Balkan Tragedy: A Re-enactment of the 1971 Genocide in Bangladesh
Jamal Hasan April 7, 1999
#58 Posted by rishi on April 15, 1999 3:52:34 pm
Re : OMAR
To reply 54 :
I have looked into the mirror more than once and i know where me or the country where i was born stand, thank you.
`` 1947 – Treatment of Pakistan, hogging all military supplies of which one third were suppose to go to Pakistan ``
-- And this also was the same country which under directions from Gandhi provided valuable foreign exchange to Pakistan when it could have gotten away without it. I am not claiming that India is a noble saint. There can be no one noble and nobility is not a valuable asset to anyone in today`s world (even though gandhi attempted at it..whether you deny it or not). Rather, a country needs to be sane. And sanity states that a country should look at things practically to its benefits and when its leaders act otherwise , the country should throw those leaders out through some process or the other.
`` 1947 – Illegal occupation and annexation of Kashmir by India to say nothing of Hyderabad and at least 2 other states that were to join moth-eaten Pakistan created by the British by division of Bengal and Punjab, in many cases forcing muslim majority areas on the border into India ``
-- one third of kashmir was annexed by pakistan which also ceded a part to china. get your history facts staight. India on the other hand signed an instrument of accession and the people and the king of kashmir accepted it. The issue is over the plebiscite promised by Nehru and not the government of India. For this to be brought into reality, Pakistan first has to liberate or vacate POK. Hyderabad and Goa were annexed, i agree. Much as how Texas was annexed by the US. True. This does not mean that India is going to annex Pakistan now,, just like how the US is not going to annex Mexico anymore. How far do you want to dig into history my boy and do remember that the skeletons you dig up will not be always to your fancy.
``1963 – Annexation and occupation of Goa by force from Portugal``
-- answered this already. Actually i never looked at it from this perspective. Defeating a european nation ...hmmm...hmmm
``1965-- India moved forces into the Rann of Kutch``
-- agreed.
``1971—Sponsorship of Mukti Bahini from its soil, and invasion of East Pakistan, breaking up the country``
-- agreed. But no invasion of East Pakistan. It was Pakistan which Invaded India . History ???? and FACTS ????
`` 1960s-70s---After obtaining ‘heavy water’ from Canada and technological help in setting up nuclear power plants for peaceful purposes, ‘Bhudda Smiled’ as India exploded its first nuclear device for which it has obtained help from foreign nations including Canada through duplicitous assurances regarding its ‘peaceful’ nuclear program. Canada ended all nuclear aid to India, claiming to having been duped by Indian leaders and their treacherous lies.``
-- Agreed and Accepted
`` 1970s--- Bhutan & Sikim, do I really need to list details of what India did to these 2 formerly independent albeit weak Himalyan states ?``
-- These two states/countries do not carry any grouse against the Indian Union. You can go to rest easy on this one
`` 1980s--- India creates crisis with poor Bangladesh over river water sharing.``
-- A legitimate crises over water sharing. It has been solved today much to the delight of the bengalis on both sides of the border.
`` 1983--- Siachen crisis began, although here Zia may share some of the blame, but India has consistently refused to resolve the crisis by simply withdrawing troops which Pakistan has repeatedly suggested. Cost to India and Pakistan $1 million daily + the human misery of the conditions prevailing. ``
-- India can afford this cost...or so it appears.
`` 1980s--- Economic Embargo of Poor Landlocked Nepal over its purchases over anti aircraft guns from China ``
-- Wow, aren`t you shedding tears for Hindu Nepal, the only Hindu country in the whole wide world.. For a moment i thought that your grouse was against Hindus. Now that it is against India i can rest easy. Nepalies don`t seem to have any such grouse against the Indians though...thank you
`` 1980s--- Support for LITTE terrorist group in Sri Lanka to put pressure on Sri Lankan govt to allow India troops and forces a base and foothold on the Island. When Sri Lanka acceded, India switch support and fought the LITTE.``
-- A mistake which was fully attributable to India and Rajiv Gandhi in particular. And India paid the price. But do note that both these actions by the govt of india were opposed in many quarters (by the press , the public and the opposition ) ...very much similar to the vietnam episode. That is what democracy is..my boy
`` 1980s--- Brutal repression of various insurgencies in India, in Nagaland, Punjab, Kashmir and others.``
-- insurgencies will be dealt with in any nation worth its salt.
`` 1984 --- Thousands of Sikhs die in Communal riots in Delhi etc after Indira Gandhi killed.``
-- an act done by the followers of the congress party and goons. The nation owed and did apologized to the sikh community (who are a part of the extended hindu family )
`` 1990s--- Babri Masjid demolition by BJP etc while Indian govt refused to intervene reveals the other face of ‘Secular India’, also the communal riots that follow in Bombay result in thousand of Muslims dead. ``
-- Deeply regrettable. But this is also the same country were a 20 % minority could return the same act to the 70 % majority . And this is again only because the 70 % majority has more than 80 % secularists in its fold. So essentially you are attributing the actions of a miniscule 5 % of the country and vote hungry politicians to the whole nation. never mind....yes babri masjid episode was a slur on the country`s democracy and secularism..........
`` 1980s/90s--- Massive increases in military spending annually, BLUE WATER NAVY Developed. Increased POWER PROJECTION CAPABILITIES.``
-- what else do you expect ?
`` 1990s--- Acquisition of Nuclear sub from Russia, First country to test nukes in the region, and develop long range missiles. Pakistan has constantly been forced to parry each Indian thrust/move. India conducts massive military exercises near the border. ``
-- again what else do you expect ?
`` 1990s--- Indian fanatics persecute and kill Christian missionaries trying to help the poor in the country’s North. India intensifies nuclear and missile race on the sub continent, plans to spend billions of dollars in acquisition of military hardware while its poverty stricken people starve and sleep in the streets. ``
-- ha ha ha.... very funny... about the christians,,, this country has a christian defense minister and its next prime minister might probably be a christian. this is not a nation were christians are persecuted by law as in pakistan (remember the shariat and the blasphemy). A few christians also killed and raped hindus in India. Does this mean that India is persecuting Hindus. Wake up will ya ?
`` The above brief timeline of history clearly shows India’s hegemonic designs in the region and its often crude methods of dealing with its neighbors, as well as shatter the facade it tries to project of internal harmony to the World as the ‘World’s biggest democracy’. ``
-- Yes, India does have hegemonic ambitions. Rather than terming it hegemonic, India likes to think of itself as a big and powerful nation both economically , scientifically and militarily. But pakistan need not be scared of India, not anymore with your nukes and all.
`` The time line also reveals a pattern of hegemony and behavior towards all its neighbors as well as all minorities within India. ``
-- neighbours i understand,, but minorities.... now who should be looking into the mirror , dear one ?
`` Its hard to imagine this is the birthplace of the architect of nonviolence Gandhi. ``
-- you are actually praising Gandhi... even i would not do that ............
``It also teaches a lesson that the only way to deal with India is from a position of strength and a strong willingness to knock out all its teeth if necessary. ``
-- My you really believe that don`t you. A classic example of how pakistani govt has made almost all pakistanis to become. You not only belittle your neighbours potentials but also overrate yours. A strong man does not boast about his strength . It is always a weak man who does that to boost his purported strength. Read todays msnbc news which talks about how much a dud the Ghauri missile was and how the pakistanis were overrating its capabilities to match up with their stupid neighbours. Brave words my friend. and if that makes you go to bed happily , i shall not dispute it... but then you do know the truth don`t you.
`` This is the only known method of restraining India. (The Chinese example of 1963 shows the way)``
-- The chinese are bigger and stronger. We know it, realize it and respect it. That is why India is a smarter nation. A smart person is one who realizes that someone is stronger than himself and respects it and tries to protect himself , not someone who kids himself into believing that he is smarter and can know the stronger mans teeth off.
``Its an UGLY country with EVIL designs.``
-- now India is EVIL and UGLY... What else ?
`` Not that I have too many illusions about the state of affairs in Pakistan and its history. But India has always adopted a hypocritical holier than thou attitude. ``
-- Aha, so finally we are to where it counts. All you are bothered about is not that India is so Bad, but because even though India is so bad, every one blames Pakistan even though it is only as bad as India, while they praise India inspite of being a bad boy......I understand. Now what shall we do about it......???????????????
Rishi
To reply 54 :
I have looked into the mirror more than once and i know where me or the country where i was born stand, thank you.
