International Law: Applicability and Real Politik in the Middle East
Nisreen Zain July 19, 2004
#72 Posted by echoboom on August 5, 2004 7:22:26 am
Ugly Westerners despoil again
By Robert McCormick
graduate student, journalism
When I first arrived 15 years ago in Bukavu, an African city situated on the magnificent Lake Kivu in eastern Zaire, I immediately harbored mixed feelings about my presence.
I had come to Bukavu for seven weeks to enhance my paltry French, which would be the means of communication at my future Peace Corps post in Cameroon, another African country. While language-learning in Bukavu seemed harmless enough, I always
wrestled with the murky issue of what purpose hordes of Westerners really served in exotic locales like Bukavu.
Today, Bukavu and other sites around Lake Kivu are experiencing great upheaval. Ethnic groups in the region are battling each other, with no end in sight to the fighting. Americans and other westerners can read all about this tragedy and smugly blame it on the intractable attitudes of those Africans.
If only it were so simple.
For almost 40 years now, numerous Westerners, including Americans, Belgians, English, French and Germans, have inhabited Bukavu, Bujumbura, Goma, Kigali and other sites involved in the present conflict. Stated intentions of those Westerners may have
appeared admirable: Let`s help the undeveloped and impoverished residents of this area improve their lives. Good intentions, however, have failed to satisfy actual needs.
Ever present consultants lectured locals about new methods of agricultural and industrial production, whether suitable for the region or not. Peace Corps Volunteers and their equivalents from other countries taught science, mathematics and other subjects,
without linking that knowledge to concrete and practical goals.
Frequently frustrated by their failure to improve social conditions, many Westerners developed a more pragmatic view of what they could accomplish. A reverse process began in translating Western largess into substantive benefits. In many cases, it was not the locals who benefited from foreign assistance; it was the foreigners themselves.
Aid workers often collected large salaries with substantial rewards for deprivations suffered by living in a place like Bukavu, which is a truly beautiful site. A donor country, like the United States, also reaped benefits by allocating foreign aid to purchases of goods from the donor country. The sight of cumbersome American trucks mired in rugged African terrain never made much sense except in the accounts of the United States manufacturer.
At times, foreign aid propped up local elites, who were then expected to follow the party line of the donor country. Usually this required the host country to open its doors to Western businesses, which could then profit from these new markets.
The Western presence in the Lake Kivu region created a sense of privilege. The mere fact that I was from the great land of America meant residents would offer me gifts and other items in recognition of my elevated, but contrived, status. Many locals, though, felt resentment toward this favored position of Westerners. For instance, one young man expressed contempt that all good tennis shoes went to the West for sale there, while Africans could buy only second-rate products.
For all the efforts of hundreds of Westerners, no apparent success has resulted in constructing a stable, multi-ethnic society in the tormented area around Lake Kivu. From a Western viewpoint it would be easy to slot Bukavu and its environs into the too-hard basket and simply forget about this area. That might even be an ethical option if Westerners had not already massively intervened there.
Recent events occurring in Zaire, Burundi and Rwanda need to be viewed in connection with the Western presence. Without that presence, it is difficult to imagine that the situation could be as horrific as it is now. Tribal rivalries in this region existed before
Westerners arrived. But not until Western intervention has the carnage been so widespread and profound.
By ensconcing themselves around Lake Kivu with little regard for regional attitudes and conditions, Westerners have found it difficult to improve significantly the lives of local residents. Instead, our weaponry, cynical politics and vulture-like business practices have provided even more fertile ground for conflict than had we never descended upon the peoples of this region.
Distrust of Westerners may hinder any significant involvement in negotiating peace among warring factions. However, the West must demonstrate that it wants to build a constructive, genuine and non-partisan alliance with the region.
No matter how treacherous the existing situation at Lake Kivu appears, the United States and other western countries have an obligation to assist in repairing the damage.
By Robert McCormick
graduate student, journalism
When I first arrived 15 years ago in Bukavu, an African city situated on the magnificent Lake Kivu in eastern Zaire, I immediately harbored mixed feelings about my presence.
I had come to Bukavu for seven weeks to enhance my paltry French, which would be the means of communication at my future Peace Corps post in Cameroon, another African country. While language-learning in Bukavu seemed harmless enough, I always
wrestled with the murky issue of what purpose hordes of Westerners really served in exotic locales like Bukavu.
