USA and Muslims

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

ali87 # 150

We will direct that question toward faisaluno.

PM #130: Let me ask you the questin again:

If you believe so strongly in the US attacks, in principal, then would you support the attack if you knew your own family would be one of the victims of collateral damage in Iraq? I mean if you really think that the attack on Iraq is, ``deparately needed`` and the civilian casualities have to be considered acceptable, then would you apply the rule to yourself?

All I can say is that no one has a right to kill anyone, who is not attacking him/her. And I have yet to see anyone in Iraq enthusiastically calling for a US airstrike. Only individuals in the US are. Even the people of the three countries threatened by Iraq (S. Arabia, Iran and Kuwait) are against it.

I am not sure how you have become their representative for encouraging a US raid? Let the Iraqis speak for themselves. I don`t think they want the US to raid them. And I don`t think the US`s intention is to anyway help the Iraqis. If if were concerned about Iraq, it would not have killed, directly and indirectly, so many of the Iraqi people.

It is very easy to justify killngs of others under one garb or another. There are people in Pakistan, who justify the killing of Christians under a blasphemy law. They can usually make a very influential case on how this is good for the society (and for Islam) and that they have nothing against Christians in general, just against one person, whom they are targeting. But, nearly always, if not always, the actual intention is different. It is self-interest (mainly on property issues).

Even if a court approved of the blasphemy death penalty, and even if the Christian being killed was a serial murderer, I would hope that I would have enough courage, to still speak up and say that if you want to kill the serial murderer, convict him for the murder he committed through a proper system. Don`t try to use that as an accuse, to try him under a blasphemy law that will just become stronger and will be used to kill other Christians, just to solve your own self-centered property disputes.

Your argument seems to be the opposite, in case of Iraq.

Now to your reply. You have avoided another basic question I had pionted to, as follows: Do you have any information on who the US has in mind for replacing Saddam? If you don`t, then how can you make this argument?

``Your contention that a US strike be predicated on a show of approval by Iraqis indicated only one thing: your disconnect with the political realities on the ground in Iraq.``

Why? Are you suggesting that people getting attacked should have no say in their getting attacked? If tomorrow the US launches an attack on Pakistan, should the deciding factor be the percentage of Americans who support it, or the percentage of Pakistanis?

``Are you implying that the US supported his use of WMD on the Kurds, or even had prior knowlwdge of it?``

Yes (not WMD, but attacks. WMD is usually used in the nuke sense). It suppored him while he was attacking Kurds. Just like it supports Turkey while it is doing the same thing.

``Over the years, the U.S. has supported Iran, Iraq, and most directly and fatally, Turkey, in assaults on the Kurdish people. In 1991, the U.S. exercised its new-found concern to protect the Kurds from Iraq by excluding the government of Iraq from most of the northwestern part of the country. It then assisted Turkey when the latter sent division-strength ground forces and continuous air assaults to crush the Kurdish people in that region. `` (Ramsey Clark - US attorney general (retd)) http://www.dhushara.com/book/death/clark.htm

Please go to http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/index.html?page=/iraqinfo/sanctions/sarticles.html and get furthur details from many other writers.

``As for helping Iraq with satellite photos etc., please don`t forget that, doctrine of self-interest aside, Saddam was pretty much an unknown factor in 1979, as opposed to Iran. I suppose you would like to fault the US here for learning only through its mistakes.``

Why move the, ``doctrine of self interest`` aside? That is the main problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that experienced and super-shrewd people like the head of CIA, US Congress committees are, ``learning through....mistakes?`` You don`t think they knew what they were doing. Their aim was to destroy Iran as much as they could. And Saddam was the way to do it. Why else would they support Iraq?

``Er.. which part of `lives are being lost ..right now` ``

The biggest source of deaths in Iraq right now are the US sanctions. That is how most of the lives are being lost at the moment.

