Advani in Karachi

#518 by southasian

[For an inclusivist there are no hurdles].

Yaar, Pakis get paranoid at the very mention of inclusivism. For them this means Indians are itching to turn the Akhand Bharat theory into a reality. Notwithstanding your noble intentions, I think Indians and Pakis are just fine the way they are. We`ve had the upper hand for so long, it`s not even funny anymore. Pakis are forever trying to catch up or as they call it, ``restore parity``. In everything that they do or seek to do, they see India as the benchmark. But they won`t dare admit it, for it`s demeaning for them to be seen trying to catch up with the dark (just take a look at #509, and this isn`t the only Paki who thinks so) and inferior Hindoos. Your suggestions look like you`re trying to bail them out from the hole they`ve dug for themselves. Just let them be.

Why is this am pm mixup on this website?

How easy it is to derail a healthy discussion on a small forum like this. Just gives a measure of challenges we have to face. As for the EU model: no need to redraw borders just look for an Economic Zone. Pakistan has a land route to China. We have a long border with China and Pakistan both. Can make a formidable economic zone. For an inclusivist there are no hurdles.

#515 by dionysus

[Who said that??? Not me.]

Read this statement again:

I don`t know about you but my vision for Pakistan does not involve Tamil Nadu or Bengal. We have to look West and North to Central Asia, the Middle East and China.

By lumping Central Asia, ME, and China together, you brought this upon yourself. Whereas you have religious and probably cultural links with CA and ME, the only links you folks have with China is religious with the Uighur/Xinjiang (sp?) Muslims.

Anyways, thanks for clarifying.

Re: # 513


You should hold your horses because I was referring to those who are talking about India as if it were a military dictatorship where its people are living under the boots of the army as in Pakistan................

And, haven`t we agreed that on various occasions Jinnah also accepted to the theocratic foundations of Pakistan after partition??

Re: # 514 harish ``You have nothing in common with a Tamil but something in common with a Chinese?? Amusing, to say the least.``

Who said that??? Not me. We don`t have anything in common with Chinese or Tamils (or Bengalis, or Keralites etc etc). But China is soon going to be the most powerful nation in the world and we have a land link to the future world superpower through the NAs. We should make the most of it.

#509 by dionysus

[I don`t know about you but my vision for Pakistan does not involve Tamil Nadu or Bengal. We have to look West and North to Central Asia, the Middle East and China.]

You have nothing in common with a Tamil but something in common with a Chinese?? Amusing, to say the least.

Re: # 512

Hold your horses Ballu... kindly learn to read first or atleast check the context. I am merely shedding some light on the European Union and why the EU model isn`t the best example the Indian ``unionists`` should quote. I am merely putting things in a context.

Personally I don`t wish India to break, just like I don`t wish for Pakistan to break. Your sharp tongue, your bigotry and your abuse isn`t going to prove your point right. As for Bangladesh... 1940`s resolution didn`t talk of one state... and even in 1947 Jinnah and Suhrawardy to agreed to an independent Bengal. It was Nehru who refused to agree to 3 countries instead of 2. Indira undid her father`s work and then started taking pot shots at an irrelevant theory.

Instead of resorting to name-calling (your old style) try and argue on the issues. That you are inherently incapable of doing.

I think now these Deen-e-fasaad TNT-ist are back to their old games - speculating about imminet breakup of India..............scratching each other`s back like monkeys and nodding their heads in an idiotic unison like arabic tribesmen........and the irony........... while their Demi-Gods thought that SOLIDARITY was a gift of the book, Bangladesh happened before their eyes......I am sory to say that this obnoxious omniscient attitude of the Paki elites has been the cause of downfall of Pakistan...................

dionysus,

Interestingly enough... Tamil nationalists were actually very supportive of Pakistan.

