An Eulogy For The Hawks

anNy (cutie pie) #121,

You tell em girl. I don`t even read Jay`s posts anymore. Koi faida nahi hai. The parrot keeps yapping biased statements and hate filled propaganda.

And when he does say something intelligent, he follows it with verbal poison.

Jay,

I believe more Pakistanis here admit their flaws than Indians admit theirs. Why don`t you preach to your own countrymen, whose head is filled with arrogant notions about their country.

Better yet, take your advice and apply it to yourself.

I love my country, I know it`s flaws, and I`m on my way towards helping it out, after I complete my education.

Now relax and have a glass of iced tea with lemon.

It cools the mind and the soul.

xxabu #114
Re Advani
``But I pose to you - would it be the end of the world?``

Advani still doesnot admit that destroying a ``structure`` in Ayodhya was the wrong thing to do. He doesnot express regret(or take responsibility) for the riots and violence accompanying his Rath Yatra. In this context, it would be pretty close to end of the world if he becomes PM.

``Now assuming that Advani and other hawks are more interested in power than ideology - it`d be preposterous for an Indian politician to do otherwise - wouldnt the new leadership necessarily have to conform, ``democratise``? ``

Exactly, he is more interested in power than ideology, so he has been talking of the ``presidential form of government``. He supports the Armed Forces having a unified head, etc.

Saifuddin Soz once said about Advani(on rediff, I think): Advani doesnot have any respect for the Constitution. I think we shouldnot ignore any signs that such a statement can be true.

``when and if Advani goes around asking for votes on the basis of Ram Mandir, peopel are going to have a good laugh. I think BJPians in general, and Advani in particular realize this. ``

The fact remains that whether the communal agenda is allowed to prevail or not, the cost in terms of human lives lost in riots and damaged(and polarized) communal relations is too large a price we have paid due to Advani and the rest of the hardliners. Either they admit this, or they are the same as the Congress, manipulators of public sentiment with pious facades, caring nothing for even 1000s of lives lost inteh process.

The terms on which BJP or any other parties seek power and public approval have to be changed, its not clear that that change has really, fundamentally happened. These leaders will certainly behave differently if they had a majority in hand, remember every Congress Prime Minister to date.

Dear Bhartiye Whatever (nobody calls a muslim a musalman these days)

There is little difference between a Muslim fascist of Pakistan and an Indian fascist claiming to be a ``musalman``.

Disintegration of Pakistan is as much real as the disintegration of India. Don`t kid yourself.

Look around yourself, Mr. Keerthik, there are so many centrifugal forcess spinning in poverty ridden India, your fascist limbs could split any moment if you don`t hold to your ``secular`` pants real tight.

India of ``sacred cows`` is only as much ``sacred`` as Pakistan of ``holy Qurans`` is ``holy``. No difference.

Kettle calling a pan how black you`re! Amazing!

SAMEER 106

``by accepting Indian Kashmir as part of India unilaterally, decreasing military spending, replacing Islam with secularism through constitutional means``.

I agree with your above statement, but I was talking about what prevents pakistan from doing this, some ontological reasons.

Once up on a time a grasshopper was getting anxious about the approaching winter, the cold was becoming un bearable, the grass supply was reducing. It went to the wise old owl, `` oh the wise one you should have a solution to this``.

The owl said, `` turn into a cricket and hybernate``.

Good answer, but there are some structural reasons, unalterable elements of the anatomy, some ontological reasons that prevent the metamorphosis of grasshopper into a cricket.

That is the level at which one has to address the pak issues.

( By the way, that story written as a prologue to a report nearly twenty five years ago about the industrialisation prospects of third world countries got me a job with an international organisation).

regards

jayaprakash

bharatiya musulman #104 ``Jay...Yes I am in full agreement...Pakistan must go and the sooner the better.``

I am glad to see Jay finally has new company in the ``I Hate Pakistan`` Club. Dream on. There are people like you in Pakistan too who are convinced India will not survive. To both of you geniuses on either side of the border, I have this to say: So what??? There is nothing sacred or eternal about nation-states. They are like bubbles. All you can see is the bubbles. What is important is the water under these bubbles - this being the current and future generations. And (this may be hard for you to believe), those future generations belong to ALL OF US. It is their welfare that is important. When you get it, you will stop wasting your time with ``I Hate Pakistan`` or ``I Hate India`` bs on chowk and start thinking in more meaningful ways.