``Imagine the anguish of thousands of mothers CURRENTLY losing their children to devious policies that seek only to blackmail the sanction-backing nations. Or would you hold the US solely responsible for the lack of medical facilities in Iraq?``

Yes, I would hold the US responsible. If you don`t believe me, please read the following:

``Few deny that Saddam Hussein is an evil man. But there can be few who would deny that the death of 4000 children a month because of the
``breakdown of water and sanitation, inadequate diet, and the bad internal health situation`` is evil, too. The clever people in Washington and London who are so unfeeling as to say ``We have always said the plight of the Iraqis is in the hands of Saddam Hussein`` are not just callous monsters, they are criminals who ignore or brush aside reports such as those from the UN Children’s Fund, which recorded a year ago that under-5 mortality more than doubled in five years. Its Director, Carol Bellamy, said that sanctions ``should be designed and implemented in such a way as to avoid a negative impact on children`` but the pitiless and relentless men—and women—of the governing coteries in Washington and London are deaf to pleas that their savage policy of sanctions and bombing be reconsidered.`` (Brian Cloughley)(http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/index.html?page=/iraqinfo/sanctions/sarticles.html)

``As for ``gigantic armada of hundreds ...``, you`d do well to drop the dramatics. I hear precision bombing has come a long way since `91. ``

I was never good at dramatics. I can`t sing either. However, I am amazed at the casualness with which people can just justify wars. You have, ``heard`` that percision bombing has come a long way. You don`t know, you have just, ``heard.`` Since you have heard it, apparently that is good enough to say ok, that must be the case, so lets go give the green light to war.

Unfortunately, you have heard wrong. And do you even know what percision bombing is? Ever tried it? And how can you say with certainity that the US will even practice percision bombing? It never has before. It isn`t a coincidence that US aerial wars always lead to the most ground destruction.

As for gigantic armada of hundreds, that is incorrect. I said gigantic armada of thousands, not hundreds. Don`t believe me. Let`s look at the statistics during the previous attack on Iraq.

``There were two thousand air strikes in the first twenty-four hours....In less than three weeks the U.S. press reported military calculations that the tonnage of high-explosive bombs already released had exceeded the combined allied air offense of World War II....By the end of the aerial assault, 110,000 aircraft sorties had dropped 88,500 tons of bombs on Iraq, the equivalent of seven and a half atomic bombs of the size that incinerated Hiroshima....Thousands of missiles were fired from ships, including submarines, in the Indian Ocean, the Gulf, and the Mediterranean. More than 93 percent of all bombs were free falling and many of the bombs and missiles directed by laser systems were misguided. Weapons used included five-ton fuel-air explosive bombs that create pressures approaching those of low-yield nuclear weapons. Cluster bombs containing 250 bomblets capable of spewing 500,000 high-velocity, razor-sharp shrapnel fragments over an acre were used against Basra and on congested highways. Napalm bombs were used against people and to ignite oil-well. fires``.....http://www.dhushara.com/book/death/clark.htm

``This was by far the most intensive bombardment in history. It killed tens of thousands of people, injuring many more. Medicines and medical supplies were exhausted. It devastated water systems from reservoir, pumping station, pipeline, filtration plant to kitchen faucet as well as urban sewage and sanitation systems nationwide. Food production, processing, storage, distribution, and marketing facilities
were widely destroyed. Poultry was nearly wiped out by loss of
electricity and lack of grain. Animal herds were decimated. Fertilizer
and insecticide plants and storage structures were destroyed.
Communications systems, telephone, radio, TV, were shattered.
Transportation was badly battered. Vital industries were attacked
everywhere. Electric power was knocked out across the nation in the
first 24 hours of the assault. Petroleum production, refining, storage
and distribution from well to service station were attacked across the
nation...... (http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-toc.htm)

I hope I have provided enough information. I can provide much more if you like.

For those of you, who have never been exposed to military weaponry, and are unaware of the tactics used by the US in its aerial wars, and have never fired an M-16 or launched rockets from an airplane, and have never seen the massive damage caused by one single bomb, the following should highlight what happens when, ``the US goes to War.``

``Sanctions in Iraq and Genocide

some millions of Americans could watch a 60 Minutes TV program filmed in late 1995-which portrayed and described the deaths of more than 500,000 children in Iraq caused by U.S.-forced sanctions and then showed UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright saying of those deaths, ``Yes, the price is worth it``-without smashing their TV sets and taking to the streets.....

At 2:30 a.m. on 17 January 1991 the bombs began to fall, and for forty-two days U.S. aircraft attacked Iraq on an average of once every thirty seconds. U.S. technology smashed the cradle of civilization, and George Bush called it liberation.

