War Now and, Forever?

re: 12-head retard aamir

{More power to common man for thats what i am.}

...better check in your undies first if you`re really even a man or not...then worry about what kind of man you are...

From #74

{To say that these buses and trains are conduits for terrorists is a canard no one should believe.}

....right, because khushwant uncle has the omnipresent roving eye that knows all this for a fact...

Ras Siddiqui #74 While agreed that war between two nuclear-armed countries would be a disaster, so far the results of brinkmanship have been positive - the military has rounded up mullahs by the score.

If all this - 9/11, 12/13 - had not happened, Pakistan was heading for a civil war, with the mullahs trying to take over by force. No question. And with men like Hamid Gul in charge, we could have kissed goodbye any chances of Pakistan emerging from the mess Zia put it in.

Some people get ahead by being smart, others by being lucky. We got lucky.

INDIA HAS FREEDOM TO DO ANYTHING ,WHICH SOME OTHER COUNTRIES CANT B/C THEY DONT HAVE FREEDOM----pearls of wisdom SUX SENA

Http://headlines.sify.com/popwin.html



jan5th 2002

Harijan child beaten to death for failing to



do `mujra`

Sanjay Sharma in Bhopal A five-year-old harijan girl was brutally kicked and beaten to death at Ramgadh village in MP`s Shivpuri district on Thursday evening. The child`s crime? Not bowing her head when two Thakur brothers passed by her hut. Veer Singh and his brother Halka were out for a stroll when they passed by the house of Kallu Jatav, a harijan. His son Atma Singh who was playing with his five-year-old sister Savita in the courtyard failed to notice the arrival of the Thakurs and did not do Mujra, an age-old practice of paying respect to the ruling class by bowing the head in their presence. Thakurs still insist on it in some parts of Madhya Pradesh. The brothers felt insulted and were incensed. They kicked and rained blows on the children till both of them collapsed. Savita succumbed to her internal injuries. The villagers, it is learnt, did not inform the police about the incident till Friday morning fearing the wrath of the Thakurs. In fact, those who had gathered at Kallu Jatav`s hut on hearing the cries of the children remained mute spectators. Ramgadh village is a part of the erstwhile Gwalior estate of the Scindias.

The foolishness of war

By Khushwant Singh

There are millions of my countrymen who agree with me that we must never ever go to war against Pakistan again — or for that matter, against any nation. Sabre-rattling is not patriotism; it is a foolish person’s show of bravado.

Persons who have not seen the havoc modern-day weaponry can cause to both, those on battlefields and civilians, who have not seen once-flourishing cities in Poland and Germany reduced to rubble and the ruins of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, have little idea of what war is.

I have. The vast majority of those who perished in World War II were not soldiers but civilians — men, women and children. I never want to see that happen in India, Pakistan or any other country.

Are our responses to the attack on our Parliament the best we could do to fight terrorism? I do not think so. Pakistan condemned it as soon as it occurred, as it did after the attack on the Kashmir assembly. Accusing President Musharraf and his government of being behind these attacks is unwarranted. So is recalling our high commissioner from Islamabad.

Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Tayyeba, Jaish-e-Moha-mmed and the Taliban are not creations of Musharraf’s regime. They were created by his predecessors and came to him as unwanted inheritance. They have strong presence in Pakistan’s armed forces and have gained popularity among the common people of Pakistan.

Musharraf has an unenviable task of getting rid of them. He did a right about-turn by disowning the Taliban in Afghanistan under American pressure. Under the same pressure, he is doing his best to disown other Islamic militant organisations. It is not in our interests to add to his troubles but to help him in the task he has been compelled to undertake.

His hold on Pakistan is very tenuous. There are many in Pakistan’s defence services who would like to see him out of power. They will be more extremist and anti-Indian than Musharraf. Would helping subvert Musharraf’s regime at this juncture be in India’s interest? Our government seems to think so. I think it is a grave error.

Stopping train and bus services to Lahore is also a retrograde step. The need of the hour is more people-to-people contact between Indians and Pakistanis, not making it almost impossible. To say that these buses and trains are conduits for terrorists is a canard no one should believe.

``After all, General Musharaf can arrest Muslim fundamentalist leaders in Pakistan but we can`t lock up the equally venomous and dangerous Imam Bukhari in Delhi, so maybe there is something here that needs further elucidation?``

Imam Bukari is just nuisance; Bal Thakare is more venomous and dangerous to secular India.

hARAMI..OU #71

HOWEVER despite his dislike he (churchill)like a STATESMAN which neither ADVANI nor Atal ji is ,He carried out the promise(BY THE G.B)]

Repeat, Clement Attlee was the Prime Minister.