Re: Jay, #103

Jay, I dislike writing long posts. But your post merits a response, and I have to say in this post more than just the issues you have raised and statements you have made in yours.

First, in your post you made some statements and raised some interesting questions. I hope you find time to answer my queries. And please give it a thought before you start typing away.

- Dissolution of Pakistan – Say your wish is granted and Pakistan as a country is dissolved. What then? Would that put the South Asian region on the fast road to peace and prosperity? Would it eradicate poverty and hunger from a region that is worst than any part of the world in terms of quality of life? Would it eliminate diseases from South Asia? Would all ``jihadis`` suddenly stop preaching violence and turn their weapons into plowshares? Would killing the demon of Pakistan be a fairy tale ending and everybody would live happily ever after?

- Pakistan Being an Accident – A lot of people, including Pakistanis, agree that Pakistan is an accident of history. However, out of 160 countries--or is it 180? This number has been increasing by the day. I have lost count--that claim sovereignty, how many can you count that are ``natural`` and not ``accidents``, including present-day India? Did ``India`` ever exist as a nation prior to 1947? Is it also not an accidental result of the crumbling of the British Empire?

- Jinnah – Dead and gone, to me, at this point in time, he is just a historical curiosity. How long are you going to beat that dead horse? To what benefit?

Secondly, as for Yasser and Scout, I don`t know them personally, but I`ve read some, if not all, of their posts. I can vouch for them. They are good people. They neither hate the Hindus or India, nor they want to dismember India. India to them is just another country like, say, Japan. Nothing more, nothing less. They just dislike those who insult their country and/or their religion. What`s wrong with that?

Now the Important Stuff.

Jay, it is my conviction that some people are more ``developed`` than others. Following the laws of Karma, if one were to take it somewhat seriously, some have achieved a ``higher`` form, a ``form`` that has absolutely nothing to do with either intelligence or physical prowess. Those people, however, are very rare. I know that you know exactly what I am talking about.

In you I saw one of those people. I find it quite disturbing, then, when you defend the likes of bhartiya_musalman (aka Imran Zulfiqar) and Keerthik Sasidharan, who, I know, are ``undeveloped`` and are of ``lower`` form. I find that disturbing not for my sake but yours. You are much better than them. I hope you realize it. You once welcomed me to my ``natural state.`` I am asking you to realize yours.

Jay:

``Pakistan has moved in the direction of intolerance, the young of pakistan, YLH, aisha, scout and others do not fill me with optimism. Waht I see is only denial that the events have moved, no assuming of responsibility, it is all slogans, flippant remarks, no love for the country. ``

So how come you didn`t take my name…especially since I`m the youngest of all three mentioned? do I scare you?

What denial are you talking about? Elaborate please…as far as assuming of responsibility is concerned, I (and many other interactors) have time and time again admitted that the country is in shambles…the moral social political economical structure is rotting like nobodys business…we take responsibility of all this that is happening...also the unwarranted deaths of hindus and christians and wahabis in the name of islam or our own in karo karo and sectarian violence...its wrong…we condemn it vehemently…what more do you want us to take responsibility of? and as far as flippant remarks go, that`s something you cant talk about sir, since theres more of that coming from you than scout or any other interactor on chowk…and she doesn`t crack jokes and be bychy about things dear to (evil) men like you as a matter of her daily routine...you do

I take strong offence to your ``no love for the country.`` I love my country as do you yours and this crazy child bharatiya musalman, his. Don`t base your ideas and conclusions on stuck up brats like sarwari and confused well meaning individuals like ylh. Gettit? And if you decide to answer please use easy language. the last post u`d addressed to me on Sarwaris board was cramped with jargon that was very irrelevent to what I had asked of you.