Without setting foot on Iraqi soil, or engaging Iraqi troops, U.S. aircraft and missiles systematically destroyed life and life-support systems in Iraq over a period of six weeks. There were two thousand air strikes in the first twenty-four hours. More than 90 percent of Iraq`s electrical capacity was bombed out of service in the first few hours. Within several days, ``not an electron was flowing.`` Multimillion-dollar missiles targeted power plants up to the last days of the war, to leave the country without power as economic sanctions sapped life from the survivors. In less than three weeks the U.S. press reported military calculations that the tonnage of high-explosive bombs already released had exceeded the combined allied air offense of World War II.

By the end of the aerial assault, 110,000 aircraft sorties had dropped 88,500 tons of bombs on Iraq, the equivalent of seven and a half atomic bombs of the size that incinerated Hiroshima. Aircraft flew from distances as great as Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana and the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, without landing-just to show it could be done. Thousands of missiles were fired from ships, including submarines, in the Indian Ocean, the Gulf, and the Mediterranean. More than 93 percent of all bombs were free falling and many of the bombs and missiles directed by laser systems were misguided. Weapons used included five-ton fuel-air explosive bombs that create pressures approaching those of low-yield nuclear weapons. Cluster bombs containing 250 bomblets capable of spewing 500,000 high-velocity, razor-sharp shrapnel fragments over an acre were used against Basra and on congested highways. Napalm bombs were used against people and to ignite oil-well fires.

Within days there was no running water in Iraq. For many weeks, people in Baghdad-without television, radio, or newspapers to warn them-were getting their drinking water from the Tigris in buckets. The Iraqi News Agency and Baghdad Broadcasting Station lost six wireless broadcast stations, twelve television stations, and five radio stations.

Iraq`s telephone system was put out of service in the first few days of the war. The International Telecommunications Union`s (ITU) fact-finding trip to Iraq in June-July 1991 reported that 400,000 of Iraq`s 900,000 phone lines had been destroyed. Fourteen central exchanges were irreparably damaged, with thirteen more put out of service indefinitely.

Lack of communications frustrated attempts to conduct most organized activity, including caring for the sick and injured. The destruction of transportation links compounded the problem. In a country built around two great rivers, 139 automobile and railway bridges were either damaged or destroyed, including twenty-six in Basra province alone. Major highways and other roads were hit, making travel a nightmare. Road maintenance stations were bombed to prevent repairs. All kinds of civilian cars, trucks, buses, and even taxis were attacked along Iraq`s major highways.

Iraq`s eight major multipurpose dams were repeatedly hit and heavily damaged. This simultaneously wrecked flood control, municipal and industrial water supply, irrigation, and hydroelectric power. Four of Iraq`s seven major water-pumping stations were destroyed. Bombs and missiles hit thirty-one municipal water and sewage facilities. Sewage spilled into the Tigris and out into the streets of Baghdad, adding water-borne disease to the list of killers. In Basra, the sewage system completely collapsed. Water purification plants were incapacitated nationwide.

Iraq`s agriculture and food-processing storage and distribution system was attacked directly and systematically. Half of Iraq`s agricultural production came from irrigated lands, and all of the irrigation systems serving them-including storage dams, barrages, pumping stations, and drainage projects-were attacked. Farmers lost the ability to flood or drain land, cutting food production in half. Widespread saltwater intrusion occurred in Basra province. At least three food warehouses in the Baghdad province were hit, seven were struck in Asra province, and all of Iraq`s General Company of Foodstuffs warehouses in Al-Qadissiya province were destroyed. Important pesticide storage was destroyed. Three separate facilities of the Iraqi Dates Company were damaged.

Iraq`s factory in Abu Ghraib to produce baby milk powder, unique to the region, was attacked on January 20, 21, and 22. Although the Pentagon claimed it was a chemical plant, the attacks were simply part of the deliberate targeting of Iraq`s food production. The Al-Ma`mun vegetable oils factory and the sugar factory in Meisan Province were hit. In Al-Taji, a small town near Baghdad, the country`s biggest frozen-meat storage and distribution center was destroyed. It was bombed three times in one day-at 8 a.m., 3 p.m., and 8 p.m.

Farm herds were decimated-three and a half million sheep from a total of ten million and two million cattle were lost by summer, primarily from feed shortages. Ninety percent of the country`s poultry production was destroyed.

Grain silos across the entire country were hit methodically, and hundreds of farms and farm buildings were attacked. The nation`s tractor assembly plant and major fertilizer plant were destroyed in bombing raids that took sixteen lives.

In June 1992, more than a year after Iraq was driven from Kuwait and with sanctions still in place, the United States burned grain and wheat fields with incendiary bombs near Mosul in northern Iraq.