[Dont ever accuse without proof ....ill eat you alive]

Go eat yourself.

NOT SO FAST NOR EVER

Who would say Atlee had any part in Indias freedom history.CHURCHILL IS STILL THE MOST TOWERING FIGURE AMONG ALL BRITAINS P.M.

Atlees existence is like Nanda & Desai being P.M. of India ...insignificant

EVEN IN & OUT AS P.M. AS A MEMBER OF HIS PARTY HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL TO SEE & MAKE SURE THAT INDIA INDEPENDENCE BILL GOT PASSED.

You are just nit picking from the central important characters & theme.Like sux sena pick on Shankars spelling of hypocricy

Ref M.A.Jinnah #: 60

[1/Who was the P.M. when Mt.Batten was sent to hand over the power.]

Clement Attlee of the Labour Party.

[3/ ww2 was over 6 yrs in duraion & various brit represented british over that period.ONE OF THE REASON OF CHURCHILLS UNPOPULARITY WAS THAT HE FORESAW THE BEGINNING OF DOWN FALL OF EMPIRE OVER WHICH SUN NEVER SET.]

Churchill lost the post-war election on economic circumstances. The British public did NOT want the burden of an Empire after WWII.

[HOWEVER despite his dislike he (churchill)like a STATESMAN which neither ADVANI nor Atal ji is ,He carried out the promise(BY THE G.B)]

Repeat, Clement Attlee was the Prime Minister.

[Dont ever accuse without proof ....ill eat you alive]

Go eat yourself.

SOUTH ASIA`S ENDURING CONFLICT

India united in distrust

Billion-strong democracy agrees on little except enmity for Pakistan

Marisa Handler, Chronicle Foreign Service Friday, January 4, 2002





Bombay -- Halfway through its sixth decade of independence, India stands at the forefront of the developing world.

It has gained international recognition for technological innovation in areas ranging from biochemicals to electrical engineering. It has successfully maintained a democracy and has waged largely effective crusades against destructive social practices as ingrained as caste discrimination, female infanticide and suttee, in which a widow is forced to immolate herself on her husband`s funeral pyre.

But when it comes to acceptance of Pakistan, there has been no significant progress since the 1947 partition that formed the two nations. Despite India`s vast cultural, economic and social diversity, the nation of over a billion people stands united in contempt for its neighbor.

``There is a hatred for Pakistan here,`` said Simran Singh, an artist living in Bombay. ``It`s a simple fact. If India beats Pakistan in a cricket match, the entire country goes insane celebrating. When Pakistan wins, the Indian players get stones thrown at them.``

Politics is a more hazardous game, and the events following the Dec. 13 attack on India`s Parliament by separatist Kashmiri Muslim militants illustrates the volatility of relations between the two nations.

Terrorist attacks are nothing new for India, but the action three weeks ago struck at the heart of its government and has effectively pushed the two nuclear-armed nations to the brink of war.

Hostility and distrust among Indians is still running deep, despite a slight easing of bilateral tensions this week.

``Pakistan always breaks its promises,`` said Sandeep Koltharkar, a telecommunications marketing executive in Bombay. ``I`ve heard it and seen it on the news since childhood. I can`t trust Pakistan.``

Anita Goel, a teacher in this sprawling city of 15 million, agreed, saying, ``You can`t believe these people, can`t rely on them or say what they`ll do next.``

Goel does not believe Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, who vowed this week to discontinue military support of Kashmiri terrorist groups and require them to purge any non-Kashmiris from their ranks. She was not surprised when Pakistan rejected India`s demand that it hand over a list of 20 people, most of them Indians, who are suspected of acts of terrorism.

``We want peace, but the Pakistani mentality is different,`` said Goel. ``You can`t trust them.``

This is an oft-expressed sentiment in India: We don`t want a war, but we keep being pushed into responding aggressively.

Many Indians are irritated by the restraint shown by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee`s government in the wake of the attack on Parliament. They say it is viewed in Pakistan as weakness, especially when compared with the U.S. response to terrorism in Afghanistan.

``Remember, India is under attack,`` reads an editorial published in this week`s issue of the newsmagazine India Today. ``India has to defend itself. The nation is not negotiable.``

Still, there is a general recognition that military aggression will not resolve the Kashmir conflict. And no one is mentioning the nuclear option.

