and have high levels of tolerance, some fellow citizens and their non-Indian friends have made it a habit to lecture us on the virtues of peaceful co-existence after every terrorist strike. Among the arguments often advanced in support of their pro-Pakistan stance are: India must yield and thus ‘strengthen’ democratic forces; if India takes a hawkish stance, the Pakistani Army will gain the upper hand; war will wreck economic progress and leave the population even more impoverished than it is today; and, there is no such thing as a winnable war against Pakistan because it is a nuclear weapon state.
Those who push the ‘peace with Pakistan at any cost’ line have such a stranglehold on the Indian establishment that they have successfully prevented us from retaining the gains of the wars in 1965 and 1971 and taking effective measures to secure our borders. Their latest argument is that people-to-people relations and the bonds that have developed between the civil societies of the two countries should not be weakened. Needless to say, according to them, war is no option.
We are all by now familiar with this gibberish because we have heard it from the days of partition. After Pakistan’s aggression in Jammu & Kashmir in October 1947, the Prime Ministers of the two countries met at Lahore in December that year. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru ‘urged’ his counterpart Liaquat Ali Khan to “appeal� to the intruders to withdraw. Khan pleaded his inability to do so. He told the Indians that he ran a Government of “moderates� and that if he issued such an appeal, there was every danger of his Government being replaced by extremists!
The Indian leadership, prompted by the then members of the ‘Lahore Club’, fell for this ploy and agreed that it would be inappropriate for Khan (the man who sponsored this infiltration in the first place) to “appeal� to the infiltrators to backtrack. Thereafter, we have seen many repeats of this story leading to dozens of such examples of Pakistan’s aggression and India’s pusillanimity. Every time we got ready for the kill, rationalists came out of the woodwork and urged us to give in so that there is ‘lasting peace’ and the ‘danger of extremists gaining control in Pakistan’ is averted.
We should not fall for this gambit any more. We must end this habit of pathetic submission to Pakistan’s criminality and warmongering, but we cannot do that until we deal with these pseudo-patriots and expose their hypocrisy. If we fail to do so even after 26/11, we will forever lose the capacity to protect our borders, our democracy and our way of life, and renege on our responsibility to hand over a secure India to future generations.
Therefore, the first task should be to confront members of the ‘Lahore Club’ and its many mutations and ask them to find a more appropriate location to peddle their wares. For example, they could open shop in Islamabad and direct their unsolicited advice towards citizens of a country who are in dire need of basic political education. If these professional advisers are truly committed to peace and modern constitutional ideas as they pretend to be, they ought to read the Constitution of Pakistan or what passes for it and urge the citizenry across the border to drop the term ‘Islamic Republic’ from this basic document.
Side by side, they could suggest that provisions which require the President, the Prime Minister, Ministers and other constitutional functionaries to solemnly swear their allegiance to the Quran and to commit themselves to the preservation of what is described as ‘Islamic ideology’ should go. When the peaceniks achieve this goal, they will acquire the right to advice secular India and promote peace.
Also, once Pakistan is re-built on a secular foundation, our so-called ‘friends’ across the border will have taken the first step towards removing the dehumanising logic on which their nation rests since its inception in 1947. Since many members of the ‘Lahore Club’ are closet Communists who have hailed the dismantling of the Hindu Rashtra in Nepal and the advent of democracy in that country, we must presume that they have similar commitment to the dismantling of the Islamic Rashtra in Pakistan!
After this task is achieved, there are many more chores for these so-called ‘friends’ of India. The ‘Lahore Club’ can take up a task in which its members claim to have expertise — detoxification of school curriculum. Pakistani textbooks contain vulgar abuse of Hindus and Hinduism. Surely, the detoxification of Pakistani textbooks ought to be a noble undertaking for secular beings?
