An Answer to the Pro War Surrealists

mohar #90 Ooops! Friendly fire! I`ll need to go back and re-read your post. (Actually, hopefully ALL our posts are friendly fire, directed not at one another but towards understanding issues).

ferozk #92 I think I have explained ad nauseum why India is not the US and Pakistan is not Iraq. You keep ignoring what I write, and come back repeating yourself.

So for the last time, I will ask you to forget your legal arguments and get real: What stopped the Indian army from walking into Pakistan last year was not some judicial decision passed by the Delhi or Lahore High Court, but Pakistani missiles and nukes.

You called me a hypocrite before, and I took the trouble of explaining to you why I am fully consistent in what I am saying. You ignore that explanation and called me a hypocrite again. Fine. Namecalling is not an argument. I have so far been trying to correct your factual inaccuracies, and providing the rationale for my views. Since these seem to be too hard for you to understand, I think this calls for remedial training: I will have to demote you to kindergarten!!

(Scene 2)

Now you are in kindergarten.

Lesson 1 (Repeat after me) : Only bad children do name calling!

Lesson 2 (Repeat after me): If someone challenges my views, that does not automatically make him a hypocrite.

Enough lessons for one day. Now close your eyes and take a nap, because these two lessons must have been very stressful and challenging.

ali87 #91 : That`s right. The reason I am not whining about the Iraq war is because I work for the CIA. I am here to change the hearts and minds of ali87, ferozk and Jay (oops, not jay. That was an ISI project). With you two individuals over on our side, our plans for world dominationand the formation of a Galactic Empire will be complete.

#60 by tahmed32 on April 11, 2003 7:56pm PT

BUT NOT because Saddam`s forces were swept away. BUT because these ``intellectuals`` have demonstrated their disgusting mindset - which is one of arrogance, of being macho men

-------------

So the intellectuals in US were not being arrogant and were not demostrating their arrogant mindset?

I wonder which world this man lives in.

-----

It is simply a way for you to hide from the truth.


-----

You must either be delirous or have a real sinster motive.

-------

The Iraqi people deserve the right to enjoy their day in the sun, after decades of watching their wealth being looted by Saddam.

-------------

Those palaces seemed a trifile thirdworld by saudi standards or even the standards of the ranches and yatches, Jets owned or used by Cheney, Rumsfield et al.

Get real Tahamed32 you have a point tell it straight dont get into propaganda. Lets see a list of poor senators in US then compare to Tariq Aziz`s middle class home accessed by an Alley.

I have noticed that in the many dozens of posts you havent answered about the issue of the cupabilty of the US and UK in installing regimes and pulling them down.

Your posts always skip the issue. YOu always start focussing on the propaganda Items. It is very suspicous behaviour. I have noticed that you have become particularly active on the disucssions posting the same stuff again and again but with differnt words and differnt context.

I was reading an article as to how the CIA has infiltrated the Journalist community as well as the Academic community. Reportedly there are at least 400 journlists of top level who are in some way connected with the CIA, Thousands of study programmes all over US Universities which are
being run with direct or covert CIA guidance.

I wonder if you are also looking for employment in a similar role or have already being co-opted into such a role.

That brings a thought could CIA be stupid enough to belive a forum like Chowk would have any influence at all on public behaviour or even behaviour of elite or professionals. But it could be a good enough ground for a freelancer to cut his milk teeth in.

re: tahemd32

Concerning the thread on Iraq, I disagree with you. Period.

In case you missed the point, that was sarcasm!

Tahmed, you said Pakistanis will fight the Indians and never surrunder. My point was not about the Pakistan`s fighting skills. I will give you a piece of advice you gave me. Think for yourself. Does Pakistan not fit all the requirements that Iraq did and if Iraq can be invaded, why cannot Pakistan be invaded by India? India has a very good case and the fact that India is openly calling American hypocricy by showing the double standards of the United States vis-a-vis Iraq and Pakistan, goes to the credit of the Indians.

If you felt so strongly about the American actions, why are you denying the same right to the Indians? Are you telling me that this war was, after all, not about principles?

