Forgive me, Danny

Most of journalists work for different intlegence agencies, may be Dannial one of them , and all such type of jouranlists have to pay the price of their services

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

A civilized ex President of MY civilized United States -- speaks out against the FOOLISH WAR -- about to be launched by our FOOLISH President -- at great PERILS to Peace and Security -- at home -- and RULE OF LAW -- abroad.

Here is an Op Ed column by President Jimmy Carter -- from todays New Yok Times:


a Just War -- or just a war?

By JIMMY CARTER


AATLANTA — Profound changes have been taking place in American foreign policy, reversing consistent bipartisan commitments that for more than two centuries have earned our nation greatness.

These commitments have been predicated on basic religious principles, respect for international law, and alliances that resulted in wise decisions and mutual restraint.

Our apparent determination to launch a war against Iraq, without international support, is a violation of these premises.

As a Christian and as a president who was severely provoked by international crises, I became thoroughly familiar with the principles of a just war, and it is clear that a substantially unilateral attack on Iraq does not meet these standards.

This is an almost universal conviction of religious leaders, with the most notable exception of a few spokesmen of the Southern Baptist Convention who are greatly influenced by their commitment to Israel based on eschatological, or final days, theology.

For a war to be just, it must meet several clearly defined criteria.

The war can be waged only as a last resort, with all nonviolent options exhausted.

In the case of Iraq, it is obvious that clear alternatives to war exist.

These options — previously proposed by our own leaders and approved by the United Nations — were outlined again by the Security Council on Friday.

But now, with our own national security not directly threatened and despite the overwhelming opposition of most people and governments in the world, the United States seems determined to carry out military and diplomatic action that is almost unprecedented in the history of civilized nations.

The first stage of our widely publicized war plan is to launch 3,000 bombs and missiles on a relatively defenseless Iraqi population within the first few hours of an invasion, with the purpose of so damaging and demoralizing the people that they will change their obnoxious leader, who will most likely be hidden and safe during the bombardment.

The war`s weapons must discriminate between combatants and noncombatants. Extensive aerial bombardment, even with precise accuracy, inevitably results in ``collateral damage.`` Gen. Tommy R. Franks, commander of American forces in the Persian Gulf, has expressed concern about many of the military targets being near hospitals, schools, mosques and private homes.

Its violence must be proportional to the injury we have suffered. Despite Saddam Hussein`s other serious crimes, American efforts to tie Iraq to the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been unconvincing.

The attackers must have legitimate authority sanctioned by the society they profess to represent.

The unanimous vote of approval in the Security Council to eliminate Iraq`s weapons of mass destruction can still be honored, but our announced goals are now to achieve regime change and to establish a Pax Americana in the region, perhaps occupying the ethnically divided country for as long as a decade.

For these objectives, we do not have international authority.

Other members of the Security Council have so far resisted the enormous economic and political influence (pressure) that is being exerted from Washington, and we are faced with the possibility of either a failure to get the necessary votes or else a veto from Russia, France and China.

Although Turkey may still be enticed into helping us by enormous financial rewards (bribes -- a crime) and partial future control of the Kurds and oil in northern Iraq, its democratic Parliament has at least added its voice to the worldwide expressions of concern.

The peace it establishes must be a clear improvement over what exists.

Although there are visions of peace and democracy in Iraq, it is quite possible that the aftermath of a military invasion will destabilize the region and prompt terrorists to further jeopardize our security at home.

Also, by defying overwhelming world opposition, the United States will undermine the United Nations as a viable institution for world peace.

What about America`s world standing if we don`t go to war after such a great deployment of military forces in the region?
__________________________________________________

The heartfelt sympathy and friendship offered to America after the 9/11 attacks, even from formerly antagonistic regimes, has been largely dissipated; increasingly unilateral and domineering policies have brought international trust in our country to its lowest level in memory.
______________________________________________________

American stature will surely decline further if we launch a war in clear defiance of the United Nations.

But to use the presence and threat of our military power to force Iraq`s compliance with all United Nations resolutions — with war as a final option — will enhance our status as a champion of peace and justice.(NYT)

arjun_m at # 110:


An average Abdul may not have to go to Madressa, but an average motooram or Gopinaath like you need to learn English first ;)

Read my reponses to Jay again. I was responding to him on intangible costs that he accuses Pakistan has incurred on the world through supporting Talibans.

The rest of your posts is out of the scope of the discussion that I had intended to undertake with Jay.

Btw, once again, are you and Jay twins?

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

arjun_m at 105 and earlier post on the matter of costs:

Pakistan`s expenditure is proportionately higher, because of its attempt to reasonably match India`s expenditure. This is for its defense purposes. Note that my assumption is based on the fact that whereas India has made it known to the world that it aspires to become a global power, Pakistan has expressed no such desire.

And if Pakistan`s expenditure is proportionately higher, then you know another gamut of cost heads that India is adding through its unreasonably high defense related expense.

The rest of your taunts and complaints on numbers are ladyish and I have no desire to respond to them, unless you really want to lock horns on numbers game. But then, that will be another subject matter. The issue under discussion is `Costs`.

;)

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

Tipu, Androscoggin # 104

Mohemmadan Anglo Oriental College, Aligarh had been formed by Muslims forty one years before BHU. It was renamed Aligarh Muslim University within five years of BHU establishment. If a person changes his name to Androscoggin, it doesn`t mean that he didnt exist before Androscoggin appeared, when he was called Tipu or other names.

Savarkar is not considered a cog. He was amongst the first Hindus to justify the use of religious violence against followers of other faiths for perceived injustices against Hindus. His doctrine led to a lot of bloodshed. Your article itself shows that he learnt this lesson from Islam. Can bloodshed be stopped without understanding and acknowledging this fact when Hindus and Muslims continue to live side by side in India and Pakistan?