Further, many of these worthies are aware that the Pakistani state ensures that the seeds of jihadi violence germinate in young minds. Since 2007, a new Islamiat curriculum has been introduced in Pakistan and the teachings begin from Grade III and go on till Grade XII. Students are taught the full concept of jihad as also the virtues of monotheism. This is where hatred for Hindus, Hinduism and India is injected. When textbooks contain such rubbish about 800 million Hindus, how can there be harmonious people-to-people contact between these nations? Any way, who are these ‘people’ in India who are shamelessly maintaining contact with such uncivil people across the border?
We often respond in anger when the Americans or the British talk of India and Pakistan — two countries which are from a constitutional, moral and humanitarian sense, poles apart — in the same breath. Then, why do we put up with this twaddle from these so-called Indians who are hell bent on perpetuating the hyphenated approach between a modern, secular, liberal, democratic India and a medieval, Islamic, theocratic Pakistan? Those of us who value our freedom, our safety and the well-being of our children, must expose their humbug and impose sanctions on these hypocrites. What we need today is zero tolerance towards those who are weakening our resolve and rendering us vulnerable to state-sponsored terrorism from across the border. We can deal with Pakistan later.
#6 Posted by ahmedmadani on January 22, 2009 5:33:29 pm
It is hopeful president Obama is going to give attention to pakistan and Afghnistan area. Leadership in pakistan is doing right in asking for 60 Billiuon dollars aid in non wot related things. That appears more better than just getting military aid. He will have to find solution to Kashmir if Pakistan afghnistan need to succeed in WOT. This is loosing proposition. India is not helping in WOT in A stan. Todays road opening connecting Iranian Chabahar port with Afghan and spending 1.1 billion dollars shows pathetic efforts to damage big "G".
#7 Posted by ahmedmadani on January 22, 2009 5:58:32 pm
Re: # 5 Ajeya you should think why all indians want to visit Lahore than delhi ?
mr. AAkar patel of India when he visited lahore said , it is question of class. New Delhi never never lot that. Lahore is like paris europe and delhi is just cold hot dusti poor babus place.
Karachi leaves behind all others in most respects.
mr. AAkar patel of India when he visited lahore said , it is question of class. New Delhi never never lot that. Lahore is like paris europe and delhi is just cold hot dusti poor babus place.
Karachi leaves behind all others in most respects.
#8 Posted by tahir on January 22, 2009 7:39:55 pm
Silly folks, you have unbelieveable expectations from Obama! The job of each US president is to act as a puppet and do the bidding of his master. Please study the families, personalites, and their front organiztaions that run the real show.
With every presidential change, the fools dream of a rainbow; it always turns out to be a dagger in their backs.
America has created global terror, spread it beyond control using usurous dope and oil money, and wants to control everyone all the time through any means.
By reading ChowQ stuff, you'll never know the truth.
With every presidential change, the fools dream of a rainbow; it always turns out to be a dagger in their backs.
America has created global terror, spread it beyond control using usurous dope and oil money, and wants to control everyone all the time through any means.
By reading ChowQ stuff, you'll never know the truth.
#9 Posted by dost_mittar on January 22, 2009 8:08:49 pm
Beena:
I agree with Arif Parvaiz. Obama will perhaps be an above-average President and will be a disappoint only to those who think of him as some kind of a Messiah.
As for his Pakistani and Muslim friends, hats off to them; they all remained discreet and quiet about him when mentioning them could have hurt his campaign. He himself is less concerned about hiding his Muslim-connection now and took his oath under his full name,Barrack Hussein, which he earlier downplayed. He also spoke about creating new relations with the Muslim world and called the US a nation of Muslims, next only to Christians.
As Parvaiz said, Obama's talk of bombing Pakistan was merely campaign rhetoric. Hopefully, he will not ask Pakistan to do what it cannot: he can ask them to stop supporting taleban but not to stop sympathising with Afghans fighting foreigners or Pathans supporting them. He cannot ask them to end their support for sharia-lite, which does not include burning girls' schools but does include the kind of activities undertaken by the Lal Masjid occupants, such as closing massage parlours. He cannot ask them to end their dreams about Kashmir.