`` 1947 – Treatment of Pakistan, hogging all military supplies of which one third were suppose to go to Pakistan ``
-- And this also was the same country which under directions from Gandhi provided valuable foreign exchange to Pakistan when it could have gotten away without it. I am not claiming that India is a noble saint. There can be no one noble and nobility is not a valuable asset to anyone in today`s world (even though gandhi attempted at it..whether you deny it or not). Rather, a country needs to be sane. And sanity states that a country should look at things practically to its benefits and when its leaders act otherwise , the country should throw those leaders out through some process or the other.
`` 1947 – Illegal occupation and annexation of Kashmir by India to say nothing of Hyderabad and at least 2 other states that were to join moth-eaten Pakistan created by the British by division of Bengal and Punjab, in many cases forcing muslim majority areas on the border into India ``
-- one third of kashmir was annexed by pakistan which also ceded a part to china. get your history facts staight. India on the other hand signed an instrument of accession and the people and the king of kashmir accepted it. The issue is over the plebiscite promised by Nehru and not the government of India. For this to be brought into reality, Pakistan first has to liberate or vacate POK. Hyderabad and Goa were annexed, i agree. Much as how Texas was annexed by the US. True. This does not mean that India is going to annex Pakistan now,, just like how the US is not going to annex Mexico anymore. How far do you want to dig into history my boy and do remember that the skeletons you dig up will not be always to your fancy.
``1963 – Annexation and occupation of Goa by force from Portugal``
-- answered this already. Actually i never looked at it from this perspective. Defeating a european nation ...hmmm...hmmm
``1965-- India moved forces into the Rann of Kutch``
-- agreed.
``1971—Sponsorship of Mukti Bahini from its soil, and invasion of East Pakistan, breaking up the country``
-- agreed. But no invasion of East Pakistan. It was Pakistan which Invaded India . History ???? and FACTS ????
`` 1960s-70s---After obtaining ‘heavy water’ from Canada and technological help in setting up nuclear power plants for peaceful purposes, ‘Bhudda Smiled’ as India exploded its first nuclear device for which it has obtained help from foreign nations including Canada through duplicitous assurances regarding its ‘peaceful’ nuclear program. Canada ended all nuclear aid to India, claiming to having been duped by Indian leaders and their treacherous lies.``
-- Agreed and Accepted
`` 1970s--- Bhutan & Sikim, do I really need to list details of what India did to these 2 formerly independent albeit weak Himalyan states ?``
-- These two states/countries do not carry any grouse against the Indian Union. You can go to rest easy on this one
`` 1980s--- India creates crisis with poor Bangladesh over river water sharing.``
-- A legitimate crises over water sharing. It has been solved today much to the delight of the bengalis on both sides of the border.
`` 1983--- Siachen crisis began, although here Zia may share some of the blame, but India has consistently refused to resolve the crisis by simply withdrawing troops which Pakistan has repeatedly suggested. Cost to India and Pakistan $1 million daily + the human misery of the conditions prevailing. ``
-- India can afford this cost...or so it appears.
`` 1980s--- Economic Embargo of Poor Landlocked Nepal over its purchases over anti aircraft guns from China ``
-- Wow, aren`t you shedding tears for Hindu Nepal, the only Hindu country in the whole wide world.. For a moment i thought that your grouse was against Hindus. Now that it is against India i can rest easy. Nepalies don`t seem to have any such grouse against the Indians though...thank you
`` 1980s--- Support for LITTE terrorist group in Sri Lanka to put pressure on Sri Lankan govt to allow India troops and forces a base and foothold on the Island. When Sri Lanka acceded, India switch support and fought the LITTE.``
-- A mistake which was fully attributable to India and Rajiv Gandhi in particular. And India paid the price. But do note that both these actions by the govt of india were opposed in many quarters (by the press , the public and the opposition ) ...very much similar to the vietnam episode. That is what democracy is..my boy
`` 1980s--- Brutal repression of various insurgencies in India, in Nagaland, Punjab, Kashmir and others.``
-- insurgencies will be dealt with in any nation worth its salt.
`` 1984 --- Thousands of Sikhs die in Communal riots in Delhi etc after Indira Gandhi killed.``
-- an act done by the followers of the congress party and goons. The nation owed and did apologized to the sikh community (who are a part of the extended hindu family )
`` 1990s--- Babri Masjid demolition by BJP etc while Indian govt refused to intervene reveals the other face of ‘Secular India’, also the communal riots that follow in Bombay result in thousand of Muslims dead. ``
-- Deeply regrettable. But this is also the same country were a 20 % minority could return the same act to the 70 % majority . And this is again only because the 70 % majority has more than 80 % secularists in its fold. So essentially you are attributing the actions of a miniscule 5 % of the country and vote hungry politicians to the whole nation. never mind....yes babri masjid episode was a slur on the country`s democracy and secularism..........
`` 1980s/90s--- Massive increases in military spending annually, BLUE WATER NAVY Developed. Increased POWER PROJECTION CAPABILITIES.``
-- what else do you expect ?
`` 1990s--- Acquisition of Nuclear sub from Russia, First country to test nukes in the region, and develop long range missiles. Pakistan has constantly been forced to parry each Indian thrust/move. India conducts massive military exercises near the border. ``
-- again what else do you expect ?
`` 1990s--- Indian fanatics persecute and kill Christian missionaries trying to help the poor in the country’s North. India intensifies nuclear and missile race on the sub continent, plans to spend billions of dollars in acquisition of military hardware while its poverty stricken people starve and sleep in the streets. ``
-- ha ha ha.... very funny... about the christians,,, this country has a christian defense minister and its next prime minister might probably be a christian. this is not a nation were christians are persecuted by law as in pakistan (remember the shariat and the blasphemy). A few christians also killed and raped hindus in India. Does this mean that India is persecuting Hindus. Wake up will ya ?
`` The above brief timeline of history clearly shows India’s hegemonic designs in the region and its often crude methods of dealing with its neighbors, as well as shatter the facade it tries to project of internal harmony to the World as the ‘World’s biggest democracy’. ``
-- Yes, India does have hegemonic ambitions. Rather than terming it hegemonic, India likes to think of itself as a big and powerful nation both economically , scientifically and militarily. But pakistan need not be scared of India, not anymore with your nukes and all.
`` The time line also reveals a pattern of hegemony and behavior towards all its neighbors as well as all minorities within India. ``
-- neighbours i understand,, but minorities.... now who should be looking into the mirror , dear one ?
`` Its hard to imagine this is the birthplace of the architect of nonviolence Gandhi. ``
-- you are actually praising Gandhi... even i would not do that ............
``It also teaches a lesson that the only way to deal with India is from a position of strength and a strong willingness to knock out all its teeth if necessary. ``
-- My you really believe that don`t you. A classic example of how pakistani govt has made almost all pakistanis to become. You not only belittle your neighbours potentials but also overrate yours. A strong man does not boast about his strength . It is always a weak man who does that to boost his purported strength. Read todays msnbc news which talks about how much a dud the Ghauri missile was and how the pakistanis were overrating its capabilities to match up with their stupid neighbours. Brave words my friend. and if that makes you go to bed happily , i shall not dispute it... but then you do know the truth don`t you.
`` This is the only known method of restraining India. (The Chinese example of 1963 shows the way)``
-- The chinese are bigger and stronger. We know it, realize it and respect it. That is why India is a smarter nation. A smart person is one who realizes that someone is stronger than himself and respects it and tries to protect himself , not someone who kids himself into believing that he is smarter and can know the stronger mans teeth off.
``Its an UGLY country with EVIL designs.``
-- now India is EVIL and UGLY... What else ?
`` Not that I have too many illusions about the state of affairs in Pakistan and its history. But India has always adopted a hypocritical holier than thou attitude. ``
-- Aha, so finally we are to where it counts. All you are bothered about is not that India is so Bad, but because even though India is so bad, every one blames Pakistan even though it is only as bad as India, while they praise India inspite of being a bad boy......I understand. Now what shall we do about it......???????????????