U.S. bombing hit twenty-eight civilian hospitals and fifty-two community health centers. Zubair Hospital in Basra province totally collapsed from bombing. At the Ibn Rashid Mental Hospital, southeast of Baghdad, ceilings collapsed onto patients` beds. At Ulwiyya Maternity Hospital, shrapnel and broken glass hit babies and mothers. The student health clinic and school in Hilla was bombed. Five of Iraq`s military medical facilities were also damaged.

Allied bombs damaged 676 schools; thirty-eight were totally destroyed. Eight of those hit were parts of universities. Nor were mosques, other religious buildings, or historic sites immune from U.S. attacks, though the Pentagon insisted that they were not targeted. Iraq reported that twenty-five mosques in Baghdad alone were hit, and thirty-one more were reported damaged around the country. During the first week of February, I saw two mosques in Basra that were totally destroyed, six badly damaged, and three damaged Christian churches. The 900-year-old Church of St. Thomas-in Mosul, more than a thousand miles from Kuwait-was attacked, as was the Mutansiriya school, one of the oldest Islamic schools in Iraq.

Bombers hit civilian government office buildings in Baghdad, including the Ba`ath Party headquarters, City Hall, the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Labor, the National Palace, and the Central Post Office. Baghdad`s impressive new convention and conference center, built to host the international Non-Aligned Nations meeting in 1989, was extensively damaged.

Many manufacturing plants were hit. Seven textile factories sustained damage, as did five engineering plants, five construction facilities, four car assembly plants, three chlorine plants, a major ammonia export facility, and sixteen chemical, petrochemical, and phosphate plants. A major hypodermic syringe facility in Hilla was destroyed by laser-guided rockets.

All major cement plants were hit. Twelve industrial contracting companies reported extensive damage to their facilities. The Baghdad factories of the Al-Sa`ad Company, the Al-Balsam Cosmetics Company, the Baghdad Razor Company, the Akad clothes factory, and the Muwaffak J. Janna factory were all totally destroyed.

Iraq`s oil industry was a priority target. U.S. planes hit eleven oil refineries, five oil pipeline and production facilities, export pipeline facilities, and many oil storage tanks. Three oil tankers were sunk and three others set on fire.

Saddam International Airport and Al-Muthana Airport were attacked, along with parked passenger and cargo planes. Rail stations and yards, transportation hubs, bus stations, and car lots were systematically attacked everywhere.

As the infrastructure and life-support systems were being bombed, Iraqi civilians were killed by the thousands. Attacks on life-support systems assured that many more thousands would perish, even though they might be far from the line of fire.

Dr. Q. M. Ismail, director of Baghdad`s Saddam Central Children`s Hospital, was on duty the night U.S. bombs began to fall. Forty infants were in incubators, their mothers at their sides. When the electricity went out, the incubators stopped working. With the thunder of war all around them, the desperate mothers grabbed their children and rushed them into the basement.

Six hours later, twenty of the children were dead. ``Those forty mothers nearly went crazy,`` Dr. Ismail recalled. ``I will never forget the sight of those women.``

On 11 February the U.S. press, following a briefing from General Richard Neal on the bombing of Basra, reported it was ``a military town.`` (Like Norfolk, Oceanside, Omaha, San Antonio, San Diego, Watertown, and scores of other American cities?) During the third week it was ``a hellish nightmare of fires and smoke so dense that witnesses say the sun hasn`t been clearly visible for several days at a time. ... [The bombing is] leveling some entire city blocks ... [and there are] bomb craters the size of football fields and an untold number of casualties.``

Four months before the bombing, the Air Force Chief of Staff said the ``cutting edge would be downtown Baghdad.`` ``We`re going after hard targets in Baghdad. Therefore, it takes more bombs on each target in order to be successful,`` Lieutenant General Thomas Kelly told reporters.

The sprawling area of Baghdad was bombed every day. On 12 February journalists in Baghdad reported more than twenty-five explosions in the central part of the city. Six days later, the allies launched a fierce two-hour bombardment that began at 11:00 p.m. A journalist wrote of the raid: ``[M]issiles began skimming past the windows of the al-Rashid hotel. Against a background roar of high-flying aircraft, the hum of a cruise missile was heard every ten minutes or so, followed by a terrific explosion that shook the entire hotel.``

Among the ``hard targets`` in Baghdad was the Amariyah bomb shelter, which was hit with two missiles early on 13 February, killing many hundreds of civilians, most women and children.

