A Decision to Regret

Ferozk#: 12

…..couldn’t have said it better myself…but, alas, it’ll fall on deaf and dumb ears, as usual….

“Jay, for some one who has a pathological hatred for Pakistan and everything Pakistani, why are you spending so much time on Chowk, a Pakistani site?”

….elementary….pak-bashing….



….now, be prepared to get back another banal, hackneyed and excruciatingly boring post about how in india….blah, blah, blah…yadda, yadda, yadda…..but i’m sure, like most ppl …well me at least, you’ll have the good sense to skip over it and save yourself some aspirin….

hamzad afaqui

``Please stick to interpreting the Quran and congratulate yourself to be the only mulla with a congregation numbering ONE(or zero?).”

….speak for yourself…..i quite like his interpretation, thank you very much….

re: Stuka # 68

Stuka,

Aap tau itne naive na the :)

Ali1 is a typical U.P. wallah who (or whose parents) migrated from U.P. or nearby. Being a U.P. wallah, he is naturally intelligent (it is all about the special wheat flour we eat), can`t stand Mullahs, and has difficulties with the dominant ethnic group in Pakistan. His hostility to India and Hindus is a fundamental aspect of his definition as a Pakistani. We Indians should feel empathy for him, aur aap hain ki...

There are more things I could tell you, but abhi nahin...:)

re: hamidm # 71

Hamid Mian,

LOL...see, that is the advantage of being a known as the kabir of Chowk. You may curse us but we will still love you. Please keep it coming :)

Regards.

re: anNy # 63

``oye..you made that up..``

anNy, that ``Hans ke liya hai Pakistan, Lad ke lenge Hindustan`` is, as far as I can tell, genuine stuff. That slogan, and the thought process behind it, was quite alive and well until 1971. After Pakistan lost half the country, it probably became difficult to sustain that military enthusiasm and confidence even for the most passionate believers (though you do see traces of that belief system on Chowk even today :)).

anNy, all of us have been pretty stupid in the past. The only way forward is to consciously decide to move forward. Who can do that? Young people like you, not oldies like me.

stuka to ali1:

``Who do you NOT give gaalis too?``

me darling stuka..me...any more questions, luvie?

1.Ok, so kashmiris will run out camps of train in? ....

No they wont run out of camps but if there is a Afghan govt which is not friendly to Pakis , then Pakistan will have to host them 100% in POK or Pakistani mainland. That will be not so easy subsequent to 11 sept.

2. Recall that Taliban incorporated whatever was left over of the Afghan Airforce. Ammo? there is no shortage of ammo anywhere.

I also know there is no shortage of ammo. But how does it reach Taliban & a land locked country like Af`tan is the million $$ question. And surley as Mushy says this ammo is not the one left by the soviets while retreating!!!

Actaully I think you will begin to see a shift in Indian policy on Afghanistan or you will see a shift in American and Chinese policy on Taliban. If india continues to side with Iran and Afghanistan, which will basically mean a division of Afghanistan or else the Americans and Chinese may realize that unless the fighting force of the Taliban is saved, to reconstitute Afghanistan, that they will have to change their economic plans and capitualte to Iranians and Pakistan may suffer mortally. Under what conditions would such a scenario be acceptable to either the American security paradigm in the Gulf or the Chinese security paradigm or to Pakistan?? You can be sure that it is the long term plan of the Americans to allow for Pakistani ground troops in the Gulf while they provide air and naval cover. So I think India has before it a historic choice.

Does not make sense. anyway

3. Psychological effect - yes, there is also a report that JKLF is pointing out that pakistan ...

I quite agree. India should dismiss the Farooq govt and call for fresh free & fair elections ASAP. Hurriyat should stop pretending , challenge the terrorists, test its popular support and democratic credentials ( and ask Mushy uncle to allow Pakis the democratic right to elections)

Of course you are aware that Mr. General Musharraf has impressed upon the Indian that they ought to remain calm or else he will teach them a lesson.

surely not like the one Pakistan taught India in 1965, 71 & Kargil :-)

4. When we cross the LoC? A Dollar on a Dime, When Indians cross LoC, it will be the biggest favor the Indian will have done Pakistan. You see the phase where India had a utility against Beijing is over, for the time being. India is an important country and the US will want good and deep relations with it, but the US will not tolerate poor relations with muslim countries anymore and this will mean that India will have to come to a decision, will it go it alone against Pakistan, and risk trade with other muslim countries and the wrath of China and the US or will it see benefits in a negotiated settlement? I think it will choose the latter option.

trade with muslims countries. You must be joking. Apart from voicing support at OIC , what have your Muslim friends done for the Pakis??