thank you

Bharatiya muslaman:

``the Pathans and Afghans are a highly uneducated, primitive and barbaric lot...``



darling you are a classic example of what propaganda does to people…how many pathans and afghans do you know? Have you personally ever interacted with a bunch of afghanis and pathans? In most probability you havent (ofcourse you may say yes you have considering your shaky credibility as I percieve it in connection of your writing style and attacks on others faith and beliefs) afghanis are some of the nicest people ever...they are incredibly polite, very well read and kind in the truest sense of the word…if the taliban are afghani to you then narsimah rao and jayalaitha will stand for all things indian to me…now do you understand?

``....today War is all about control of information and intelligence, not about physical brawn...and India has a decided advantage....I do believe on Average Indians have a much much higher IQ than Pakis...stats prove this....compare Pakis educational results in UK with those of Indians...the latter are light years ahead.``

I`ll kick your cute lil butt in any exam, test or other measure of intelligence…actually anyone could…but id like to do it in full view of everyone here so you suggest how we go about it…and just for the record my cousin at LSE which in case you didn`t know is one of the best schools in your U.K, has topped being one of 3 pakistanis in his batch with 9 indians…but unlike you I wont base the intelligence of indians on this certain incident…im sure there are smarter individuals in india than you…god help them if there arent…and provide stats and sources next time you decide to shoot of the hip

``…please remember Pakistan does not mean much to Pakis except in juxtaposition to India. My own Pakistani relations have admitted as much. We Indians consider the soil of India sacred..whereas to the Neurotic converted Paki..only the desert Sands of Arabia are sacred....tragic but true…``

child don`t u ever think before you write? are u like a little mad? Do you realize what ure saying up there doesn`t apply to even .5 percent pakistanis?? We`re not obsessed with india dollface…you seem to be with us… you sound like a sad indian flick as far as the soil bit goes…might as well humor you...for me the soil of my city, my country is as precious as is yours to you…saudisoil doesn`t do anything for me…and its not just muslims who feel this way about pakistani soil..my various hindu, christian and parsi friends feel the same was about India as you do about Pakistan…they don`t dig india just because there are people of their faith there…the sense of belonging is here for them just like its for you in india…for them Pakistan is as much home and theirs as india is for you but they`re a little more polite and tolerant in their views…we uneducated poor undernourished jehadi IQless village bumpkins here in pakistan believe in basic manners…so how about you be a little less volatile and rude since youll love india and I pakistan at the end of any dissing contest…?

STORY OF PAKISTAN

Sameer 106

I do agree that accidental creation need not hamper the continued survival, but when it happens due to stupidity, the cansequence can be catasprophic.

In kerala it is common in those days to see elephants being taken every evening for a bath in the rivers. Men and women line up the katcha roads to see the elephants. One farm labourer, every day yelled out to the mahout, `` will you give me the elephant``. One person asked, you should be stupid to ask this, do you know how much an elephant costs``. The farm labourere replied `` At best I loose a few words, if lucky I get the elephant``.

And one day it happened, the king was on the elephant and he decided to give the elephant to the worker.

The worker took it to his hut, and proudly tied it to the coconut tree next to his hut. He didnt know that the elephants are to be fed at dusk, no idea that the elephant was a male in musk. The elephant trample his hut, uprooted the coconut tree......

If one really struggles to get something, there is an eagerness to know about what one is after.

Accident, if it is a pure accident could have some redeeming hand of the `god`, when it is what do I loose....approach.. we have problems.

If you can see some parallel with pakistan so be it. It is not debatable, we are in the realms of wisdom.

regards

jayaprakash.

I think people on this board will agree that the Indo-Pak relationship should better be of the USA-Canada sort (without saying which is which, and I personally find Canada a better place to live in especially Vancouver BC . . .) otherwise we will see it becoming like the East-West Timor sort of relationship.

Choice, ladies and gentlemen, is ours.