The EU model cuts across the one-India project... I am surprised that Indians quote the EU model... if anything that would mean emergences of smaller republics which would re-organise themselves as the South Asian Union i.e. very close to Ch Rahmat Ali`s ``Dinia`` or ``PakAsia`` scheme.

As a matter of principle, I don`t support any redrawing of borders.

Re: #509 by dionysus


[These Indian blackies are nothing but trouble for us.]


I shudder to think what would have happened if this Dionysus was ACTUALLY white, and even blond haired and blue eyed.

Would be an eye-opener for him if he was dropped into the middle of a KKK rally somewhere in the deep south.

:-)



[I don`t know about you but my vision for Pakistan does not involve Tamil Nadu or Bengal.]


NO?

Only the rest of India?

Darn! I KNEW IT!

But what if Tamil Nadu and Bengal REALLY BEGS to be included into Pakistan?

Please? Could they then? Please?

Manto, that`s one of the BIG differences between the European project and this `India` buisness. Apart from the fact that Europeans share much more with each other than South Asians do, the unification of Europe is voluntary and even a small nation like Holland can bring the whole process to a halt. `India` , on the other hand, is not voluntry and once you`re in you don`t get out. If you try, you end up with 600 000 raping. murdering, torturing Indian troops in your country.

I don`t know about you but my vision for Pakistan does not involve Tamil Nadu or Bengal. We have to look West and North to Central Asia, the Middle East and China. These Indian blackies are nothing but trouble for us.

Europe is a bloc of nations and not a nation itself. Our (Pakistani) vision for the subcontinent is not very different. Like I pointed out coexistence doesn`t equate to one political state or nation... The French and Dutch decisions against the EU constitution affirm our point of view.

Re: # 503 soutasian ``England , Germany, France, Japan. One blood, one history, one culture? ``

Yes, the English nation, the German nation and the rest are composed of peoples who share a blood, a history and culture, just like the Tamil nation, the Sindhi nation or the Kashmiri nation.

``Is western Europe a nation, did u say?``

No, I didn`t say that. They are basically of one blood, but their languages etc are different.

``Similarly in our context Indian subcontinent is one nation.``

No. A Frenchman and a German are MUCH closer to each other than a Pathan or a Punjabi is with a Tamil. Only an accident of history, the British occupation, connects Punjabis with Tamils.


It`s people like you with your one nation fantasies who are responsible for the rape, murder and torture of Kashmiris and will just as happily rape, murder and torture Pakistanis into submission, if they ever get the opportunity. And it`s because of people like you that Jinnah is so revered in Pakistan.

#496 by dionysus on June 12, 2005 11:43am PT


The side where India is the poor, innocent little victim and not the illegal and brutal occupier? Sorry, but nobody in the world sees this side, apart from Indians themselves.


It`s pretty much the picture in most of the civilized world...ever wonder why the pakistan based jihadis are being banned but there is no move against the Indian governments supposedly brutal tactics...

here`s a tip...Islamic terrorism is soooo 80s....Today it`s about Islamic fundamentalist/terrorists against democracies...and India has played it`s card well to position itself on the right side...

If you are so in love with the kashmiris, or if the kashmiris really really love you, they are free to leave...Most Indians would pay for their one way bus trip..

We will benefit from actually learning the histories of England , Germany, France, etc. What we may discover is the meaning of one blood, one culture, one history, and how a nation attains that oneness.

A quick beginning can be easily made here.

http://chemistry.mtu.edu/~pcharles/ANGLOUSA/roman1.html

Then read up the pages on Anglo-Saxon Britain, and Norman and Planteneget Britain.

---

Here and elsewhere, one learns that the term ``Great Britain`` came into vogue only during the 16th century (yes, sixteenth century). Even then it referred only to England and Scotland. Further, the two were considered two separate kingdoms.

The term `brittania` is of older usage. It was first employed by the Romans, 1st century AD onwards. The `brittania` of the Romans was a far cry from today`s ``Britain.``

---

The histories of the nations of Germany and France can be equally enlightening.