There is no difference between Pakistan and Iraq and yes; India might not be the United States, but this is about the principle of pre-emption and what is good for the goose is also good for the gander!

How about Syria? Do you also feel that Syria should be invaded and the Syrians freed. Syria according to Bush has WMD and is harboring terrorists. If that case was good enough for Iraq, why cannot Syria be also invaded to bring democracy in the region and the Syrians also liberated? If Syria has weapons of mass destruction and harbors terrorsts, so does Pakistan. It is a common secret! Why cannot Pakistan be invaded? If American actions in Iraq were so principled and the costs in human lives justified, can same principle not apply else where?

Tahmed, why don`t you simply admit the hypocricy?

Ciao

#89 by tahmed32
//...But dont let me spoil your dreaming. ..//

I was not dreaming. I actually agreed with you on this one. Only if you have read my whole post you would have realised that.

mohar #86 you write ``So I desist. ``

Amen.

mohar #84 you write ``Exactly. Like India did in Dhaka in 1971. ``

In your enthusiasm, you forgot the ``if`` in my sentence (as in ``if India had the capacity to take over Pakistan it would have done so last year when it marched a million men to the borders``).

But dont let me spoil your dreaming.

Ref veeresh #63

[Straws in the winds:- an enquiry has been placed for almost 120000 English speaking teachers from India (various subjects, junior/middle/senior) for Iraq schools.

Go, Kottayam, Go!!]

My God, what did the Iraqis do to have Malayalam-accented English inflicted on them?

The only thing worse I can think of is Sangilikkaruppan alias Soysauce teaching them English and not being able to differentiate between `k` and `g` or `t` and `d`.

Oh, puhleeeeze, don`t send in the North Indian crowd either. Have you ever heard them say `thirty`?

#85 by tahmed32
//..c. Recognize that the current round of violence in kashmir was triggered by the BJP govt when it came to power a decade or so ago and changed the constitutional status of Kashmir. Then do what it takes to undo the hostitlity. ..//

-- You are totally off the mark on this one. As usual, when it comes to Kashmir - Pakis of all persuations, educated or not, unformly show amazing lack of ability to grasp even the basic facts.

But this is not the board for Kashmir. So I desist.

nasah #80 ``Answer it Tauheed Ahmed``
Already did, Hasan sahib (#81 and #82). Even before you wrote. :-)

You may now continue to weeping about US troops ejecting poor little Saddam from his grand palaces and explaining why Iraqi people have no business being happy.

#81 by tahmed32
//...But if it was militarily capable of doing this, rest assured sikhs would have marching down the streets of Lahore a long time ago...//

Exactly. Like India did in Dhaka in 1971.

At this point, India needs no ``precedent`` to march into Pakistan - after all that Pakistan has been doing in Kashmir. Only thing that is holding India back is the fact India is NOT US, militarily speaking.

Come to think of it - if India were like US, then the whole situation would have been different. Pakistan would have been like mexico or like Canada - either way it wouldn`t have participated in the anti-soviet Afgan Jihad. No Jihad means no Bin Laden, no taliban, no mullah omar and no 9/11. Which means - the current war in Iraq wouldn`t have happened either.

Talk about domino effect!!

In fact, India`s inability to properly control its own neighborhood has created this whole mess. If Nehrus and Gandhis of independent India would have taken care of even very rudimentary economic issues ( instead of grandstanding in NAM and imagining themselves to some kinds of global statesman out there to save the world) India would have been an economic and military power house by now.