What he can ask Pakistan, and hopefully will,is to crack down on the powerful elements within the state who extend active support and training to jihadis with cash, training or logistics support, close down madrassas who train jihadis and ban, really ban, all organizations that support and train jihadis for "mission kashmir", although the last one is merely a pipedream of Indians.
I agree with Arif Parvaiz. Obama will perhaps be an above-average President and will be a disappoint only to those who think of him as some kind of a Messiah.
As for his Pakistani and Muslim friends, hats off to them; they all remained discreet and quiet about him when mentioning them could have hurt his campaign. He himself is less concerned about hiding his Muslim-connection now and took his oath under his full name,Barrack Hussein, which he earlier downplayed. He also spoke about creating new relations with the Muslim world and called the US a nation of Muslims, next only to Christians.
As Parvaiz said, Obama's talk of bombing Pakistan was merely campaign rhetoric. Hopefully, he will not ask Pakistan to do what it cannot: he can ask them to stop supporting taleban but not to stop sympathising with Afghans fighting foreigners or Pathans supporting them. He cannot ask them to end their support for sharia-lite, which does not include burning girls' schools but does include the kind of activities undertaken by the Lal Masjid occupants, such as closing massage parlours. He cannot ask them to end their dreams about Kashmir.
What he can ask Pakistan, and hopefully will,is to crack down on the powerful elements within the state who extend active support and training to jihadis with cash, training or logistics support, close down madrassas who train jihadis and ban, really ban, all organizations that support and train jihadis for "mission kashmir", although the last one is merely a pipedream of Indians.
#10 Posted by Romair on January 22, 2009 9:34:39 pm
dost-mittar #: ...as i have always stated, the future of south asia, lies in the behavior and policies of its largest country - India - not its much tinier neighbors....the above is true for any region........
......obama, correctly, mentioned that peace in south asia from india to afghanistan is tied to kashmir.....everything from state to individual terrorism, from mukti bahani to LeT, from the separation of bengal to to the incidence in mumbai, is tied around the original kashmir situation.........you can extrapolate out a totally different south asia, had there been a plebescite in kashmir, as promised, in 1948 or so.......
......this is the big question.....will obama be able to convince india to hold some sort of a plebescite on kashmir.......i doubt india will agree......hence i don't see too much of a change in south asia......
......trying to solve south asian problems, without the largest entity, agreeing to a moral, legal, ethical (and un-based) solution to a major geographical problem, is impossible.......
usually such solutions are right in front of everyone.....however, one entity doesn't want to pursue them......and it has enough power to ensure it never gets pursued......everything else is a by-product......the same situation exists in palestine......
......by-products will always be present, if the core item remains unsolved.......this is the law of nature.......unfortunately, everyone from the indian left to center to right is unwilling to even accept that the whole world considers kashmir to be occuppied and sees it as the main catalyst of the problems in the region......as well as the fact that an overwhelming number of deaths in kashmir are due to indian state terrorism, and only a minority are due to any other kind of terrorism....it is even unwilling to ask the kashmiris, for their view, on who they think is killing them........
......the moment pakistan gets some kind of economic stability, and afgahnistan stabilizes, pakistan will readjust to the new situation and will continue to keep its non-state kashmiri fighters, in its back pocket.....in its opinion, if it doesn't do that india will, simply, swallow kashmir further, and will then move its 700k soldies on punjab and sindh's borders.....further threatening pakistan.....
....barring pakistan's economic and social collapse, there is nothing india can do to stop pakistan from doing that.....as is apparent from the mumbai incidence.....other than screaming and yelling, india hasn't been able to do anything......much like there is nothing pakistan can do to force india to give up kashmir.....ohter than screaming and yelling.....