(By the way, how come the Canadians never howl for Alaska??)

re: xxabbu99

I think xxabbu is right about how most of us (at least North)Indians view Pakistanis as ``our guys`` at some level. Why else would we get sooooo cross with you with such frequency? (Apart from Kargill and all.) And if it isn`t to some extent the truth, how would we be able to easily push your buttons (with articles like this one) and make you soooooo cross also? Would you react the same way if an Afghanistani or Iranian had written these things?

I also agree with xxabbu that there is a increasingly broad-based feeling of ``who we are as a people`` in India which is not based on religion but on culture (a broader thing). Right wing ideologues of all religions find this a little bit difficult to handle - and who can blame them? It questions their world view.

Nasah,

``The horrible thought is that the Bamiayani destroyer of Babri Masjid, Advani, despite his ``prashchit`` at the dargah of Khawaja Moinnuddin Chisti -- is still an unreformed criminal -- will be next in line.``

Yes, its kinda disconcerting. But I pose to you - would it be the end of the world? Think about the main reason BJP has held onto power - there is only one and it starts with V. Isnt it obvious that for a party like BJP to succeed, it needs to present a moderate, wise, Vajpayee-esque figure as leader? Otherwise it will be deserted by voters as well as prospective coalition partners. Now assuming that Advani and other hawks are more interested in power than ideology - it`d be preposterous for an Indian politician to do otherwise - wouldnt the new leadership necessarily have to conform, ``democratise``?

This is the norming influence I was talking about. Point is, regardless of Advani`s personal convictions, it`d be impossible for him to impose a communal agenda within the govt. Even more pertinently, why would he do it? What does he gain? In contrast to some people, I do not believe him to be a fundamentalist - just a shameless opportunist. He`d do whatever it takes to keep him in power. If it involves reciting the kalima tomorrow, he`ll happily do it.

Nasah, do you seriously think BJP, with or without Vajpayee, has even a remote chance of securing power on a communal agenda? Havent you seen what has been happening quietly in India in the last 10 years or so? In cities and towns, mufussils and villages, the only talk is now development, employment, money, and going one up over the next guy. There is no more of that colossal national insecurity that Advani exploited a decade ago. This time round, when and if Advani goes around asking for votes on the basis of Ram Mandir, peopel are going to have a good laugh. I think BJPians in general, and Advani in particular realize this. You just watch that man - as the elections come nearer, he will mutate into the greatest champion of minority rights. All sweet reasonableness and baby-kissing sugar daddy.

Regards.

``ps...for those of you who are interested, some friends of mine are organizing a goup called ``Deen Ilaahi Again``...it attempts to revive Akbar`s syncretistic approach among Indian Muslims. Also tries to get Indian Muslims to re-connect to their Hindu roots.``

Great idea ol` chap. Now get it signed and attested and send copies to the MS branch and His Holiness Sri Thakeray. A promotion to Major, maybe? Prospects of in-laws from the house of Jaipur? Who knows what the future might hold. Bloody good show.

I normally don`t post articles that aren`t mine, but this is worth it I believe...

JP Morgan commends Federal Budget 2001-02, terms it investor-friendly

ISLAMABAD, July 4 (APP): JP Morgan, the third largest financial services group in the world has commended the Pakistan Government for living up to its promise of making the Federal Budget 2001-02 an investor-friendly. In its analysis of the Federal Budget 2001-02, it said, besides the wide-range of incentives aimed at inducing investment flows some landmark decisions towards good governance and restoration of investors’ confidence were also announced, says JP Morgan report. The report said an ordinance for the protection of foreign currency deposits will soon be enacted.

It said a Fiscal Responsibility Law targeted at limiting government borrowing is also under consideration. The report analyzed the budgetary announcement on three key determinants of equity prices corporate earnings, liquidity and equity risk premium. According to their assessment, liquidity will improve in the capital market and will become an even stronger driver of equity prices as the market moves towards a T + 3 rolling settlement cycle over the next six months, the report added.