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


#97 by Manjit on March 6, 2003 9:32pm PT
Tipu,

As you noticed, Aligarh Muslim college had come into existence full four decades ahead of BHU.

Sarvarkar is just ONE cog in the wheel of vermin of communalism who think being Hindu entitles them to special rights!The other cogs are Shyama Prasad Mukherjee ,K.M. MUNSHI,Pt,Madan Mohon Malvia ,Business community of Dalmia & Birla (read thegrand daughters expose of grand father Dalmia)to most recent RETREAD of old tires by Koenrad Elstd(for being white german) Francis Gauthier (for being Whitre French)foolsHindutva still are impressed by Whites .Arun Shourie (only roped i b/c of Scathing criticizing Journalistic ability And Spewing venomin Koran translation ,Ramesh Rao ,Rajiv Malhotra ,etc.etc.etc.etc.etc.

What 4 decades before BHU ??Are you trying to pull fast one Manjit ?I know colleges even older than Aligarh Musl;im Oriental Colleges still there .DOnt compare COLLEGE with UNIVERSITY !

How many times Police made raid in BHU to investigate BJP VHP RSS etc.?



Even India Govts Raw or CID or BJP doesnt think Tableeq Jamaat is any org. Even if you want why you are suggesting as if Sarvarkar INVENTED Jan Sangh or Maha Sabha THAT WAS DONE BY others.

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

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

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

#99 ahmadzai

[quote]
the cost of keeping 450-500 million of Indian population under poverty line through India`s unreasonable expenditure on defense.
[end-quote]

Indian expenditure on defense is under 3% of GNP. It is lower than the proportion spent by China (4.5%) and roughly a third of the proportion spent by Pakistan (somewhere between 8 and 15%, no one really knows). Most normal countries (I am not talking about Lichtenstien or Norway here) spend between 2 and 4 % of GNP on security-related expenses. So the only thing unreasonable here are your statements....

I understand that your imagination only a pacifist india is a good india. I understad that for pakistanis the only role model for India (but not for pakistan) are the opinions of Mahatma Gandhi on militarized nation states. Of course, you will never apply these ideas to Pakistan or China. After all, the former is a proud islamic country and must be heavily armed to terrorize the kafir. The latter is a supplier of arms to Pakistan and so must be allowed to militarize heavily.

Sigh ! Talk about ignorant people in glass houses....

Urstruly at # 91:

You wrote:
``The inter-ethnic carnage went through several stages; first it was Mohajir-Pakhtoon, when all others remained neutral, the it became Mohajir vs. Punjabi-Pakhtoon where Punjabis and Pakhtoons made an alliance and then it was Mohajir-Sindhi, while PP alliance remained neutral. ``

Your writing is self-explanatory. It was Mohajir versus all others one by one. I would again refer you to read Adnan`s response to me on the matter. Mr. Altaf Hussain made it a Mohajir versus other ethnic war on purpose instead of making it a oppressed versus establishment.

Btw, Please do not take me as an anti-Mohajir person. I may be anti-MQM, but I believe that any single ethnic group that could have given a competitive edge to Pakistan on the basis of economic prowess would be Mohajiris.

You wrote:
``MQM was split very late after 4-5 years of this inter-ethnic civil war.``

While establishment might have some role in it, basically Amer-Afaq lead more radical faction of MQM provided them a reason to do so. Do recall that when these two decided to quit MQM-Altaf, banners were quickly posted to ban their entries from all MQM areas. If you recall, these banners had read,`` Yahan Ghadaron ka daakhla mamnoo hay.``

Finally you correctly mentioned:
``LFO is a constitutional issue. It is being dealt in constitutional manner, right in the assembly.... ``

I agree with you, but boycotting the sessions of national assembly won`t help. Let the opposition discuss the matter in NA and if ruling party does not give it due consideration, take it to the court. Also opposition has to remember that more important issues than LFO are fighting corruption, poverty, Iraq and Kashmir issues, revamping of our education system, water related problems, etc.

Jay at # 98:

``YLH, if have any patriotism, if as you say you are dealing with the pak reality, make a monument for Samia Sarwari as reminder to that pak people about the nature of law in pakistan, where a woman can be killed infron of a world renowned lawer and the killer is honoured by the president of the country...... ``

While YLH may take some time to respond to this excellent post of yours, now I don`t understand how does the above compare with an event in secular and democratic India.

The leader of the march on Babri Mosque, which brought it down, and killer of Muslims in the ensuing Bombay riots has been elected as a Minister in India. The same person has now been elevated to the position of Deputy Prime Minister. A state minister followed in his footsteps in Gujrat and continues to rule unblamed.

;)

Jay at # 87:

``I did dish out some numbers about the kashmiris killed by the indian troops. Now as a typical pakistani you do not want to give some numbers to the afghan and kashmir shaheeds of pakistan. This is really pathetic, theses are the true un-countables of pakistan. From the local papaers, from the mosques, from the jihadic organisation, pl do come up with a number.``

While Adnan may take his time in responding to this excellent post, let me reply to at least one part that you have been raising lately:

I will give you the cost of Pakistani support to Talibans incurred more on ourselves than anybody else and some what offset by Pakistani support to Afghan refugees, as soon as someone gives me (preferably you) the cost of keeping 450-500 million of Indian population under poverty line through India`s unreasonable expenditure on defense.

``About the holier than thou attitude of mine, well I has said befor, I am a professional paki-basher..(there are two full stops after that)``

Please recall that I had suggested that you replace the first letter of your name i.e. `J` by the letter `G` due to your passive behaviour in taking all the bashing from all the chowksters;)