......so india has to hope for an economic and social collapse of pakistan, which would disintegrate pakistan, and then it can negotiate with each separate entity, separately......however, an unstable pakistan is not in the interest of india, if you ask me......much like an unstable afghanistan, has totally damaged pakistan.......
the solution to the problem is a plebescite in kashmir.....india will never agree to that.....so i think life will go on, the way it has been going on........the current lull is due to the economic problems pakistan is facing as well as the situation in afghanistan.......if these are resolved, then i think it will be back to square one, in some form or manner......
......obama, correctly, mentioned that peace in south asia from india to afghanistan is tied to kashmir.....everything from state to individual terrorism, from mukti bahani to LeT, from the separation of bengal to to the incidence in mumbai, is tied around the original kashmir situation.........you can extrapolate out a totally different south asia, had there been a plebescite in kashmir, as promised, in 1948 or so.......
......this is the big question.....will obama be able to convince india to hold some sort of a plebescite on kashmir.......i doubt india will agree......hence i don't see too much of a change in south asia......
......trying to solve south asian problems, without the largest entity, agreeing to a moral, legal, ethical (and un-based) solution to a major geographical problem, is impossible.......
usually such solutions are right in front of everyone.....however, one entity doesn't want to pursue them......and it has enough power to ensure it never gets pursued......everything else is a by-product......the same situation exists in palestine......
......by-products will always be present, if the core item remains unsolved.......this is the law of nature.......unfortunately, everyone from the indian left to center to right is unwilling to even accept that the whole world considers kashmir to be occuppied and sees it as the main catalyst of the problems in the region......as well as the fact that an overwhelming number of deaths in kashmir are due to indian state terrorism, and only a minority are due to any other kind of terrorism....it is even unwilling to ask the kashmiris, for their view, on who they think is killing them........
......the moment pakistan gets some kind of economic stability, and afgahnistan stabilizes, pakistan will readjust to the new situation and will continue to keep its non-state kashmiri fighters, in its back pocket.....in its opinion, if it doesn't do that india will, simply, swallow kashmir further, and will then move its 700k soldies on punjab and sindh's borders.....further threatening pakistan.....
....barring pakistan's economic and social collapse, there is nothing india can do to stop pakistan from doing that.....as is apparent from the mumbai incidence.....other than screaming and yelling, india hasn't been able to do anything......much like there is nothing pakistan can do to force india to give up kashmir.....ohter than screaming and yelling.....
......so india has to hope for an economic and social collapse of pakistan, which would disintegrate pakistan, and then it can negotiate with each separate entity, separately......however, an unstable pakistan is not in the interest of india, if you ask me......much like an unstable afghanistan, has totally damaged pakistan.......
the solution to the problem is a plebescite in kashmir.....india will never agree to that.....so i think life will go on, the way it has been going on........the current lull is due to the economic problems pakistan is facing as well as the situation in afghanistan.......if these are resolved, then i think it will be back to square one, in some form or manner......
#11 Posted by majumdar on January 22, 2009 9:46:10 pm
FM Romair,
You keep telling us Indians "Give Kashmir freedom else Talibs will take over Pakistan" but suppose we were to offer you a deal "Allow Talibs to take over Pak, we will give Kashmir to you" will you take up the offer?
Regards
You keep telling us Indians "Give Kashmir freedom else Talibs will take over Pakistan" but suppose we were to offer you a deal "Allow Talibs to take over Pak, we will give Kashmir to you" will you take up the offer?
Regards
#12 Posted by harish_hyd on January 22, 2009 10:38:31 pm
#10 Posted by Romair
.......unfortunately, everyone from the indian left to center to right is unwilling to even accept that the whole world considers kashmir to be occuppied and sees it as the main catalyst of the problems in the region......
Abay gadhay, if the whole world considers Kashmir to be a problem, how come none of the major countries support Pakistan's stance? Don't pull stuff out of your a$$. The fact is that if Obama talked about Kashmir, he also talked about Pakistan and the problem it has become to the world. And guess which is more urgent?
so i think life will go on, the way it has been going on........
What makes you think so? With every passing year, Pakistan continues its descent into chaos. If not for US aid, who knows? So don't be too deluded, reality might kick you on your teeth and give you a rude awakening.
