Last Rites in Kashmir or a New Journey?

tahmed32 #23

`` This is your view, not a fact. While I always hear this refrain from Indians, I have yet to meet a Pakistani who thinks it was a blunder or that the partition should be undone. Pakistan is here to stay. Get used to that idea. ``

I can live with this.

`` Dont blame the ``masses`` for what you think of as a ``blunder``. The masses were smarter than you, and supported Jinnah for good reasons. ``

I think the Urdu speaking people in modern day UP/Bihar/MP were not smart. They supported Pakistan. Some of the elite migrated to Pakistan. Some of their descendants in Karachi will always be hostage to the sons of the soil schemes from Sindhi nationalists. The ones left in India get to face the likes of the BJP. I dunno if I will call their support for Jinnah/Muslim league a ``blunder``. It is pretty close to playing with fire. They can count their blessings that they were not subject to what minorities in Bengal and Punjab went through.

Re: # 93

Stop lecturing aha_Snarl.Let there be a free flow of exchanges and viewpoints.Are you a commie?.If so, i do understand your authoritarian ways.

Re: # 34
re: arjun_m:

///HP didn`t..I agree with most of the points he`s made in his well thought out article. I`m talking about Romair aka captain clueless///

Whoops. My mistake. I thought you were commenting on bbabu #9 (in which he refers to HP) when in fact you were commenting on bbabu #14 - in which he refers to Romair.

*I wish people would reply to interacts using the ``reply to interact`` link below each interact. That way the discussion is properly threaded and much more manageable.*

#30 by Aha_Snark on June 7, 2005 12:19pm PT


But, arjun_m, can you please point out where HP made such a colossal blunder of self-delusion ?


HP didn`t..I agree with most of the points he`s made in his well thought out article. I`m talking about Romair aka captain clueless


Wow :) That would surely be a superhuman feat of self-delusion.


You`re new to chowk, I presume? Capt Clueless has a history of self-delusion...He doesn`t BS..he actually believes all of it...In an oft-quoted(by me :D) example, he told Indians, Sri Lankans and arabs in the US to wear t-shirts with pakistani flags in the days after 9/11 if they wanted to avoid being targets for reprisals..the premise being that Americans would be falling at the feet of pakis,prostrated in gratitude, because Pakistan was going to allow the US to use it`s bases to launch attacks against the taliban...

Sorry, I just returned.

#23 by tahmed32

Dear tahmed:

(1) All I said was the division of the subcontinent was a (major) blunder based on the results that it produced. For just once (instead of throwing wisecracks, or smarting as if you were attacked personally by questioning the logic behind the creation of Pakistan), I would be interested in your doing a simple tabulation of facts, as follows: make a table with two columns - (a) what benefits it produced, (b) what costs were incurred. Go ahead, do it and put up the tables here! Let’s see how honest you can REALLY be!

(2) Since by your own admission (interactor page) you are an average Joe, and since Chowk.com is full of high-octane smart individuals, does it not appear curious that few have come up to counter my points! Could it be (perish the thought) that inside they agree with it but lack the guts to say so publicly (yes, even in the virtual world – such chickens!)

Lies under compulsion (as under the bayonet of dictators) are one thing. The lies that we willingly accept are much worse. There is no salvation from the tragedy that THOSE lies lead to, because such lies have nothing to do with facts or reason and they are self-perpetuating!

#25 by kaalchakra

Listen Kaal, if we can not speak our minds and speak with our hearts in this VIRTUAL world where we are presumably anonymous, what chance do we have in the real one? (We might as well stop wasting our time on this site here, then.)

I am not trying to “strategize” in any fashion – since I am not trying to push for any particular outcome. I am just telling it like I see it and if others disagree – they should try to PROVE me wrong using the cost/benefit table approach I recommended to tahmed.

I also disagree with your implication that ALL Pakistanis will react in a knee-jerk manner to something which admittedly is not said out aloud a whole lot! Also, the issue of partition and its rationale is so germane to the Kashmir imbroglio that it can not be removed from this discussion without being “wishy-washy” (and the author’s lack of response is leading me to believe he is in the same category)!

For crying out loud, we are supposed to be dealing with the EDUCATED elite here!!

#24 by mohar11
Mohar, I did not advocate reunification (one major disruption is bad enough, who needs another)!

tahmed:
``I have yet to meet a Pakistani who thinks it was a blunder or that the partition should be undone``

I am from Pakistan and i think the creation of Pakistan was a complete blunder.

tahmed : ignore me cos i am not gonna get into a debate with you. This admission was just to highlight that there Are pakistanis regardless of their numbers who share this view. I know few of them personally.

Re: # 37

``the recent sacking of Advani by the party for the crime of visiting the grave of Jinnah and for acknowledging that Pakistan was a reality demonstrates the ugly reality of BJP. ``

WRONG.
He has been challenged on these statements:
1. Jinnah was a secular man
2. Dec. 6 1992 was the ``saddest`` day of his life.

So please stop spreading your propaganda. India is at peace with Paks existence. Vajpayee himself visited that Minar-of-Pakistan. No one asked for his head then.