Rishi
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#57 Posted by JR on April 15, 1999 3:52:34 pm
There are a few things about Pakistan that stand out in a strange way. Pakistan is one bundle of contradictions. How about this for starts, Pakistan is an Islamic republic, essentially a theocratic state and yet the constitution of Pakistan guarantees all freedoms to every citizen, even a non-Muslim. A theocratic democracy? Well, the world knows how well that has worked in Pakistan. The reality is, Pakistan is an army, a Muslim army, with a state. And the army has done a great job with the propaganda by continuing to paint a picture of constant threat of aggression and hence the heavy defense expenditure. Finally everything being spent on is only Defence. The whole identity of the nation and its peoples is based on this Islamic Army and a modern political environment is trying to be fashioned from it. What you see in Pakistan today are the failures of those travails.
The national language of Pakistan is Urdu. Urdu was and is an exclusive, high society language of some well established Muslim communities with origins in India. By no means is Urdu a majority language considering the geography of modern Pakistan. But again, a contradiction of sorts continues its flawed existence. Take Kashmir, a geographic entity at the storm centre of South Asian politics- Yes. I say it is again one of Pakistan`s interesting contradictions. What is it that Pakistan wants? Kashmir for itself? NO! The recent rhetoric is that all Pakistan wants is for India to allow Kashmiris to self determine. And Pakistan will do anything, even risk nuclear war so that Kashmiris can self determine. Pakistan does not want to risk nuclear war for any of its own pressing problems but will risk nuclear war so that the neighboring Kashmiris may have their freedom.
Mohamed Ali Jinnah, the father of the nation, the proponent of the two nation theory wanted a safe place for Muslims. From whom? Now you see that by the creation of Pakistan, its peoples are no safer, because its leadership says that there is a constant threat of aggression from the hegemon neighbor. Are the Muslims any safer now with nuclear missiles aimed in their direction? How about East Pakistan and West Pakistan, geographically separated by a 1000 kms. I cant believe Jinnah agreed for such a country already divided to govern. Another contradiction that was. Take Pakistan`s foreign policy, it has a friend in America, a friend who labels it a terrorist state, a friend who has sanctions against it, Pressler Amendment, no help at times of war (1965 and 1971), but still a friend nevertheless. Contradiction or what?
I firmly believe that Pakistan needs to redefine itself politically and internationally. Indian leaders are well aware of the inherent chaos in Pakistan and are capitalizing on it. They are taunting and leading on Pakistan into an arms race which they very well know Pakistan cannot afford. Remember how they allowed the East and West Pakistan thing to prove to Pakistan`s detriment? They will continue to undermine Pakistan much the same way that the US led the USSR into its present quagmire. Set aside the jingoism and take a hard look at the real state of affairs.
The national language of Pakistan is Urdu. Urdu was and is an exclusive, high society language of some well established Muslim communities with origins in India. By no means is Urdu a majority language considering the geography of modern Pakistan. But again, a contradiction of sorts continues its flawed existence. Take Kashmir, a geographic entity at the storm centre of South Asian politics- Yes. I say it is again one of Pakistan`s interesting contradictions. What is it that Pakistan wants? Kashmir for itself? NO! The recent rhetoric is that all Pakistan wants is for India to allow Kashmiris to self determine. And Pakistan will do anything, even risk nuclear war so that Kashmiris can self determine. Pakistan does not want to risk nuclear war for any of its own pressing problems but will risk nuclear war so that the neighboring Kashmiris may have their freedom.
Mohamed Ali Jinnah, the father of the nation, the proponent of the two nation theory wanted a safe place for Muslims. From whom? Now you see that by the creation of Pakistan, its peoples are no safer, because its leadership says that there is a constant threat of aggression from the hegemon neighbor. Are the Muslims any safer now with nuclear missiles aimed in their direction? How about East Pakistan and West Pakistan, geographically separated by a 1000 kms. I cant believe Jinnah agreed for such a country already divided to govern. Another contradiction that was. Take Pakistan`s foreign policy, it has a friend in America, a friend who labels it a terrorist state, a friend who has sanctions against it, Pressler Amendment, no help at times of war (1965 and 1971), but still a friend nevertheless. Contradiction or what?
I firmly believe that Pakistan needs to redefine itself politically and internationally. Indian leaders are well aware of the inherent chaos in Pakistan and are capitalizing on it. They are taunting and leading on Pakistan into an arms race which they very well know Pakistan cannot afford. Remember how they allowed the East and West Pakistan thing to prove to Pakistan`s detriment? They will continue to undermine Pakistan much the same way that the US led the USSR into its present quagmire. Set aside the jingoism and take a hard look at the real state of affairs.
#56 Posted by rishi on April 15, 1999 12:04:29 pm
Re: Omar
About Pakistan being concerned (duly or unduly) about Indian hegemonistic designs, go back and read the dawn on the internet about how Pakistan reacted to the AGNI tests and also the indian newspapers and rediff as to how India reacted and proacted to the Gauri and Agni tests. In Pakistan politics is run based on India alone. While in India neither the public nor the press nor even the government gave any undue hoopla to pakistan or to its tests. We all should know who the losers are ..... the ordinary Pakistani public who can be tricked by his ruler just by playing the India card.
just one word to describe this....Immaturity
Rishi
(p.s: i support the testing of Gauri by Pakistan and i even encourage them to test hundreds of missiles if that makes them feel secure. What i don`t understand is the kid brother attitude that both Pakistan`s government and the public not to mention even the press displayed over this whole hungamma. Just shows that Pakistanis can be lead into any trap by the Indians if they so wish )
About Pakistan being concerned (duly or unduly) about Indian hegemonistic designs, go back and read the dawn on the internet about how Pakistan reacted to the AGNI tests and also the indian newspapers and rediff as to how India reacted and proacted to the Gauri and Agni tests. In Pakistan politics is run based on India alone. While in India neither the public nor the press nor even the government gave any undue hoopla to pakistan or to its tests. We all should know who the losers are ..... the ordinary Pakistani public who can be tricked by his ruler just by playing the India card.
just one word to describe this....Immaturity
Rishi
(p.s: i support the testing of Gauri by Pakistan and i even encourage them to test hundreds of missiles if that makes them feel secure. What i don`t understand is the kid brother attitude that both Pakistan`s government and the public not to mention even the press displayed over this whole hungamma. Just shows that Pakistanis can be lead into any trap by the Indians if they so wish )
#55 Posted by iconoclast on April 15, 1999 12:04:29 pm
Re: RAS SIDDIQUE
``And last but not least Pakistanis need to refocus
on the torment of the Kashmiris. ``
-- And also on the torment of the Sindhis, the Balochs and the torment of the Pakistanis in general
iconoclast
``And last but not least Pakistanis need to refocus
on the torment of the Kashmiris. ``
-- And also on the torment of the Sindhis, the Balochs and the torment of the Pakistanis in general
iconoclast
#54 Posted by OMAR1974 on April 15, 1999 11:54:16 am
Ras : I`m not against THE TRUTH coming out, just the factually baseless defamation of people. The burden of proof in this case is NOT on Brig. Z.A Khan, but rather on anyone who states that he `fits the profile of a war criminal`, who must be brought to trial for his, `heinous crimes,` clearly an implication that he committed acts amounting to genocide in the context of this article. This is completely and utterly unacceptable, considering the author nor anyone else has ever provided any factual evidence in this regard, much less made such a statement. Kindly obtain a copy of `The way it was,` published in Pakistan by the gentleman and read it for yourself.
Also, I`m not entirely convinced `our civilization is WORTH Saving ...
Also, I`m not entirely convinced `our civilization is WORTH Saving ...
#53 Posted by OMAR1974 on April 15, 1999 11:54:16 am
I agree with Ferozk that the economic situation is at least as big a threat to Pakistan as Indian hagemony in the region. Neither country can really afford an expensive arms race, but i think we can reasonably state that it is INDIA that is responsible by and large for introducing the vast bulk of spohisticated new weapon systems into the region, and testing nukes and missiles to carry them. Pakistan has been forced to play catch-up at every turn. Truly a sorry state of affairs.
#52 Posted by satyavadi on April 15, 1999 11:54:16 am
Dear Pakis ( from COPYCAT PAKISTAN),
Shed your obsession to match India in all fields, specially defense. Agni is meant for a poor - weak and dissented and samll nation like you. That one is for China... OK.. So please dont cry loud whenever Indis tests any missile or anything... Whatever we have now is more than sufficient to deal with you guys.. So the new developments are for the purpose that China or anyone else doesnt bully us.
So stop shouting.. security etc.. please. Its good that we are not obsessed with you as you are with us.. No one in India has said that Ghouri is a big threat.. etc... We do everything for our security and are not reactionary like you people.