Two nights before the ceasefire, on 27 February at 1:35 a.m., Iraq announced its pullout from Kuwait. Seemingly in response, Baghdad was subjected to another fierce raid, described by a resident as ``a sleepless night of horror.``

The assault on the Iraqi military, which was as defenseless as the civilian population, was relentless. More than 40,000 tons of bombs targeted the military, often in proximity to civilian areas. B-52s carpet-bombed military areas from extremely high altitudes. Estimates of the numbers of Iraqi soldiers killed by the end of the bombing ranged from 100,000 to 200,000. On March 22, 1991, the Defense Intelligence Agency placed Iraq`s military casualties at 100,000. Near the end of the bombing, as U.S. troops planned to advance on Kuwait City and Iraq, U.S. General Kelly said of Iraqi forces: ``There won`t be many of them left.`` When asked for his assessment of the numbers of Iraqi soldiers and civilians killed, General Colin Powell answered, ``It`s really not a number I`m interested in.`` General Schwarzkopf had a strict policy that Iraqi dead were not to be counted. Both violated international law requiring respect for enemy dead, their identification, notification of family, and proper religious burial. Americans know how they feel about their MIAs from Vietnam and earlier wars.

The U.S. claims to have destroyed 4,300 tanks and 1,856 armored vehicles. The Pentagon claimed 1,500 tanks were destroyed by F-111s alone, confirmed by video camera. Nearly all these planes employed laser-guided depleted-uranium missiles, leaving 900 tons of radioactive waste spread over much of Iraq with no concern for the consequences to future life. The rate of tumors, cancers, leukemia, and other fatal growths has increased alarmingly in the last few years in Iraq. Doctors believe radiation is a major cause. (Ramsey Clark: .) http://www.dhushara.com/book/death/clark.htm

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

Ref AlephNull #129

[I would add that the `Abduls` being relative simpletons are likely to be honest with themselves and others in expressing their mixed but generally hostile feelings towards the US, `immoral` American society and Western civilization, India etc. They have fewer delusional expectations of the US.]

Actually, the Abduls you meet in the US, including some of the professionals belonging to the middle class in Pakistan, have no hostile feelings towards the US or India. They are too busy driving cabs, pumping gas, working at the 7-11s, or slaving away as code coolies, trying to make ends meet and send some money back home to the family. They are worried sick that they may not get a green card or that their illegal stay may be discovered and don`t know what they will do if they are forced to return to Pakistan. They realize they get no respect in the Middle East (amongst the Ummah) but that every Indian they meet here in the US treats them fairly, and if not with great respect certainly not with contempt.

On the other hand, it is the non-Abduls, descendants of Army officers, civil servants, feudals, and other rich folks, who have nothing to do but rant and rave about the injustices to Kashmiris, Palestinians, Bosnians, Chechnyans, Kosovars, Iraqis, etc. They don`t of course talk about the injustices to Kurds, Uighurs. Shias or Qadianis or to the Armenians or East Timorese.

I have never met a single Pakistani in the US in the cab driver category who has said one bad word about India. It is unfortunate that they don`t post on Chowk.

If you are in NYC, Chicago or DC, talk to your cab driver and see if I am wrong.

#138: ``This is why I have little respect for people like Shammi, who on the one had preach Gandhi`s tolerance, while on the other hand, oppose it completely, when it doesn`t suit their interests in Kashmir.``

should read,

This is why I have little respect for some of the arguments made by people like Shammi, who on the one had preach Gandhi`s tolerance, while on the other hand, oppose it completely, when it doesn`t suit their interests in Kashmir.

- Due apologies to Shammi....

#147 by no_more_a_slave on January 14, 2003 12:35pm PT
faisaluno # 137

What must be done to reconcile Islam with modernity? Can Islam be changed

For that you will have to first define modernity..

... some thing for you to chew on..

#146 by AlephNull on January 14, 2003 11:43am PT

Intresting .... calling him a shrewed gujrati baniya... Shrewed to what purpose?? some thing you did not agree with??

Shrewed like the RSS calls him to be??

but you have no qulams about using his statements....

What is your opinion on it...

Why is that you guys only seem to be able to critic a particular argument..

C`om out with your stand....

Romair these guys act as if they come from a holier position.... Let every one insist that these positoins be declared and explained....

that you will critisise anything coming from a paksitani as long it is not anti-pakistani or anti-muslim is a known fact..