And pakis, instead of bursting at the border with AK-47 in hand and Jihad in their minds, would be crashing the gates with degrees in their hands and money in their minds.

rsridhar #79 I think we have discussed this before, and neither you nor I can prove intentions. I base my views on public statements issued by indian rulers e.g. Advani jumped to say that the balance of power had been tilted vis a vis Pakistan after blasting those five bombs. In 1971 I heard Indira Gandhi`s victory speech, and her most prominent remark as I recall was that a 1000 years of humiliation has been avenged. Dont get me wrong - I think India has a lot to be proud of. The nonviolent philosophy of Gandhi is truly the one philosophy that can save mankind from itself. Only, many people in India dont know what greatness means, they dont recognize greatness in their own culture, and so are constantly doing stupid things. I lived through the nuclearization stage in the subcontinent. I know a man whom Bhutto himself asked over a one hour meeting to lead the Pakistani nuclear bomb effort as a response to India (that man turned down the request on grounds of conscience, although I think it is only these nukes that are now keeping the Advanis at bay). And whether the world fears an Islamic bomb rather than a Hindu bomb is neither here not there. I have had this discussion before on chowk on nukes, so I dont think there is much more to say than what I have said above plus what I had said earlier.

As for the Pakistan I am defending, this is the land of my birth. We have problems with our power-hungry generals, with our mullahs. But that is not an invitation for India to step into Pakistan. Musharaff, despite his coup d`etat and anti-India stance, is no Saddam (no statues, no palaces, no suppressed press, no torture chambers). And even if he were, I cant imagine Pakistanis ever coming to the streets to welcome a conquering Indian army, just as the Iraqis would never have come to the streets to wecome a conquering Israeli army. It is only the US military that is being welcomed, and this is because deep down these people trust that the US will conduct themselves in an honorable manner and then hand back power to the Iraqis. In case of India, the hindutva movement is too strong and the resentment against pakistanis for forming a separate nation too well known in Pakistan for us to welcome Indian troops. I hope one day we will welcome ordinary Indians as friends. But no thanks, we dont need the Indian army.

I am sincerely glad that India is moving forward. You are not quite USA though. The per capita income of India inched past Pakistan`s last year, but it is still in the ``extreme poverty`` range of less than $500. Economic immigrants have come from Bihar and UP in India to Pakistan - not vice versa. I hope India becomes a rich country some day. But let us stick with reality till then.

You keep saying war will come in the subcontinent. Easy to say sitting in the US. If war comes (and I pray to God it does not) rest assured it wont be pretty - not for Indians, not for Pakistanis. There is indeed such a thing as a nuclear holocaust, with cinder-burnt cities, cinder-burnt armies, poisoned winds, poisoned soil, poisoned water. Let us not learn this lesson the hard way. Even conventional war is no picnic, rest assured, at least not for the people on the front lines.

As expatriates, it is I think immoral on our part to talk so easily about war and to do this one-upmanship between India and Pakistan.

What is the option, you ask: Try this-

a. Drop this hostility towards Pakistan. When I see this TV station in Delhi that beams to the US (South Asia TV or something) I see nothing but demonization of Pakistan (always showing bearded mullahs and their bs, never showing ordinary people of Pakistan, never appreciating any cultural aspect of Pakistan) and glorifiaction of India. This attitude must change. Ignore Pakistan if you like. But act your size (India is a nation of 1 billion for Gods sake, not a tiny republic that must always prove itself to be something).

b. Promote democracy in Pakistan: Invite Pakistani journalists - even those opposed to India - to visit India and discuss and debate e.g. Democracies dont go to wars. Stop believing those in India who are too happy to brand Pakistanis as terrorists, and start showing respect for the rights of ordinary Pakistanis.

c. Recognize that the current round of violence in kashmir was triggered by the BJP govt when it came to power a decade or so ago and changed the constitutional status of Kashmir. Then do what it takes to undo the hostitlity.

I am not saying that we Pakistanis are innocent. Our govts have been at least as bad as yours in promoting hostilities. But rest assured, that the indian governments and the indian media have not been virgin mary`s either. Terrorist actions in Kashmir are as pleasing to the Advanis in India as they are to the religious fanatics and warmongerers in Pakistan.

>>Does India not have a right to invade Pakistan and bring democracy to that poor oppressed nation and will Pakistanis not also welcome the Indian troops marching into Lahore, Karachi and Islamabad? Why can India not attack Pakistan and the remove the present government of Pakistan with one, which will agree to its interests and just maybe, solve the issue of Kashmir in India`s favor?<<(Ferozk)

Answer it Tauheed Ahmed.