If you want to match India, let me give a bit of news. Before two weeks or so, we launcehd INSAT 2E
satellite... This may well be our 30th Satelllite.. Here is a field where you can try to match India.. I can give u a clue, like you imported Nordong from North Korea and renamed it Ghouri, your TIMETESTED FRIEND ( or should I say master) China can provide you with some satellites... and then you can claim you have matched India in this field also..
But I think you guys are too much obsessed with defense to think of anything else.
I know this is not the right forum for this topic, but couldnt find an alternative place.
Anyway...Good luck guys.. come out of your obsession.
Satyavadi ( I always speak the truth)
Shed your obsession to match India in all fields, specially defense. Agni is meant for a poor - weak and dissented and samll nation like you. That one is for China... OK.. So please dont cry loud whenever Indis tests any missile or anything... Whatever we have now is more than sufficient to deal with you guys.. So the new developments are for the purpose that China or anyone else doesnt bully us.
So stop shouting.. security etc.. please. Its good that we are not obsessed with you as you are with us.. No one in India has said that Ghouri is a big threat.. etc... We do everything for our security and are not reactionary like you people.
If you want to match India, let me give a bit of news. Before two weeks or so, we launcehd INSAT 2E
satellite... This may well be our 30th Satelllite.. Here is a field where you can try to match India.. I can give u a clue, like you imported Nordong from North Korea and renamed it Ghouri, your TIMETESTED FRIEND ( or should I say master) China can provide you with some satellites... and then you can claim you have matched India in this field also..
But I think you guys are too much obsessed with defense to think of anything else.
I know this is not the right forum for this topic, but couldnt find an alternative place.
Anyway...Good luck guys.. come out of your obsession.
Satyavadi ( I always speak the truth)
#51 Posted by OMAR1974 on April 15, 1999 11:54:16 am
And allow me to include the following facts about good neighborly India. India has always behaved like a school yard bully in S.E Asia. But has an extremely self serving hypocritical image of itself. Lets make Rishi and others look in the mirror and examine their country’s true face.
1947 – Treatment of Pakistan, hogging all military supplies of which one third were suppose to go to Pakistan
1947 – Illegal occupation and annexation of Kashmir by India to say nothing of Hyderabad and at least 2 other states that were to join moth-eaten Pakistan created by the British by division of Bengal and Punjab, in many cases forcing muslim majority areas on the border into India
1963 – Annexation and occupation of Goa by force from Portugal
1965-- India moved forces into the Rann of Kutch
1971—Sponsorship of Mukti Bahini from its soil, and invasion of East Pakistan, breaking up the country
1960s-70s---After obtaining ‘heavy water’ from Canada and technological help in setting up nuclear power plants for peaceful purposes, ‘Bhudda Smiled’ as India exploded its first nuclear device for which it has obtained help from foreign nations including Canada through duplicitous assurances regarding its ‘peaceful’ nuclear program. Canada ended all nuclear aid to India, claiming to having been duped by Indian leaders and their treacherous lies.
1970s--- Bhutan & Sikim, do I really need to list details of what India did to these 2 formerly independent albeit weak Himalyan states ?
1980s--- India creates crisis with poor Bangladesh over river water sharing.
1983--- Siachen crisis began, although here Zia may share some of the blame, but India has consistently refused to resolve the crisis by simply withdrawing troops which Pakistan has repeatedly suggested. Cost to India and Pakistan $1 million daily + the human misery of the conditions prevailing.
1980s--- Economic Embargo of Poor Landlocked Nepal over its purchases over anti aircraft guns from China
1980s--- Support for LITTE terrorist group in Sri Lanka to put pressure on Sri Lankan govt to allow India troops and forces a base and foothold on the Island. When Sri Lanka acceded, India switch support and fought the LITTE.
1980s--- Brutal repression of various insurgencies in India, in Nagaland, Punjab, Kashmir and others.
1984 --- Thousands of Sikhs die in Communal riots in Delhi etc after Indira Gandhi killed.
1990s--- Babri Masjid demolition by BJP etc while Indian govt refused to intervene reveals the other face of ‘Secular India’, also the communal riots that follow in Bombay result in thousand of Muslims dead.
1980s/90s--- Massive increases in military spending annually, BLUE WATER NAVY Developed. Increased POWER PROJECTION CAPABILITIES.
1990s--- Acquisition of Nuclear sub from Russia, First country to test nukes in the region, and develop long range missiles. Pakistan has constantly been forced to parry each Indian thrust/move. India conducts massive military exercises near the border.
1990s--- Indian fanatics persecute and kill Christian missionaries trying to help the poor in the country’s North. India intensifies nuclear and missile race on the sub continent, plans to spend billions of dollars in acquisition of military hardware while its poverty stricken people starve and sleep in the streets.
The above brief timeline of history clearly shows India’s hegemonic designs in the region and its often crude methods of dealing with its neighbors, as well as shatter the facade it tries to project of internal harmony to the World as the ‘World’s biggest democracy’. Kashmiri elections usually get a 5% voter turn out. The time line also reveals a pattern of hegemony and behavior towards all its neighbors as well as all minorities within India. Its hard to imagine this is the birthplace of the architect of nonviolence Gandhi. India’s hypocrisy knows no bounds. It also teaches a lesson that the only way to deal with India is from a position of strength and a strong willingness to knock out all its teeth if necessary. This is the only known method of restraining India. (The Chinese example of 1963 shows the way) I’m open to better alternatives, if they can be shown to work. India has always PREACHED Non-Violence, ahimsa, the non-aligned movement way etc, but has PRACTISED REALPOLITIK, and the use of calculated force. Its an UGLY country with EVIL designs. Not that I have too many illusions about the state of affairs in Pakistan and its history. But India has always adopted a hypocritical holier than thou attitude.
1947 – Treatment of Pakistan, hogging all military supplies of which one third were suppose to go to Pakistan
1947 – Illegal occupation and annexation of Kashmir by India to say nothing of Hyderabad and at least 2 other states that were to join moth-eaten Pakistan created by the British by division of Bengal and Punjab, in many cases forcing muslim majority areas on the border into India
1963 – Annexation and occupation of Goa by force from Portugal
1965-- India moved forces into the Rann of Kutch
1971—Sponsorship of Mukti Bahini from its soil, and invasion of East Pakistan, breaking up the country
1960s-70s---After obtaining ‘heavy water’ from Canada and technological help in setting up nuclear power plants for peaceful purposes, ‘Bhudda Smiled’ as India exploded its first nuclear device for which it has obtained help from foreign nations including Canada through duplicitous assurances regarding its ‘peaceful’ nuclear program. Canada ended all nuclear aid to India, claiming to having been duped by Indian leaders and their treacherous lies.
1970s--- Bhutan & Sikim, do I really need to list details of what India did to these 2 formerly independent albeit weak Himalyan states ?
1980s--- India creates crisis with poor Bangladesh over river water sharing.
1983--- Siachen crisis began, although here Zia may share some of the blame, but India has consistently refused to resolve the crisis by simply withdrawing troops which Pakistan has repeatedly suggested. Cost to India and Pakistan $1 million daily + the human misery of the conditions prevailing.
1980s--- Economic Embargo of Poor Landlocked Nepal over its purchases over anti aircraft guns from China
1980s--- Support for LITTE terrorist group in Sri Lanka to put pressure on Sri Lankan govt to allow India troops and forces a base and foothold on the Island. When Sri Lanka acceded, India switch support and fought the LITTE.
1980s--- Brutal repression of various insurgencies in India, in Nagaland, Punjab, Kashmir and others.
1984 --- Thousands of Sikhs die in Communal riots in Delhi etc after Indira Gandhi killed.
1990s--- Babri Masjid demolition by BJP etc while Indian govt refused to intervene reveals the other face of ‘Secular India’, also the communal riots that follow in Bombay result in thousand of Muslims dead.
1980s/90s--- Massive increases in military spending annually, BLUE WATER NAVY Developed. Increased POWER PROJECTION CAPABILITIES.
1990s--- Acquisition of Nuclear sub from Russia, First country to test nukes in the region, and develop long range missiles. Pakistan has constantly been forced to parry each Indian thrust/move. India conducts massive military exercises near the border.
1990s--- Indian fanatics persecute and kill Christian missionaries trying to help the poor in the country’s North. India intensifies nuclear and missile race on the sub continent, plans to spend billions of dollars in acquisition of military hardware while its poverty stricken people starve and sleep in the streets.