BeeJay #35 Here is the cost-benefit analysis you commissioned me to do:

Benefits:

1. Freedom from hindu animosity: This of course is what turned Jinnah from being the ``Ambassador of hindu-muslim unity`` to the leader of the calls for a separate nation.

Proof of this animosity is of course to be found in a number of way: the vast constituency of the hindu nationalist party BJP that exists to this day; the recent sacking of Advani by the party for the crime of visiting the grave of Jinnah and for acknowledging that Pakistan was a reality demonstrates the ugly reality of BJP. At a personal level, the spite and hatred for islam and muslims and pakistanis displayed by too many indian posters (not all, by any means, but enough) over the past few years I have been on chowk has been an eye-opener.

Costs: the main cost has been the loss of lives (hindu, sikh, muslim) in the 1947 riots and in subsequent wars.

How does one weigh costs and benefits when the cost is in lives? One does not. Nor is it necessary to do this in 2005, because the past is past.

As of today, Pakistanis are far better off living as good neighbors with Indians then they would be as one country: A pipeline deal here, cross cross-tourism there, and we have the beginnings of a beautiful friendship (as the french police chief in Casablanca would have put it). Of course, the hindu animosity will disappear only very slowly - perhaps another couple of generations from now. Who knows. And who cares, as long as the bullying of those extremists ends where the Pakistan border begins.

bbabu #33 actually the UPites who came to Pakistan did quite well for themselves (and not just mushy, but large numbers of businessmen etc.) - and a large proportion of them have taken the next step and migrated to the US.

And even today there are over a hundred thousand bihars in bangladesh who claim (30 years after bangladesh was formed) that they are ``stranded pakistanis`` with a right to enter Pakistan. Obviously, they are not being fooled by Jinnah or anyone else today - they have seen other biharis do well for themsleves in Pakistan and seek to improve their lot as well the same way.

Raw Dust: You are entitled to your views, sir. Wont comment further since you do not wish to debate this.

``Freedom from hindu animosity``
Obviously Hindus are the only ones who harbour such animosities.

#37 tahmed

Now you have made me VERY curious:

[Benefits: 1. Freedom from hindu animosity:]
Is present-day Pakistan free from the “hindu” animosity? First of all, hasn’t the “Hindu” animosity increased multiple-fold (and is now located just across the border)? Also, haven’t other varieties of animosities replaced that “Hindu” animosity? By following the same logic, would you advocate further partitions of the current Pakistan so each of the “enemy” factions could become free from the “animosities” of each other? Is that a REAL benefit?

[Costs: the main cost has been the loss of lives (hindu, sikh, muslim) in the 1947 riots and in subsequent wars.]
Tahmed – these were REAL people that got killed!

So let me hear you loud and clear! You are sure the “benefit” outweighs the costs? (Yes/No answer please – go ahead – don’t fuzz your answer now, please!

Ref BeeJay #41

[Tahmed – these were REAL people that got killed!

So let me hear you loud and clear! You are sure the “benefit” outweighs the costs? (Yes/No answer please – go ahead – don’t fuzz your answer now, please!]

If you want to make omelettes, you need to break a few eggs.

In the Indo-Pak context, if you want to make brain curry, you need to break open a few skulls.

Jinnah and Company made brain curry, so what?

Re: # 43
re: harish_hyd:

///Boss, I thought you knew better. If India is not averse to making the LoC the border, does it not imply that India doesn`t lay claim to ``Azad`` Kashmir anymore?///

Of course India`s hinting in a nudge-nudge-wink-wink fashion that it is not averse to the LOC as the border. I only raised the 1994 Parliament Resolution because you talked about the stated and official position of Pakistan and the difficulty it will face in resiling from that. It`s not fair, is it, to compare the official position of Pakistan (which has changed radically in a few years time) with the unofficial position of India is it ? And no doubt, if India ever says officiallly that the LOC is acceptable to it as the border, rather than repeat that the ``whole of the erstwhile princely state of Kashmir is Indian territory`` screams of rage will emanate from those seeking to gain political mileage. It`s not going to be easy to contradict a resolution of Parliament right ? Only 40 years have allowed the Government to contradict in real life the resolution calling for the armed forces to throw the Chinese out. We give Aksai Chin, they give Arunachal and Sikkim.

cheers,

A_S

#31 by Aha_Snark

[Parliament (under Congress` Narasimha Rao, I might point out) adopted a resolution [1] in 1994 which unanimously resolved that ``Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression``

Does that alter your stated position?]

Boss, I thought you knew better. If India is not averse to making the LoC the border, does it not imply that India doesn`t lay claim to ``Azad`` Kashmir anymore?

Re # 37

What a racist remark, ``Hindu Animosity``! Amazing there are still fossils like that.

What about ``Muslim Animosity``? Or muslims are not capable or ``Animosity`` towards
Hindus or others? So I guess someone is justified in exploiting such a charge against
Muslims and commit horrible deeds and crimes.

This person needs to start thinking for himself instead of regurgitating those unfounded silly charges, Hindu this and Hindu that and Hindus did this and Hindus did that and how Hindus were bad and how Hindus are vicious.