Why dont you expound your stand....

quit hiding behind the veil of ambiguity....

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

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

faisaluno # 137

What must be done to reconcile Islam with modernity? Can Islam be changed?

Air Chief Marshal Romair #138

{I am a big admirer of Gandhi. I have stated that openly before on this site. He stated that Kashmiris should get self-determination. It takes a lot of courage to say that. No one, other than you on this board out of Indians, has that much courage. This is why I have little respect for people like Shammi, who on the one had preach Gandhi`s tolerance, while on the other hand, oppose it completely, when it doesn`t suit their interests in Kashmir.}

Romair dear Romair, please don`t indulge in terminological inexactitude yet again. I think you should be more forthright about what the Mahatma really said about Kashmir. Bear in mind that for all his concern with morality, he was a shrewd Gujarati Baniya and nobody`s fool. He would not have been taken in for an instant by unctuous hypocrites who cloak their naked territorial ambitions in a phony concern for `human rights` and `self-determination`. And moreover he was quite keen that Kashmir accede to India. He visited the vale in early August 1947 to the accompaniment of angry protests from the minority Muslim conference which wanted acession to Pakistan.

Here is an extract from what appears to have been his last public pronouncement on Kashmir, on January 4th 1948, less than a month before he was felled by the assassin`s bullet. It will provide cold comfort to your wishes to grab Kashmir for Pakistan.

{{.... India has written to the U.N. because whenever there is a fear of conflict anywhere the U.N. is asked to promote a settlement and to stop fighting from breaking out. India therefore wrote to the U.N.O. however trivial the issue may appear to be, it could lead to a war between the two countries. It is a long memorandum and it has been cabled. Pakistan`s leaders Zafrullah Khan and Liaquat Ali Khan have since issued long statements. I would take leave to say that their argument does not appeal to me. You may ask if I approve of the Union Government approaching the UNO I may say that I both approve and do not approve of what they did. I approve of it, because after all what else are they to do? They are convinced that what they are doing is right. If there are raids from outside the frontier of Kashmir, the obvious conclusion is that it must be with the connivance of Pakistan. Pakistan can deny it. But the denial does not settle the matter. Kashmir has acceded the accession upon certain conditions. If Pakistan harasses Kashmir and if Sheikh Abdullah who is the leader of Kashmir asks the Indian Union for help, the latter is bound to send help. Such help therefore was sent to Kashmir. At the same time Pakistan is being requested to get out of Kashmir and to arrive at a settlement with India over the question through bilateral regotiations. If no settlement can be reached in this way then a war is inevitable. It is to avoid the possibility of war that the Union Government has taken the step it did. Whether they are right in doing so or not God alone knows. Whatever might have been the attitude of Pakistan, if I had my way I would have invited Pakistan`s representatives to India and we could have met, discussed the matter and worked out some settlement. They keep saying that they want an amicable settlement but they do nothing to create the conditions for such a settlement. I shall therefore humbly say to the responsible leaders of Pakistan that though we are now two countries – which is a thing I never wanted – we should at least try to arrive at an agreement so that we could live as peaceful neighbors. Let us grant for the sake of argument that all Indians are bad, but Pakistan at least is a new-born nation which has more ever come into being in the name of religion and it should at least keep itself clean. But they themselves make no such claim. It is not their argument that Muslims have committed no atrocities in Pakistan. I shall therefore suggest that it is now their duty, as far as possible, to arrive at an amicable understanding with India and live in harmony with her. Mistakes were made on both sides. Of this o have no doubt. But this does not mean that we should persist in those mistakes, for then in the end we shall only destroy ourselves in a war and the whole of the sub-continent will pass into the hands of some third power. That will be the worst imaginable fate for us. I shudder to think of it. Therefore the two Dominions should come together with God as witness and find a settlement. The matter is now before the UNO. It cannot be withdrawn from there. But if India and Pakistan come to a settlement the big powers in the UNO will have to endorse that settlement. They will not object to the settlement. They themselves can only say that they will do their best to see that the two countries arrive at an understanding through mutual discussions. Let us pray to God is to grant that we may either learn to live in amity with each other or if we must light to let us fight to the very end. That may be folly but sooner or later it will purify us.}}

The text of the speech may be found in its entirety at:

http://www.mkgandhi-sarvodaya.org/kashmir_issue.htm

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

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

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