5. Islamic Terror? So those who tore down Babri under the Ramjamanbhumi were Hindu terrorist? Anyways, as usual, Indians seemed to not realize that this paradigm and it`s terms of reference ...

Firstly, hobbyty please tell me honestly how many non Muslim religious strucutres have been torn down prior to Babri Masjid and after Babri Masjid in Pakistan since 1947. You may talk of Babri Masjid, but it is a symbol of hundreds of years of Islamic terrorism ( some of your ancestors were also at the receiving end of that terrorism).

You see, solving kashmir is in the interests of Pakistan and India cannot gain acceptance at table of permanent members of security council without solving kashmir. And as soon as it does both Pakistan and India may become elibigle for consideration. India cannot be accept without Pakistan. There is no zero sum game with Pakistan; it is going to be around for as long as there is an India, therefore it is in the interest of India to seek a negotiated settlement.

let me tell you that India is not going to concede an inch of its land with or without the permanent seat at UN. UN anyway is an impotent institution. However, it is not only in Indias interest but Pakistans interest to solve the isue. In trying to bleed India by thousand cuts , pakistan has choosen to poison itself slowly and surely. Your present woes are due to this poisoning of your polity and mind.

Today, pakistan has refused to accept dead bodies of Pakistanis killed in Af`tan ( the 35 men of HUM killed in kabul during an air raid when they they were in a brain storming session

on how to send the infeidels to hell) Does this refusal to accept dead bodies of its men not remind one of Kargil when Pak Army refused to accept dead bodies of its soldiers. Do PAkis have any shame!!! May they get some sense and shame Inshaallah

FerozeK and jay

Sorry for interfering but I believe calling anybody Chuurra (North Indian word for Sweeper class) is also a cognizable offence and I know for sure that such complaints are registered and action taken. Law is there and fauth can be in implementation.

Feroze,

re Jay

Any fool can criticise the other side & toot his own side`s horn. It takes more fortitude in criticising one`s own deficiencies. So, let the dog bark.

I can understand why a barking dog can test one`s patience. Unfortunately, if you tell a barking dog to ``shut up``, he barks even more.

Stuka,

re Ali 1

{{Who do you NOT give gaalis too?}}

Lemme guess--Hugh Heffner...:)

The current events in S. Asia give us an opportunity to do a strategic re-assessment of the effect of Partition on India and Pakistan. The benefits that Partition was supposed to have delivered have been well documented by pre-`47 politicians, and I will not repeat them here. There were many things that they never considered - (a) the impact of eternally hostile neighbors, (b) the behavior of foreign powers, (c) the impact of (a) and (b) on national development. Perhaps, the leaders who agreed to Partition can be excused - none really had any experience in strategic affairs.

It is the strategic goal of most countries to not have hostile neighbors - Partition achieved the exact opposite. Even with the Kashmir issue resolved, it seems unlikely that India and Pakistan will ever co-exist like the US/Canada. Unfortunate, but likely. The hostility (or fear of India) has been nothing short of disastrous for Pakistan`s domestic politics and emergence of democracy. The military in Pakistan could never trust civilian politicians to handle diplomacy (only time will tell whether the military was part of the problem or the solution). Bangladesh, Afghanistan blow-back on Pakistan and Kashmir are just some of the direct consequences of Partition - many more are yet to come. The cost to India has also been great - militancy in two border states, and a two-decade long pre-occupation with Pakistan. In the mid-80s, Bob Gates (ex-CIA director) reportedly told Pakistani decision-makers that every conceivable conventional military conflict with India would result in Pakistan`s defeat. The same organization has recently run through two-dozen scenarios again, and has concluded that ALL scenarios will result in a nuclear exchange. The military expenditure and fiscal mismanagement is ruining both countries, to varying degrees. Is this what was desired by the politicians who agreed to Partition?