The above brief timeline of history clearly shows India’s hegemonic designs in the region and its often crude methods of dealing with its neighbors, as well as shatter the facade it tries to project of internal harmony to the World as the ‘World’s biggest democracy’. Kashmiri elections usually get a 5% voter turn out. The time line also reveals a pattern of hegemony and behavior towards all its neighbors as well as all minorities within India. Its hard to imagine this is the birthplace of the architect of nonviolence Gandhi. India’s hypocrisy knows no bounds. It also teaches a lesson that the only way to deal with India is from a position of strength and a strong willingness to knock out all its teeth if necessary. This is the only known method of restraining India. (The Chinese example of 1963 shows the way) I’m open to better alternatives, if they can be shown to work. India has always PREACHED Non-Violence, ahimsa, the non-aligned movement way etc, but has PRACTISED REALPOLITIK, and the use of calculated force. Its an UGLY country with EVIL designs. Not that I have too many illusions about the state of affairs in Pakistan and its history. But India has always adopted a hypocritical holier than thou attitude.
#50 Posted by Ras Siddiqui on April 14, 1999 10:49:11 pm
We have been reading quite a variety of views
on this welcome work by Jamal Hasan, who if
some of the Pakistanis are not aware has also
written about injustices done in Pakistan today.
He is a humanitarian in outlook and writes about
what he feels are the wrongs committed to human beings everywhere. So let us not try and intimidate him with legalistic postures.
If Jamal Bhai is wrong then let us try and prove it. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis need to learn
THE TRUTH about 1971. If Z A Khan wants to enlighten us, so be it. Let the Hamoodur Rehman
Commission Report come out and if Jamal Bhai can
be proven wrong then he will be the first to admit it. But let us not try and hide behind Bhutto`s ``betrayal``. Jamal Bhai has a genuine case because a lot of his countrymen were killed in 1971. I think that this warrants action by the GOP to at least educate us on what happened. Countries, nations and individuals have learnt a great deal from defeat and become very strong again (Germany, Japan etc..). Why cannot Pakistanis take responsibilty for their actions in 1971 today?
RE Omar1974: I do not know how Sk. Mujib can be called a ``Ghaddar`` (Traitor) by us. Democracy is the tyrrany of the majority. He won an election
on a slogan of certain Bengali grieviances which
had validity. He had the support and the votes
of the MAJORITY of the country and the Awami League had won a MAJORITY in the National Assembly. So by mathematical logic who were the
``ghaddars``? Bangladeshis or Pakistanis?
Whether India played the role of savior or spoiler depends on ones` perspective. All we know
is that India came out smelling like a rose in 1971 because Pakistan didn`t have a clue or just
chose not to look at reality.
So what this boils down to is that Jamal Bhai
is seeking justice. Other writers from Bangladesh
have been much more harsh (Even Pakistan`s poet
Ahmed Faraz has held back no punches in ``Paid
Murderers`` in one of his finest works in Urdu).
Let us at least think and reflect. If not for his (Jamal`s)sake then for Pakistan`s. ``Never Again`` should this kind of scenario ever be repeated.
And it wont be if Pakistanis learn from their past
instead of sweeping it under the rug.
And last but not least Pakistanis need to refocus
on the torment of the Kashmiris. No NATO planes will come to their aid so a negotiated settlement
with India appears to be the only way out. Let us
hear more from the Kashmiris (both Muslim and Pandit) on CHOWK. Who knows? We may come up with ideas to preserve our CIVILIZATION.
Ras
#49 Posted by ferozk on April 14, 1999 7:23:38 pm
Re: Rishi and Omar
The problem with reviewing the 1971 crisis in former East Pakistan is that it still exists within the living memory of many people in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. 28 yrs is not enough time to heal all the nationalistic passions which still exist and that goes for any meaningful dicussions in the region. In India and Pakistan, the past is not forgotten; it is not even a past, but a reality which shapes the present. Each national perspective, of the 1971 war, is not determined the events, but by the emotional content of its value to our national mindset.
There have been valid points, from all sides, in these InterActs. I am not sure who said it, but the observation was insightful. Pakistani policy needs to be less India specific and more multi-lateral in its outlook, but then again, Omar has a vaild point when he discusses the Indian military and its force projections as being Pakistan specific. This mutual reaction to each other`s intent and the inability to start afresh is the greatest impediment to the improvement of relations in the region.
For the record, I do not support the recent Pakistani test of its missile, in response to the Indian test, because this quid pro quo is not beneficial to the settlement of our outstanding problems. Pakistan has already established a level of credibility, to deter an Indian strike, and it should not seek an arms race with India, because the economic costs will be too Phyrric for Islamabad. Nor do I agree with the planned celebrations to mark the first anniversary of Pakistani nuclear tests. It is a waste of money and more importantly, a complete ignorance of reality.
Pakistani political leadership does not seem to understand that it is still under the sanctions regime and this one time presidental waiver will expire in October. Once it does, Clinton will have to seek another Congressional waiver to suspend the sanctions against Pakistan and keep its economy afloat. What will happen is that Pakistan, though economic and political mismanagement, will find itself on the brink of bankruptcy again. Lets not forget, the Paris Club has merely re-scheduled the Pakistani debt and not cancelled it. IMF will not release more payments if the sanctions are reimposed. Pakistan has five months to get its economic house in order and the sentiment on the Hill is that it will not get another ``Indian Summer``.
Pakistan needs to keep these issues in mind and it needs to deal with their potential significance to its national intergrity, which is of a far more serious nature than any Indian military build-up could pose to its security. Pakistan should have de-linked its India centric policies after the 1971 disaster, but it did not. I can understand the issues of 1971, in the present InterActs, and the questions being raised on the nature of treason, but those are academic questions. Pakistan and India can re-fight the 1971 war and its premutations endlessly, like a serialization of Rambo movies, but it still will not alter the reality that Pakistan can not economically, militarily, or demographically hope to attain a degree of parity with India.
The future of Pakistan will be more directly affected by these issues and not what should have happened 30 years ago! The greatest threat to Pakistani unity, as in 1971, is internalized and it is only when Pakistani political leadership externalizes its problems, as in 1971 again, does security of Pakistani is undermined. The Pakistani leadership is repeating the mistakes of 1971 in the sense that it is isolating and marginalizing political discourse in the country. Islamabad has to make a concentrated effort to engage the provinces and the various minorities in Pakistan in a meaningful discussion or risk the alienation of those groups from the center.
Otherwise, the situation will be repeat of events that led to the 1971 crisis and the breakup of East Pakistan from West Pakistan.
The problem with reviewing the 1971 crisis in former East Pakistan is that it still exists within the living memory of many people in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. 28 yrs is not enough time to heal all the nationalistic passions which still exist and that goes for any meaningful dicussions in the region. In India and Pakistan, the past is not forgotten; it is not even a past, but a reality which shapes the present. Each national perspective, of the 1971 war, is not determined the events, but by the emotional content of its value to our national mindset.
There have been valid points, from all sides, in these InterActs. I am not sure who said it, but the observation was insightful. Pakistani policy needs to be less India specific and more multi-lateral in its outlook, but then again, Omar has a vaild point when he discusses the Indian military and its force projections as being Pakistan specific. This mutual reaction to each other`s intent and the inability to start afresh is the greatest impediment to the improvement of relations in the region.
For the record, I do not support the recent Pakistani test of its missile, in response to the Indian test, because this quid pro quo is not beneficial to the settlement of our outstanding problems. Pakistan has already established a level of credibility, to deter an Indian strike, and it should not seek an arms race with India, because the economic costs will be too Phyrric for Islamabad. Nor do I agree with the planned celebrations to mark the first anniversary of Pakistani nuclear tests. It is a waste of money and more importantly, a complete ignorance of reality.
Pakistani political leadership does not seem to understand that it is still under the sanctions regime and this one time presidental waiver will expire in October. Once it does, Clinton will have to seek another Congressional waiver to suspend the sanctions against Pakistan and keep its economy afloat. What will happen is that Pakistan, though economic and political mismanagement, will find itself on the brink of bankruptcy again. Lets not forget, the Paris Club has merely re-scheduled the Pakistani debt and not cancelled it. IMF will not release more payments if the sanctions are reimposed. Pakistan has five months to get its economic house in order and the sentiment on the Hill is that it will not get another ``Indian Summer``.