It said the number of budgetary measures such as a three year capital gain tax exemption, tax brakes on equity investment, and preferential tax treatment of dividend income for insurance sector will go a long way in attracting long term capital flows to the equity market. As far as impact on corporate earnings is concerned, the report believes that the budgetary measures will have a positive impact on corporate earnings.

It said the budget speech of Finance Minister, Shaukat Aziz was truly one of the most important and comprehensive policy statements made by the current administration. The report further said the Federal Budget 2001-02 is based on 3-5 year economic plan that revolves around the government’s debt management strategy, with an unerring focus on revenue growth and fiscal discipline. In this respect, the public sector investment will be targeted at a broad cross section of the economy to stimulate growth and create employment opportunities.

While development spending will increase in actual terms, it will be targeted at mainly improving infrastructure in priority sectors such as agriculture, small and medium sale industry, information technology, oil and gas. By following this strategy, the government hopes that public sector investment will trigger private sector investment, it added. The Federal Budget 2001-02, report said, aims to further the structural reforms take over the past 20 months among the measures announced, those focusing on fiscal reform, documentation of the economy, good public governance, restoration of investors’ confidence and poverty alleviation were the most prominent. Significant fiscal announcement include no new taxes, rationalization of tax rates, freezing of defence spending and a 28 percent increase in the development expenditure. Two of the important legislatives announcements are the proposed promulgation of an ordinance for protection of foreign currency deposit and a new Fiscal Responsibility Law to limit the government borrowing. This focus on fiscal reforms, growth and poverty reduction, in their opinion, will go a long way toward restoring investors’ confidence. The report contends that perhaps the government’s single most significant achievement since coming to power is the expansion in revenue base not by way of regressive ad-hoc taxes, but in an environment of tax rationalization.

It is heartening to see that this unerring focus on revenue growth has been maintained as a critical policy initiative in the Federal Budget 2001-02, the report added. Despite significant resistance, the government has extended the General Sales Tax (GST) at the retail level. Efforts to document the economy are also commendable.

While attempting to grow revenue, the government has maintained a tight limit on current expenditure, and both large discretionary current expenditure heads-defense and civil administration—have been kept stagnant. It further said talk of austerity and belt-tightening has actually been reflected in the budget. Discretionary current expenditure is up only 7 percent for 2001-02, a 2.4 percent budget increase in real terms. Budget development expenditure on the other hand, is up by 28 percent. More importantly, there are significantly large reallocations toward priority sectors while relatively wasteful expenditure has been slash quite dramatically, the report said.

reply #: 100 rajanjua

``A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation should tell you that MAD is a reality exactly because of the proximity. It should`nt matter who strikes first.``

Actually, you have it backwards there... let`s compare the US vs. USSR and India vs. Pakistan, shall we? If the USA or USSR had fired nukes, the other side would see them coming over, say, the north pole and thus would have time to fire a counterstrike which would be equally as devastating. If Washington fired upon Lenningrad, Kiev, Moscow and Baku, Moscow would fire upon Washington, NYC, San Francisco and West Virgina.

However, in the case of India Pakistan, the proximity means that by the time either India or Pakistan realised the other side had fired on them it would be too late; in other words, they would find out as the bombs basically hit them. This gives the initiative to the first strike.

Of course, if you meant in some way that the nuclear fallout would devestate each side no matter who fired first, I`m not positive about wind factors there but most likely there would be tremendous damage to both sides no matter what. Thus, it`s a bad move, but the greater damage would go to the one who did NOT strike first.

Also...