``War is not the solution,`` said Shirshankar Swami, an engineer from Bombay. ``We have had three wars with Pakistan; did we get anything from that? It is good they are talking.``

But even ardent doves are pessimistic about finding a way out of the Kashmir morass.

Priya Ahluwalia, a Bombay writer-director, is one of a small minority who believe Indian Kashmir, which is the nation`s only Muslim majority state, should be allowed to vote on its future.

``A consensus has to be reached, and both sides have to agree to back out of Kashmir,`` she said. ``But that won`t happen. There are too many fanatics in both countries.``

H.F. Shaikh is a Muslim living in the city of Ahmedabad; he qualifies himself as Indian first, and is adamant that Kashmir remain a part of India. However, in contrast to most Hindus, he questions the Indian assumption that Pakistan is to blame for the attack on Parliament.

``We don`t have proof that it was ordered by Pakistan,`` he said. ``We don`t know that Pakistan was directly involved.``

Hindu Indians rarely consider this line of thinking, mirroring the profound religious tension that is part of India`s permanent makeup.

``India is fighting the Pakistani government, but (that) isn`t the problem,`` said Singh, the artist.

``Kashmir is an excuse to let out frustration,`` he said. ``Hindus and Muslims have been fighting since partition. The seeds of this hatred were sown long ago. There is no solution; it`s a no-win situation.``

The decades of distrust have created such a profound rift between the two nations that no one speaks of solutions, only of calming the situation.

``They should sit at the table,`` said Shaikh. ``They should talk.``

But there are few suggestions as to where to go from there.

At a meeting yesterday of the Indian Science Congress, Vajpayee named Pakistan as the primary source of international terrorism and described Musharraf`s steps thus far as unsatisfactory.

With the cycle of heated rhetoric nowhere near an end, Swami says the answer lies in mediation by a neutral party.

``A third party will give new options -- an unbiased party, like the United Nations, but India is rejecting mediation,`` he said, with a shrug of discouragement.





http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/01/04/MN197222.DTL

Veeresh Malik

``Dolce Et Decorum Est`` - por patria mori... Zigfried Sassoon - is that Owen`s non de plume? You may be mistaken about him (Sassoon) dying in WWI - So are there priciples and lives worth defending, at the cost of one`s life? Are you sure you understand what is ``Dolce`` and what is ``Decorum`` about defending ``principles and lives`` at the risk of losing your own?

Such a waste this self congratulatory tripe, you and the editors at Chowk ``feel`` is work (fits in with the theme of ``Dolce Et Decorum Est) - No there is no point in throwing Kashmir or Babri at people who do not acknowledge these as problems - nor is there any point in acknowledging that ``rights`` of and for women are a problem within much of Islamia (as presumably they are not in India - at least they can be seen in the streets, and this is a measure of ``liberation``).



``And so we in India do have to worry about this lack of evolution in Pakistan.``

``Sorry, we do have to worry. We have to try to get you to set your house in order``

YOU pass for a ``GIFTED`` writer on Chowk - ``GIFTED`` with what remains debatable - So Pakistani society is unevolved? Can such a statement be made by any thinking person? ``Contemporary sciences`` do not act as agents of assimilation in the same measure as does a growing economy. In the Ayub Khan years, Pakistan experienced a robust economy, it served as a model for developing economies, while in the same time the Indian economy served as a model for all that was percieved as wrong in developing an economy and how it did not serve to lift up peoples to lives of dignity. Can Pakistanis prevent you from worrying? apparently life in India is so free of stife, that significant numbers of Indians worry not about the hundreds of millions of Indians who do not share the indulgences (worrying about Pakistan) but then knowing whats best for the Pakistani is less a strain on the ``easy going``.

The mindset you represent in this work is precisely the problem between us - The Indian knows whats good for Pakistan? perhaps, I wonder where all those Indians are who so vigourously reject such notions when similar prisciptions are offered by Pakistanis to what they percieve as social and moral failures in the Indian political economy.

Here is whats missing from this piece - we are different, not in a biological sense or even in a moral sense - but because of different visions and experiences, not only was and is, evolution present in Pakistani society, it is present in all, by definition it has to be, it is the pace and direction of the evolution that can be open to examination - here again, we are confronted with differences - if evolution is directed, that is is to say, we know the desired outcome and can effect the pace, is it evolution? ``normal science`` ? yes, we are similar in that we do not want to be evaporated in a war and want lives of meaning, dignity, and joy.