.......unfortunately, everyone from the indian left to center to right is unwilling to even accept that the whole world considers kashmir to be occuppied and sees it as the main catalyst of the problems in the region......
Abay gadhay, if the whole world considers Kashmir to be a problem, how come none of the major countries support Pakistan's stance? Don't pull stuff out of your a$$. The fact is that if Obama talked about Kashmir, he also talked about Pakistan and the problem it has become to the world. And guess which is more urgent?
so i think life will go on, the way it has been going on........
What makes you think so? With every passing year, Pakistan continues its descent into chaos. If not for US aid, who knows? So don't be too deluded, reality might kick you on your teeth and give you a rude awakening.
#13 Posted by harish_hyd on January 22, 2009 10:38:56 pm
#10 Posted by Romair
.......unfortunately, everyone from the indian left to center to right is unwilling to even accept that the whole world considers kashmir to be occuppied and sees it as the main catalyst of the problems in the region......
Abay gadhay, if the whole world considers Kashmir to be a problem, how come none of the major countries support Pakistan's stance? Don't pull stuff out of your a$$. The fact is that if Obama talked about Kashmir, he also talked about Pakistan and the problem it has become to the world. And guess which is more urgent?
so i think life will go on, the way it has been going on........
What makes you think so? With every passing year, Pakistan continues its descent into chaos. If not for US aid, who knows? So don't be too deluded, reality might kick you on your teeth and give you a rude awakening.
.......unfortunately, everyone from the indian left to center to right is unwilling to even accept that the whole world considers kashmir to be occuppied and sees it as the main catalyst of the problems in the region......
Abay gadhay, if the whole world considers Kashmir to be a problem, how come none of the major countries support Pakistan's stance? Don't pull stuff out of your a$$. The fact is that if Obama talked about Kashmir, he also talked about Pakistan and the problem it has become to the world. And guess which is more urgent?
so i think life will go on, the way it has been going on........
What makes you think so? With every passing year, Pakistan continues its descent into chaos. If not for US aid, who knows? So don't be too deluded, reality might kick you on your teeth and give you a rude awakening.
#14 Posted by nb on January 22, 2009 11:00:59 pm
Romair, this is like "Give in to me else I'll shoot myself" from Pakistan, isn't it?
#15 Posted by Romair on January 22, 2009 11:37:55 pm
majumdar: 'You keep telling us Indians "Give Kashmir freedom else Talibs will take over Pakistan" but suppose we were to offer you a deal "Allow Talibs to take over Pak, we will give Kashmir to you" will you take up the offer?'
....i think your comment indicates that psyche that is currently prevalent in india....i never stated what you proclaim i am stating....please highlighted where i said this......
....i don't discuss issues based on nationalism.......i discuss issues neutrally.....
...what i tried to describe is the current situation in south asia and how the two countries are thinking and the mistakes they are making.....
....i don't think the talibs can take over paksitan......unless pakistan makes massive blunders....they can, at best, cause a huge amount of trouble.......which they are doing.....and they could do the same in india.....
.....the moral issue of kashmir has been decided by the un....it belongs to the wishes of kashmiris......if they want to join india, by all means they should.....
however, currently, kashmir is in a neither here-nor there situation.....this is what i attempted to describe.....i.e. what india and pakistan are doing, and how they may react in the future.....
i am surprised you saw that as my saying, "Give Kashmir to Us".....i would suggest you need to get out of this mode and look at the issue objectively and neutrally to understand the moves both sides are making......
....i think your comment indicates that psyche that is currently prevalent in india....i never stated what you proclaim i am stating....please highlighted where i said this......
....i don't discuss issues based on nationalism.......i discuss issues neutrally.....
...what i tried to describe is the current situation in south asia and how the two countries are thinking and the mistakes they are making.....
....i don't think the talibs can take over paksitan......unless pakistan makes massive blunders....they can, at best, cause a huge amount of trouble.......which they are doing.....and they could do the same in india.....