``Correct me if I am wrong but if my memory serves me right, Egypt has lost Sinai (three times), Syria the Golan Heights and Jordan the West Bank. Israelis still hold the Golan Heights, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The last brilliant Arab generals were probably Umar ibn al-Khitab and Khalid b. Walid. The word ``brilliant`` does`nt fit well with Nasser, Sadat or that other joker- Hussain of Jordan.``

Egypt lost Sinai after the 1967 war which was an unprovoked attack by Israel. It remained this way until 1973 when the Egyptians crossed the Suez and captured a large strip of land on the other side of the canal (the occupied side) and then dug in to await international intervention. They did this because of several things (not the place here to really go into it) but among them were #1) It was only designed to be a limited scale war, not all out war (Sadat used the term ``give them a bloody nose``) and #2) Logistically, Egypt could not have pressed the war onwards much further and decided to quit while they were ahead. The bottom line is that after 1973 Israel was forced to consider talking with Egypt in order to resolve the issues that arose after 1967. As a result of the peace talks, Egypt regained the Sinai penn. and it holds it to this day.

Syria did indeed lose the Golon Heights, something that has never been accepted by the international community and neither has the occupation of the West Bank nor the occupation of Arab East Jerusalem. Most of this is due to the fact that Israel struck first and her air force was superior and in this day and age it`s the air that usually decides the war. The Arabs have been a little down on their luck lately as far as great generals go, this I will give you. However, Sadat was a brave man who went to war because he knew it was the only way out of a bad situation for Egypt but THEN had the courage to sign a peace treaty with the ``enemy``. He knew Egypt had much greater things to worry about internally like her moribound economy and rising class discrepencies. He also paid the ultimate price when the fundamentalists killed him.

Finally, as for the ``brilliant`` term, I think that Nasser and Sadat were brilliant in their own ways; Nasser for showing the Arabs there was an alternative to subservience, Sadat for finally beating Israel in a war (or at the least showing the world that Israel was NOT invincible and could indeed be beat) and for signing a peace treaty that showed tremendous foresight and Hussain for keeping his country in one piece. This last part was very difficult if you know the history of Jordan esp in the aftermath of the 1967 war.

bharatiya musalman
In the context of statecraft, what you recommend for Pakistan would be counterproductive for India as others have pointed out. Only in the Balkans and in the depths of Africa is the horrendous human price paid for such upheavals as you suggest, considered acceptable.

As for people`s aspirations and Islam, just a question: aren`t you giving inordinate importance to Pakistanis and their future in the context of the future of subcontinental, including Indian Muslims?

By giving so much importance aren`t you doing precisely what you were saying Pakistanis do?

The veto power for Indians and Indian Muslims to be a vibrant and confident community lies with Indians and Indian Muslims only. The cause of Islam is best served by an ideology focussed on happy and secure Indian Muslims, not an ideology based on Pakistanis in disarray.

The counterpart lesson about an ideology based on happy and secure Pakistanis being better for Islam than ideology based on Indians in disarray is what a number of Pakistani leaders have not understood to Pakistan`s(and Islam`s) detriment. Why emulate their mistakes?

Re: bhartiya musalman #104

Bhartiya, no plan survives its first contact with reality.

Having said this, for the sake of argument, let us postulate your hypothesis a bit further.

Suppose that Pakistan does break up, how would you manage the following scenrios:

a) replace the political/regional vacuum that will exist; how will Iran feel about Baluchistan going to India or being independent; how will China react to a power struggle in South Asia with United States as being one of the interested parties; what will be the Russian/CAR reaction to turmoil on their southern borders - turmoil that can be exploited?

b) offer a security detente/pact to the post-Pakistani states/provinces; will you be willing to deploy Indian forces to maintain law and order, before these state are fully functional to do the job themselves?

c) would you be willing, if deployment is not possible, to give them economic credits ala Marshall Plan to make them intergrated into the Indian confederation?

d) would you be willing to give them special status or would be willing to have them as Indian protecterates?

e) how would India solve the various ingrained problems associated with these states - lack of education, high employment, fedual culture, sectarianism et al?

f) more importantly, does India have the POLITICAL WILL (sorry to all chowkwallahs for yelling this out...)to sustain this course of action?

Also; Bhartiya, international relations favors a status quo and not policies of destablization. Do you think, more critically, does India think that the world will allow it to destablize a ``key node`` in IR; an important geo-strategic link?

I hope you will answer my questions realistically and not on the basis of nationalistic rhetoric.

Ciao