WHY -- what`s good for the United States -- is not good for India --

PREEMPTION -- is now the NORM of International Conduct established by that Texas MORON --

why it should be kosher for a US Bushwhacker but not for an India`s Masked Man?

ferozk #72 you say: ``why do think that India is not America and Pakistan is not Iraq``
I was thinking in the military context only, in response to rsridhar`s assumption that India could simply walk into Pakistan whenever it wanted. And I think I explained even this obvious fact already in that post.
You raise broader questions of political and legal precedent here.

On the political aspect: Do you seriously think that Pakistanis would welcome Indian troops into Lahore the way Iraqis have welcomed US troops into Baghdad? They would fight them with all their might, they would never surrender (and this is assuming that the Indian military was capable of entering Pakistan - which it clearly is not in this post-nuclear south asia). On pre-emptive strikes - sure India can claim that it is merely copying the Bush doctrine (and indeed many in BJP are clamoring for this). But if it was militarily capable of doing this, rest assured sikhs would have marching down the streets of Lahore a long time ago (you may re-read my post to sridhar to understand why).

On Bangladesh: the Bengalis had had enough of us and wanted to be separate. Even though as a Pakistani one of the saddest days of my life was the day Dhaka fell in 1971, I think the Indian army was as justified in liberating the Bengalis as the US army is in liberating the Iraqis. Rest assured that I mean it when I say that people come first, and politics and the legal framework are there to serve the people and not vice versa.

btw: Please dont call me a hypocrite and dear, dear friend in the same post. That does not make any sense. Call me a hypocrite if you wish, and if later you are convinced that I am in fact being quite sincere and rational, and it is you who were being irrational and had your priorities all wrong, THEN you may apologize for calling me names and call me your friend. (I incidentally consider ALL chowk posters to be friends - even Jay Thakeray who cannot refer to me without adding ``and his ilk``). Also, while you say I have castigated you, if you re-read my posts this is only through the logic of my arguments. Not by saying that you are on your knees to anyone or by speculating on your colonial mindset - both of which you have done, and neither of which bothers me.

You see, logic hurts and one feels castigated, while namecalling only falls back on the namecaller. Consider this to be today`s lesson from Dr. tahmed.

ferozk #77
On Realpolitiks: This is something that those responsible for political decisions are forced to do. You and I on chowk are not burdened by such politicial responsibilities, and as such can speak freely without trying to be politiciams.

On US/UK contributions to democracy: I wrote a whole article on this earlier where I of course pointed out the leadership role of the US and UK in the spread of democracy over the past 200 years. You challenged me, I responded by showing how your points were factually incorrect (e.g. democracy came to japan in 1945 under US occupation, not in the 1880`s as you said). You ignored my response, and simply come back with the same argument on this board. Does this make any sense?

On what the US promised Kuwait: Again, you are factually wrong here. The US promised to liberate Kuwait from Saddam, and it is for this that it received a US mandate. Neither the UN nor the US ever said anything about replacing the Kuwaiti constitution.

On the US being arrogant: Sorry, I beg to differ again. The US prides itself on its philosophical roots, on being a nation of nations, on its democratic traditions. This is genuine pride, not arrogance. If you are looking for arrogance, look at Saddam for example, whose statues were everywhere. Look at the Japan for arrogance: its doors are shut tight to immigration despite a declining population because of it does not wish to dilute its superior race (or ``mongrelization`` as a Japanese minister once said). The US on the other hand celebrates this as ``diversity``. Look at the average civil servant (immigration official, tax authority, police): This is a bit subjective, but I have seen arrogant German officials, and I have seen arrogant Pakistani officials. I have almost always found US officials to act like a public servant should act: in a cheerful, courteous and helpful manner.
And please dont follow, as you indicate, what Hamilton or Clausewitz said. Follow your own mind instead.
And please dont interpret this as castigating. That is not the intent. I spend time on chowk to speak my mind and to stand corrected if someone points out flaws in what I wrote (as some people sometimes do).