Foreign powers have taken advantage of Indo-Pak hostility for their own benefits, or at least, have relegated the concerns of both India and Pakistan to a much lower order of priority than would have been possible if there were no conflict between India and Pakistan. One need not go beyond Afghanistan to see how foreign powers (USA, Pakistan, India, Iran, Russia) can literally call the shots if there is domestic strife -- Afghanistan is what India must have been like when Mughal power collapsed and open season could be declared on her (from Nadir Shah to the British) because the various princes/maharajas could not evolve a unified structure for conducting military, foreign relations. Since Partition, both India and Pakistan have been used (Pakistan by the West for its anti-Soviet and now anti-terrorism conflicts, and by China for its anti-India policies; India to a lesser extent by the US as a bulwark against China). Neither India nor Pakistan benefited from being used in this manner. The blow-back of the Afghan war is visiting Pakistan today, and will perhaps visit India tomorrow. Indeed, had Pakistan been backed by India in `79, the Soviets may never have advanced on Afghanistan in the first place. Afghanistan was a pit-stop for them enroute to the sea, which remained (and may remain?) their end game. A historical analysis of The Great Game tells us that Afghanistan`s current borders came into existence in the modern era as a result of the strategic understanding between Czarist Russia and British India. Once the British left, and the Soviets recovered in strength from the 1917 revolution and the World Wars, the delicate strategic balance was disturbed to the discomfort of Pakistan. Nature abhors a vacuum, and the Soviets picked Afghanistan like a ripe plum. Had the Soviets not been engaged in a Cold War with the US that resulted in US aid to Afghans, unfortunate Pakistan would likely have been their next target (possibly with India`s connivance? - although Mrs. Gandhi reportedly assured Zia that she was opposed to any foreign power from playing a military role in the Subcontinent). China, too, has used Pakistan to keep India from playing a bigger role in Asia. The cost of this to India will become clearer in the future. The emerging social strife in Pakistan is creating conditions that will once again be tempting for foreign powers (there is talk of US contingency plans for the US to take out Pakistani strategic weapons in case of an Islamic revolution there, Taleban-Pathans may begin to see Pakistan as an enemy, not a friend). To forestall this, India and Pakistan should put forth a joint vision for the future for their respective peoples that ensure at a minimum -- a common defense and foreign affairs policy. They should solve their differences in order to achieve this. The geography of the Subcontinent defines threats - if the threat from within can be controlled, then threats from the outside are manageable. Again, is this what the politicians who agreed to Partition desired?

The impact of all the above on national development in both Pakistan and India has been terrible, and at the risk of stating the obvious - the per capita GDP of both is still stuck at less than $500 and neither country is a shining example of human development. The only way out, it seems, is for India and Pakistan to recognize that they are mutually dependent on each other more than they have been willing to admit so far. Once, they admit that, they should then evolve some common understanding on defense and foreign policies. There could still be an Islamic Republic of Pakistan and a Republic of India, but there should perhaps not be separate armies or foreign offices.

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

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

ref: Ferozek #78

``What I really find interesting about India urging the United States to tackle the problem of terrorism in Kashmir is that it seems to suggesting, ironically, a third party mediation.``

India wants ``Facilitation``, not mediation! :)

But seriously, how safe is Pres. Musharraf? From looking at Pakistani newspapers, it seems that the public mood is swinging slowly away from the general`s policies. There also seems to be a dangerous level of polarization taking place between a (largely urban) elite which sees its interests best served by aligning with the west and continuing with the pattern of economic development adopted till now, and a (largely rural, lower middle class) section which has been not benefitted much from economic development and which does not see itself gaining much from the potential for economic recovery which the west is offering Pakistan. To what extent is this correct?

In many ways the situation now is similar to what Mr Sharif faced just before he was deposed: an unpopular loss (then Kargil, now Pakistan`s Aghanistan policy), a vocal anti-govt. clergy, a disaffected public, no support from political parties and a restive army. Could there be something brewing up?

-narain

Fuzair #14

``One of the reasons why we hate the Anglo-Saxons as much as we do is because we know that, at some level, they are better than us because they can still be shamed, eventually, into doing the right thing. ``

You think so??? only time will tell, and so far it hasnt been saying too many good things about shame and the white race......

Taliban online singles service. Interesting.

http://citizens.reagan.com/right/WSGil/talibansingles.jpg

Thanks