.....the moral issue of kashmir has been decided by the un....it belongs to the wishes of kashmiris......if they want to join india, by all means they should.....
however, currently, kashmir is in a neither here-nor there situation.....this is what i attempted to describe.....i.e. what india and pakistan are doing, and how they may react in the future.....
i am surprised you saw that as my saying, "Give Kashmir to Us".....i would suggest you need to get out of this mode and look at the issue objectively and neutrally to understand the moves both sides are making......
#16 Posted by majumdar on January 22, 2009 11:58:36 pm
Romair,
Let me try to explain to you again. There is no question that the KMs want to have nothing to do with India. There is also no dispute on the fact that there are UN resolutions outstanding on Kashmir.
But that does not mean that India is going to take either of the above into cognisance. Because it believes rightly or wrongly that shud it give Kashmiris the right to self-determination two things will happen:
1. Give other provinces bad ideas.
2. Result in large scale Hindoo-Muslim bad blood
Now, I know that you do not believe any of the above to be true, but that is irrelevant what is important is what GOI believes in.
Now, India will give in to the demand for a plebiscite if and only if:
1. Pakistan drubs India in a war.
2. Extraordinary amount of Western pressure is applied, the kind we have not seen before.
3. India finds that the cost of holding onto Kashmir is prohibitively expensive.
Unless either of the above happens, India isnt going to budge an inch.
Now let us take what has happened in the last 20 years of insurgency. Inspite of whatever you guys have thrown at us, incl 26/11, India prolly has seen a faster economic growth and a better maturation of political processes (notwithstanding communal and caste divides) than it has ever in its history. Now you tell us what has happened to Pakistan in the last 20.
As I see it India's main challenge is to keep growing its economy and address two serious internal issues (Hindoo-Muslim divide in the mainland which has very little to do with Kashmir and unequal growth which is partly getting reflected in Naxalism). If we can do this, we can ride out the challenges posed by Pakistan and Kashmiri Muslims.
Regards
Let me try to explain to you again. There is no question that the KMs want to have nothing to do with India. There is also no dispute on the fact that there are UN resolutions outstanding on Kashmir.
But that does not mean that India is going to take either of the above into cognisance. Because it believes rightly or wrongly that shud it give Kashmiris the right to self-determination two things will happen:
1. Give other provinces bad ideas.
2. Result in large scale Hindoo-Muslim bad blood
Now, I know that you do not believe any of the above to be true, but that is irrelevant what is important is what GOI believes in.
Now, India will give in to the demand for a plebiscite if and only if:
1. Pakistan drubs India in a war.
2. Extraordinary amount of Western pressure is applied, the kind we have not seen before.
3. India finds that the cost of holding onto Kashmir is prohibitively expensive.
Unless either of the above happens, India isnt going to budge an inch.
Now let us take what has happened in the last 20 years of insurgency. Inspite of whatever you guys have thrown at us, incl 26/11, India prolly has seen a faster economic growth and a better maturation of political processes (notwithstanding communal and caste divides) than it has ever in its history. Now you tell us what has happened to Pakistan in the last 20.
As I see it India's main challenge is to keep growing its economy and address two serious internal issues (Hindoo-Muslim divide in the mainland which has very little to do with Kashmir and unequal growth which is partly getting reflected in Naxalism). If we can do this, we can ride out the challenges posed by Pakistan and Kashmiri Muslims.
Regards
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- SureshM: Re: # 36 God Bless... Uneven Democracy : The
- SureshM: Re: # 59 "kuwait... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 35 this... Uneven Democracy : The
- jayp: Re: # 55 Good muslim... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- jayp: Re: # 53 thanks madani... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- Pardesi: Breaking News for ahmedmadani... Uneven Democracy : The
- a_r_j_u_n325: #94 Posted by... The Strange Case of
- a_r_j_u_n325: #95 Posted by... The Strange Case of