Pakistan needs to keep these issues in mind and it needs to deal with their potential significance to its national intergrity, which is of a far more serious nature than any Indian military build-up could pose to its security. Pakistan should have de-linked its India centric policies after the 1971 disaster, but it did not. I can understand the issues of 1971, in the present InterActs, and the questions being raised on the nature of treason, but those are academic questions. Pakistan and India can re-fight the 1971 war and its premutations endlessly, like a serialization of Rambo movies, but it still will not alter the reality that Pakistan can not economically, militarily, or demographically hope to attain a degree of parity with India.
The future of Pakistan will be more directly affected by these issues and not what should have happened 30 years ago! The greatest threat to Pakistani unity, as in 1971, is internalized and it is only when Pakistani political leadership externalizes its problems, as in 1971 again, does security of Pakistani is undermined. The Pakistani leadership is repeating the mistakes of 1971 in the sense that it is isolating and marginalizing political discourse in the country. Islamabad has to make a concentrated effort to engage the provinces and the various minorities in Pakistan in a meaningful discussion or risk the alienation of those groups from the center.
Otherwise, the situation will be repeat of events that led to the 1971 crisis and the breakup of East Pakistan from West Pakistan.
#48 Posted by OMAR1974 on April 14, 1999 11:54:07 am
Re; Rishi #49
Again Bad arguments Omar
``How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state.``
Are all kashmiris fighting for their liberation traitors then ? Are the Kosovars traitors today ? You have a rather myopic and partial viewpoint over all things. And you seem to favor everything that suits yourself however contradictory that might make you. what goes around comes around ..
O’s Reply: From India’s perspective, they are traitors are they not? India has been fighting a WAR in Kashmir, just like the Serbs Vs. The Kosovars in Kosovo.
``Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.``
-- You could have started a saner process if you had been in Yahya`s shoes by respecting the democratic process and installing the Awami League as the ruling party of Pakistan and giving the Bengalis equal rights by making Bengali also a national language rather than Urdu alone. But then you won`t b`coz like Yahya you have to act immature and force things down to brawn with a mistaken belief on your own strength untill someone stronger brow beats you , would ya...
O’s reply: I stated repeatedly that this indeed would have been better, for Mujib to become P.M of United Pakistan. Unfortunately, by mid-March 1971 he was no longer interested. I never said Yahya’s initial decision to postpone convening the newly election National assembly in Dhaka was a good one, which contributed to this mess. But by 1971 having done that earlier, options were running out, and at that point Mujib’s true intentions and the Awami League’s sinister plans were becoming clear. Like the Kosovar analogy, West Pakis suspected the goal of the Awami League was not autonomy, but independence from the start. Serbs are right to suspect that. And that was never going to be acceptable to West Pakistan, as is indep to Serbia of Kosovo. I am well aware of the economic arguments of E.Pak being a ‘colony’ similar to Serbia-Kosovo, but its much more than that, its an emotional attachment to one’s country. And people, like the Serbs in Kosovo are willing to die for that. So were Pakistanis in 1971. It’s a core value. Like it or not. Not that I support the Serbs, but it has given me an insight into how they probably feel, and how Indians probably feel over Kashmir that I was lacking before I thought about this from the other point of view.
`` This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting.``
-- Yeah, would be seriously tempting . would`nt it ? Particularly when the country you want to nuke is probably much more powerful and has its own nukes and much more larger . It would never cross your mind that during your frenetic and bombastic frenzy in pressing the nuke buttons, that in a few seconds you would also vaporize along with all of your family and your country men not to mention a few innocent neighbours who would also suffer the after effects of the radiation carried over by the winds. You give yourself too much credit, you know.
O’S REPLY: Well, have you ever heard of the doctrine of deterrence? Threats only work when the other side believes them. Khrushchev believed Kennedy, thats why U.S WON the Cuban missile crisis, and Khruschev was forced to resign in disgrace later. He blinked first. Nuke threats work/are credible only when the other side believes that there is a certain point beyond which they can’t push you.
`` If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore.``
-- nothing to lose,,, if you had nothing to lose in 1971 what are you trying to protect today. Why do you need all these nukes and missiles if you have nothing to lose ?
O’s reply: THE INTEGRITY OF ANY PART OF A COUNTRY is usually equal to the whole. We don’t rationally decide whether Sindh is more valuable than Punjab, hence if India annexes Sindh, we won’t push the button, but would wish to continue our existence as a nation (of Punjabis!:) in the Punjab, therefore showing a willingness to allow Sindh to become either an independent state or accede to India by force of Indian arms. That would be ridiculous. So you are being ridiculous. Would you like to give Pakistan a guarantee that India won`t resort to Nukesif we sucessfully invade Indian Occupied Kashmir, encircle the Indian forces in the valley, and close a pincer around them strangulating them. Would you like to tell us BEFOREHAND that its okay for us to try?
``Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. ``
-- A most viable alternative would have been to handle the situation as the Indians have been handling kashmir. Instead of forcing things into the open and pushing yourself against the wall so that you have to kick back and kill yourself in the process (which is what milosevic is doing today) , a more saner person would manoever around the corners and keep the fight at a low intensity level till the fighters tire themselves out and choose other easier and more comfortable options which are thrown open to them and retire gracefully from the fight (believe me, the indians did that with Punjab and won the fight We could have easily done a bangladesh in punjab by butchering all punjabi sikhs and not letting them enjoy the benefit of a judiciary, a human rights commission and a diplomatic and political process, but then we would have created a refugee crises and forced things into the open. instead the indians waited it out , not out of some great insight but because their democratic process does not provide any other alternative).
O’s : Precisely what I stated in my earlier posts, India is responsible for extending the conflict and widening it. India stoked the flames of the conflict (See Kissinger & Nixon on Indira Ghandhi) By Oct-Nov the Pakistan army had basically defeated the Mukti Bahini. That is when India expanded border clashes in an effort to seize territory to set up a puppet govt on E.Pakistani soil. I also addressed the myths about the conflict that India has propogated regarding the numbers of dead and displaced people in my earlier posts in detail. Read ‘em. India poured fuel on the fire and created the inferno that engulfed East Pakistan. The allies in Kosovo conflict are NOT broadcasting to Kosovars that they should flee Kosovo.
`` It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not. ``
-- read my previous answer again whether you like it or not.
p.s: Your reply my friend, i am sorry to say is typical of the jingoistic nature in which pakistan is run today and is but an example of the political and judiciary and social process . For instance when India tests an Agni-II, There were no public hue and cry about it this time and people took it as a matter of fact. But on the other hand, pakistanis across the border seemed too agitated about it. I would think that all the Pakistanis need to do is to test their own missiles and feel confident about their security rather than link their actions with that of India`s. Just confirms my belief that politics in Pakistan seems to be more India centric than it should probably be. Thankfully things appear a little better across the border in India. At least the Indians don`t appear to get worked up about everything that Pakistan does.
O’s reply : With Pakistan’s history of conflict with India, and 80% of Indian forces deployed facing Pakistan, the current tensions involving Kashmir, SEVERAL HUGE ARMY, AirForce & NAVAL exercises conducted by India recently, plus the detonation of nukes by India just last year, plus the massive disparity in conventional and nuclear weapons between the two sides, CALL ME PARANOID if I and other Pakis are just a trifle concerned about the missile tests for missiles with the capability to strike any Pakistani target from deep within India, as opposed to the Prithvi which needs to be deployed near the border (and India has already deployed over 100 near Pakistan’s border, this missile is Pakistan Specific, does not have the range for use against China, and 85% of Indian aircraft lack the range to Penetrate into China, they are deployed facing Pakistan). Yeah, I guess Pakistanis MUST be Crazy to take all these things into account. Right. You really made your point Rishi.:). Uh, huh.
Again Bad arguments Omar
``How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state.``
Are all kashmiris fighting for their liberation traitors then ? Are the Kosovars traitors today ? You have a rather myopic and partial viewpoint over all things. And you seem to favor everything that suits yourself however contradictory that might make you. what goes around comes around ..
O’s Reply: From India’s perspective, they are traitors are they not? India has been fighting a WAR in Kashmir, just like the Serbs Vs. The Kosovars in Kosovo.
``Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.``
-- You could have started a saner process if you had been in Yahya`s shoes by respecting the democratic process and installing the Awami League as the ruling party of Pakistan and giving the Bengalis equal rights by making Bengali also a national language rather than Urdu alone. But then you won`t b`coz like Yahya you have to act immature and force things down to brawn with a mistaken belief on your own strength untill someone stronger brow beats you , would ya...