Do we also seek ``easy going`` way of life? what`s that mean? ``easy going`` as in ``unexamined``, ``uncritical``, ``self-congratulatory``?

``just look at the women on Indian streets, even Delhi which was supposed to be unsafe a few years ago has changed in this context. Give it time, our version of democracy and an emerging middle class should improve matters. Will improve matters. Is improving matters. And if in evolution we lose some of our best, well, tribes and herds from whom we descended do the same, so does nature.``

More of the mind set (or the lack of one). Will looking at women in the streets of New Dehli tell us that these women are poor? unemployed? look unwashed? - I would suggest that we can infer that it is none of the above and that their visibility is a function of a robust economy. A robust economy is not necessarily a function of a democratic dispensation (Argentina?) - now, for main point - human society is not a mirror of nature, it is the struggle to animate the ``OUGHT`` and not the ``IS`` - If ``tribes and herds from which we desend do the same``, why the need to evolve? had you concentrated on this distinction while congratulating your Indian selves and promoting ``principle and lives worth defending`` it would have added ``reason`` and ``values`` and brought cogency and relevance to Pakistanis, to this piece. You ``ought`` to read ``Dolce Et... over and over again - it is the waste and meaninglessness of war - that is to say there are no principles and lives worth defending or risking one`s own life for. Are you asserting that this is so???

You seek time for the Indian vision, but are rather impatient with that of the ``Islamic fundamentalist`` - All ``Islamic fundamentalist``? such ridiculous broad brushes - but then, hey, you are ``gifted`` - no effort required to seperate the wheat from the chaff - preaching to the converted are you?

``...it seems that we in India are under attack from Islamic fundamentalists because we are trying to make our principles and our lives worth defending. This is apparently not acceptable to the Islamic fundamentalist because it threatens, by visible display, to undermine their religious and traditional feudal basis of authority and in identifying that, we have an ongoing request for formalisation of war supported, increasingly, by the Indian middle class who has the most to lose otherwise``

So ``Islamic funadmentalists`` are trying to formulate principles so as to make those principles and their lives indefensible? or is it your argument that because their visionis different from yours that it makes their lives unworthy and indefensible? Sounds a lot like Mr. Bush`s argument and Mr. Advani`s aping of it, that we are hated because of our freedom and success - but you are gifted and no one will see through your ``brilliance``.

``Humanity does not want fundamentalism as portrayed by the hardcore Islamists, and in that war, against it, we the majority of people in India and Pakistan are together.``

Speaking in the name of ``humanity``? Secular humanism strikes again - ``Hardcore islamist``? What are these? Why these broad brushes? what are you hiding behind these broad brushes strokes? are there ``softcore Islamists``?

You could have done much in this work, instead you opted for the lazy, unexamined, uncritcal. ideological approach. So not only Not only are Indian and Pakistani readers too ``stupid`` - but you, in this work, have helped them distinguish that this piece certainly is,``stupid``.

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

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

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

PS: Kuti kay bachay 12 headed monster... stop associating Jinnah`s pristine name with your rather sad personality.

Harimau,

Granted that you are a Pakistan hating fanatic. And granted that you dont like Jinnah, but to make a statement like : `twisting of facts comes with the name` shows your unwillingness ever to accept facts...like Jinnah`s honesty and integrity are unquestionable.

After all, your christ, your mahatma, the gospel of truth, the one and only, the most honest creation of earth, the walking talking God in flesh called Jinnah `Honest man of Integrity, brave and incorruptible`.

Is the gospel of truth not enough for you?

Now go to hell.

trojan #52

I would agree with you that SOME of the people associated with the Jana Sangh, RSS etc. do have a very rabid and unreasonable anti-muslim viewpoint. But you will not find the rhetoric repeated in the BJP partyline. They are not that different from Congress, unfortunately (basic politicians with self interest). But the complicity of huge sections of the Pak establishment in nurturing jehadis with *extremely * anti-Indian views is responsible for the real mess we are in. Students in India are *not * fed with anti-pakistan or anti-muslim viewpoints; if anything all these are toned down at the cost of distorting the bitter truth of the past. So consequently there is no systematic ``kill or convert muslims/pakistanis`` kind of theme existing in any section of youth in India.

More than the current leaders of LeT etc. what is

alarming are the kids who will be the leaders