O’s reply: I stated repeatedly that this indeed would have been better, for Mujib to become P.M of United Pakistan. Unfortunately, by mid-March 1971 he was no longer interested. I never said Yahya’s initial decision to postpone convening the newly election National assembly in Dhaka was a good one, which contributed to this mess. But by 1971 having done that earlier, options were running out, and at that point Mujib’s true intentions and the Awami League’s sinister plans were becoming clear. Like the Kosovar analogy, West Pakis suspected the goal of the Awami League was not autonomy, but independence from the start. Serbs are right to suspect that. And that was never going to be acceptable to West Pakistan, as is indep to Serbia of Kosovo. I am well aware of the economic arguments of E.Pak being a ‘colony’ similar to Serbia-Kosovo, but its much more than that, its an emotional attachment to one’s country. And people, like the Serbs in Kosovo are willing to die for that. So were Pakistanis in 1971. It’s a core value. Like it or not. Not that I support the Serbs, but it has given me an insight into how they probably feel, and how Indians probably feel over Kashmir that I was lacking before I thought about this from the other point of view.
`` This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting.``
-- Yeah, would be seriously tempting . would`nt it ? Particularly when the country you want to nuke is probably much more powerful and has its own nukes and much more larger . It would never cross your mind that during your frenetic and bombastic frenzy in pressing the nuke buttons, that in a few seconds you would also vaporize along with all of your family and your country men not to mention a few innocent neighbours who would also suffer the after effects of the radiation carried over by the winds. You give yourself too much credit, you know.
O’S REPLY: Well, have you ever heard of the doctrine of deterrence? Threats only work when the other side believes them. Khrushchev believed Kennedy, thats why U.S WON the Cuban missile crisis, and Khruschev was forced to resign in disgrace later. He blinked first. Nuke threats work/are credible only when the other side believes that there is a certain point beyond which they can’t push you.
`` If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore.``
-- nothing to lose,,, if you had nothing to lose in 1971 what are you trying to protect today. Why do you need all these nukes and missiles if you have nothing to lose ?
O’s reply: THE INTEGRITY OF ANY PART OF A COUNTRY is usually equal to the whole. We don’t rationally decide whether Sindh is more valuable than Punjab, hence if India annexes Sindh, we won’t push the button, but would wish to continue our existence as a nation (of Punjabis!:) in the Punjab, therefore showing a willingness to allow Sindh to become either an independent state or accede to India by force of Indian arms. That would be ridiculous. So you are being ridiculous. Would you like to give Pakistan a guarantee that India won`t resort to Nukesif we sucessfully invade Indian Occupied Kashmir, encircle the Indian forces in the valley, and close a pincer around them strangulating them. Would you like to tell us BEFOREHAND that its okay for us to try?
``Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. ``
-- A most viable alternative would have been to handle the situation as the Indians have been handling kashmir. Instead of forcing things into the open and pushing yourself against the wall so that you have to kick back and kill yourself in the process (which is what milosevic is doing today) , a more saner person would manoever around the corners and keep the fight at a low intensity level till the fighters tire themselves out and choose other easier and more comfortable options which are thrown open to them and retire gracefully from the fight (believe me, the indians did that with Punjab and won the fight We could have easily done a bangladesh in punjab by butchering all punjabi sikhs and not letting them enjoy the benefit of a judiciary, a human rights commission and a diplomatic and political process, but then we would have created a refugee crises and forced things into the open. instead the indians waited it out , not out of some great insight but because their democratic process does not provide any other alternative).
O’s : Precisely what I stated in my earlier posts, India is responsible for extending the conflict and widening it. India stoked the flames of the conflict (See Kissinger & Nixon on Indira Ghandhi) By Oct-Nov the Pakistan army had basically defeated the Mukti Bahini. That is when India expanded border clashes in an effort to seize territory to set up a puppet govt on E.Pakistani soil. I also addressed the myths about the conflict that India has propogated regarding the numbers of dead and displaced people in my earlier posts in detail. Read ‘em. India poured fuel on the fire and created the inferno that engulfed East Pakistan. The allies in Kosovo conflict are NOT broadcasting to Kosovars that they should flee Kosovo.
`` It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not. ``
-- read my previous answer again whether you like it or not.
p.s: Your reply my friend, i am sorry to say is typical of the jingoistic nature in which pakistan is run today and is but an example of the political and judiciary and social process . For instance when India tests an Agni-II, There were no public hue and cry about it this time and people took it as a matter of fact. But on the other hand, pakistanis across the border seemed too agitated about it. I would think that all the Pakistanis need to do is to test their own missiles and feel confident about their security rather than link their actions with that of India`s. Just confirms my belief that politics in Pakistan seems to be more India centric than it should probably be. Thankfully things appear a little better across the border in India. At least the Indians don`t appear to get worked up about everything that Pakistan does.
O’s reply : With Pakistan’s history of conflict with India, and 80% of Indian forces deployed facing Pakistan, the current tensions involving Kashmir, SEVERAL HUGE ARMY, AirForce & NAVAL exercises conducted by India recently, plus the detonation of nukes by India just last year, plus the massive disparity in conventional and nuclear weapons between the two sides, CALL ME PARANOID if I and other Pakis are just a trifle concerned about the missile tests for missiles with the capability to strike any Pakistani target from deep within India, as opposed to the Prithvi which needs to be deployed near the border (and India has already deployed over 100 near Pakistan’s border, this missile is Pakistan Specific, does not have the range for use against China, and 85% of Indian aircraft lack the range to Penetrate into China, they are deployed facing Pakistan). Yeah, I guess Pakistanis MUST be Crazy to take all these things into account. Right. You really made your point Rishi.:). Uh, huh.
#47 Posted by Truth on April 14, 1999 11:54:07 am
Rishi:
Can you read my mind? Once again, I agree 100% with you (Reply #49).
In future, you can assume that you speak for at least two people - yourself and me! Dont misuse that authority!
Omar1974:
Dont mean to insult you but your musings about the unknownability of truth are perilously close to the Hindu concept of Maya wherein everything is considered a matter of perception and having no innate reality of its own.
And just to be clear, I`m not saying this concept is the exclusive domain of the Maya - I`m certain other religions and philosophies have their own concepts of the unknowability of truth,.
Can you read my mind? Once again, I agree 100% with you (Reply #49).
In future, you can assume that you speak for at least two people - yourself and me! Dont misuse that authority!
Omar1974:
Dont mean to insult you but your musings about the unknownability of truth are perilously close to the Hindu concept of Maya wherein everything is considered a matter of perception and having no innate reality of its own.
And just to be clear, I`m not saying this concept is the exclusive domain of the Maya - I`m certain other religions and philosophies have their own concepts of the unknowability of truth,.
#46 Posted by rishi on April 14, 1999 8:02:05 am
Re: OMAR1974
Again Bad arguments Omar
``How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state.``
-- Are all kashmiris fighting for their liberation traitors then ? Are the Kosovars traitors today ? You have a rather myopic and partial viewpoint over all things. And you seem to favor everything that suits yourself however contradictory that might make you. what goes around comes around ..
``Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.``
-- You could have started a saner process if you had been in Yahya`s shoes by respecting the democratic process and installing the Awami League as the ruling party of Pakistan and giving the Bengalis equal rights by making Bengali also a national language rather than Urdu alone. But then you won`t b`coz like Yahya you have to act immature and force things down to brawn with a mistaken belief on your own strength untill someone stronger brow beats you , would ya...
`` This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting.``
-- Yeah, would be seriously tempting . would`nt it ? Particularly when the country you want to nuke is probably much more powerful and has its own nukes and much more larger . It would never cross your mind that during your frenetic and bombastic frenzy in pressing the nuke buttons, that in a few seconds you would also vaporize along with all of your family and your country men not to mention a few innocent neighbours who would also suffer the after effects of the radiation carried over by the winds. You give yourself too much credit, you know.
`` If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore.``
-- nothing to lose,,, if you had nothing to lose in 1971 what are you trying to protect today. Why do you need all these nukes and missiles if you have nothing to lose ?
``Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. ``
-- A most viable alternative would have been to handle the situation as the Indians have been handling kashmir. Instead of forcing things into the open and pushing yourself against the wall so that you have to kick back and kill yourself in the process (which is what milosevic is doing today) , a more saner person would manoever around the corners and keep the fight at a low intensity level till the fighters tire themselves out and choose other easier and more comfortable options which are thrown open to them and retire gracefully from the fight (believe me, the indians did that with Punjab and won the fight We could have easily done a bangladesh in punjab by butchering all punjabi sikhs and not letting them enjoy the benefit of a judiciary, a human rights commission and a diplomatic and political process, but then we would have created a refugee crises and forced things into the open. instead the indians waited it out , not out of some great insight but because their democratic process does not provide any other alternative).
`` It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not. ``
-- read my previous answer again whether you like it or not.
p.s: Your reply my friend, i am sorry to say is typical of the jingoistic nature in which pakistan is run today and is but an example of the political and judiciary and social process . For instance when India tests an Agni-II, There were no public hue and cry about it this time and people took it as a matter of fact. But on the other hand, pakistanis across the border seemed too agitated about it. I would think that all the Pakistanis need to do is to test their own missiles and feel confident about their security rather than link their actions with that of India`s. Just confirms my belief that politics in Pakistan seems to be more India centric than it should probably be. Thankfully things appear a little better across the border in India. Atleast the Indians don`t appear to get worked up about everything that Pakistan does.
#45 Posted by OMAR1974 on April 14, 1999 2:35:07 am
Rishi :
Mujib Ur Rehman was indeed a traitor. How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state. That is precisely what the Awami League and Mujib were doing PRIOR to March 25th, 1971. And Mujib was a CITIZEN of UNITED PAKISTAN. The AWAMI LEAGUE wanted a `CONFEDERATION`, to use their word. This was the demand that preceded the army action on March 25, 1971, in addition to widespread lawlessness, looting and forcible closure of businesses and government institutions plus burning of Pakistani flag in Dhaka and else where in East Pakistan, incited primarily by the Awami League and Mujib Ur Rehman. A confederation implies the right to secession. This is essentially the heart and soul of the Awami league`s 6 point agenda in early 1971. Mujib himself was never really interested in becoming P.M of United Pakistan, although i most certainly defend his right to do precisely that. However, he was interested since the 1960s in the secession of East Pakistan from the country. That does amount to TREASON under my working definition of the term. Can`t really call it anything else.
Regarding my comment of `if we had to do it over again, we probably would.` Well, Some regional leaders in Pakistan today have called for what amounts to the breakup of the country. Since they are citizens of Pakistan today, that amounts to treason. Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.
This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting. If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore. Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not.
Ferozk : Point well taken. There is no absolute truth, nor can we ever really ‘know’ it. The closet we can get to a conception of ‘absolute truth’, is a reflection in the muddied waters of a pond. Hence, there are only VERSIONS of the truth, depending upon one’s vantage point and perspective. Still, judges don’t have this luxury, and they have to decide cases and practical problems on a daily basis on the basis of the information they possess. The process of justice is far from perfect, like all things human, but one can only make an attempt to learn the truth, one should not give up dispairingly.
Mujib Ur Rehman was indeed a traitor. How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state. That is precisely what the Awami League and Mujib were doing PRIOR to March 25th, 1971. And Mujib was a CITIZEN of UNITED PAKISTAN. The AWAMI LEAGUE wanted a `CONFEDERATION`, to use their word. This was the demand that preceded the army action on March 25, 1971, in addition to widespread lawlessness, looting and forcible closure of businesses and government institutions plus burning of Pakistani flag in Dhaka and else where in East Pakistan, incited primarily by the Awami League and Mujib Ur Rehman. A confederation implies the right to secession. This is essentially the heart and soul of the Awami league`s 6 point agenda in early 1971. Mujib himself was never really interested in becoming P.M of United Pakistan, although i most certainly defend his right to do precisely that. However, he was interested since the 1960s in the secession of East Pakistan from the country. That does amount to TREASON under my working definition of the term. Can`t really call it anything else.
Regarding my comment of `if we had to do it over again, we probably would.` Well, Some regional leaders in Pakistan today have called for what amounts to the breakup of the country. Since they are citizens of Pakistan today, that amounts to treason. Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.
This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting. If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore. Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not.
Ferozk : Point well taken. There is no absolute truth, nor can we ever really ‘know’ it. The closet we can get to a conception of ‘absolute truth’, is a reflection in the muddied waters of a pond. Hence, there are only VERSIONS of the truth, depending upon one’s vantage point and perspective. Still, judges don’t have this luxury, and they have to decide cases and practical problems on a daily basis on the basis of the information they possess. The process of justice is far from perfect, like all things human, but one can only make an attempt to learn the truth, one should not give up dispairingly.
#44 Posted by OMAR1974 on April 14, 1999 2:35:07 am
Rishi :
Mujib Ur Rehman was indeed a traitor. How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state. That is precisely what the Awami League and Mujib were doing PRIOR to March 25th, 1971. And Mujib was a CITIZEN of UNITED PAKISTAN. The AWAMI LEAGUE wanted a `CONFEDERATION`, to use their word. This was the demand that preceeded the army action on March 25, 1971, in addition to widespread lawlessness, looting and forcible closure of businesses and government institutions plus burning of Pakistani flag in Dhaka and else where in East Pakistan, incited primarily by the Awami League and Mujib Ur Rehman. A confederation implies the right to secession. This is essentially the heart and soul of the Awami league`s 6 point agenda in early 1971. Mujib himself was never really intetrested in becoming P.M of United Pakistan, although i most certainly defend his right to do precisely that. However, he was interested since the 1960s in the secession of East Pakistan from the country. That does amount to TREASON under my working definition of the term. Can`t really call it anything else.
Regarding my comment of `if we had to do it over agin, we probably would.` Well, Some regional leaders in Pakistan today have called for what amounts to the breakup of the country. Since they are citizens of Pakistan today, that amounts to treason. Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.
This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting. If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore. Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not.
Mujib Ur Rehman was indeed a traitor. How do i define treason? Simple. Advocating and inciting others to take action to break up the state, while being a citizen subject to that state. That is precisely what the Awami League and Mujib were doing PRIOR to March 25th, 1971. And Mujib was a CITIZEN of UNITED PAKISTAN. The AWAMI LEAGUE wanted a `CONFEDERATION`, to use their word. This was the demand that preceeded the army action on March 25, 1971, in addition to widespread lawlessness, looting and forcible closure of businesses and government institutions plus burning of Pakistani flag in Dhaka and else where in East Pakistan, incited primarily by the Awami League and Mujib Ur Rehman. A confederation implies the right to secession. This is essentially the heart and soul of the Awami league`s 6 point agenda in early 1971. Mujib himself was never really intetrested in becoming P.M of United Pakistan, although i most certainly defend his right to do precisely that. However, he was interested since the 1960s in the secession of East Pakistan from the country. That does amount to TREASON under my working definition of the term. Can`t really call it anything else.
Regarding my comment of `if we had to do it over agin, we probably would.` Well, Some regional leaders in Pakistan today have called for what amounts to the breakup of the country. Since they are citizens of Pakistan today, that amounts to treason. Frankly had i been in Yahya`s shoes i don`t see too many other reasonable alternatives at the time, given my/his duty to protect the integrity of the country and to prevent rampant lawlessness, including the deliberate desecration of the flag by elements of the supporters of the Awami League.
This is the harsh truth. Deal with it. And if India tried the same thing with Sindh today for example, IF i were the person making the decisions, there would certainly come a `critical point` at which use of nuclear weapons in a first strike against India would become seriously tempting. If you drive a man to the wall, then he can reach a point where he has nothing to lose anymore. Pakistani leaders faced this situation in East Pakistan in 1971. There were few other viable alternatives. It backfired, but even with 20/20 hindsight, i can`t honestly say that i would have made different choices. That is the emotional truth of it, like it or not.
#43 Posted by Truth on April 14, 1999 2:35:07 am
Rishi:
I just wanted to support every word of your Reply #37. Good Job.
I just wanted to support every word of your Reply #37. Good Job.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- hamidm2: Re: # 146 kaalchakri, .... thank... The Correct Turn
- _arjun38: #145 Posted by... The Correct Turn
- KaalChakra: If tahmedji is not... The Correct Turn
- masadi: hamid writes "tahmed mian, ....... The Correct Turn
- masadi: Kulharee sahib, your writing... Hop Aboard the Interfaith
- treetop: wonder the nun survived... The Correct Turn
- KaalChakra: hamidm, don't knock Pakistanis... The Correct Turn
- MantoLives: PS you might want... Politics of PPP and