Today, Bukavu and other sites around Lake Kivu are experiencing great upheaval. Ethnic groups in the region are battling each other, with no end in sight to the fighting. Americans and other westerners can read all about this tragedy and smugly blame it on the intractable attitudes of those Africans.
If only it were so simple.
For almost 40 years now, numerous Westerners, including Americans, Belgians, English, French and Germans, have inhabited Bukavu, Bujumbura, Goma, Kigali and other sites involved in the present conflict. Stated intentions of those Westerners may have
appeared admirable: Let`s help the undeveloped and impoverished residents of this area improve their lives. Good intentions, however, have failed to satisfy actual needs.
Ever present consultants lectured locals about new methods of agricultural and industrial production, whether suitable for the region or not. Peace Corps Volunteers and their equivalents from other countries taught science, mathematics and other subjects,
without linking that knowledge to concrete and practical goals.
Frequently frustrated by their failure to improve social conditions, many Westerners developed a more pragmatic view of what they could accomplish. A reverse process began in translating Western largess into substantive benefits. In many cases, it was not the locals who benefited from foreign assistance; it was the foreigners themselves.
Aid workers often collected large salaries with substantial rewards for deprivations suffered by living in a place like Bukavu, which is a truly beautiful site. A donor country, like the United States, also reaped benefits by allocating foreign aid to purchases of goods from the donor country. The sight of cumbersome American trucks mired in rugged African terrain never made much sense except in the accounts of the United States manufacturer.
At times, foreign aid propped up local elites, who were then expected to follow the party line of the donor country. Usually this required the host country to open its doors to Western businesses, which could then profit from these new markets.
The Western presence in the Lake Kivu region created a sense of privilege. The mere fact that I was from the great land of America meant residents would offer me gifts and other items in recognition of my elevated, but contrived, status. Many locals, though, felt resentment toward this favored position of Westerners. For instance, one young man expressed contempt that all good tennis shoes went to the West for sale there, while Africans could buy only second-rate products.
For all the efforts of hundreds of Westerners, no apparent success has resulted in constructing a stable, multi-ethnic society in the tormented area around Lake Kivu. From a Western viewpoint it would be easy to slot Bukavu and its environs into the too-hard basket and simply forget about this area. That might even be an ethical option if Westerners had not already massively intervened there.
Recent events occurring in Zaire, Burundi and Rwanda need to be viewed in connection with the Western presence. Without that presence, it is difficult to imagine that the situation could be as horrific as it is now. Tribal rivalries in this region existed before
Westerners arrived. But not until Western intervention has the carnage been so widespread and profound.
By ensconcing themselves around Lake Kivu with little regard for regional attitudes and conditions, Westerners have found it difficult to improve significantly the lives of local residents. Instead, our weaponry, cynical politics and vulture-like business practices have provided even more fertile ground for conflict than had we never descended upon the peoples of this region.
Distrust of Westerners may hinder any significant involvement in negotiating peace among warring factions. However, the West must demonstrate that it wants to build a constructive, genuine and non-partisan alliance with the region.
No matter how treacherous the existing situation at Lake Kivu appears, the United States and other western countries have an obligation to assist in repairing the damage.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#71 Posted by harish_hyd on July 29, 2004 7:13:05 am
Yeah, I knew you`d back off when confronted with facts, esp. the bit about candidates being asked to sign the undertaking in AJK.
#70 Posted by taqat-e-parvaaz on July 27, 2004 9:33:11 pm
i`m not going to argue this anymore. esp. in the context of this being a completely retarded argument. i hope you agree.
#69 Posted by harish_hyd on July 26, 2004 9:14:49 pm
#65 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[mr. `hashish`, if you were to bring something about the `pakistan connection` from a more neutral source and not outlookindia (hahaa) i would have believed it.]
You`re more deluded than I thought if you believe the world press is not talking about Pakistan`s connection with 9/11. What about the 9/11 commission? You find that ridiculous too? Only a deluded Paki would think the way you do.
[were this true, the US would slap sanctions on pakistan before it could say, oh, i dont know, `kargil`. i suggest you watch `farenheit 9/11` by michael moore. if then you still believe pakistan has links with muhammad atta then you obviously heeded my advice to stick something in your pipe and smoke it!]
Gen. Mahmood Ahmad wired $100,000 to Muhammad Atta just days before 9/11. I suppose only Pakis do not know about this. Or are they living in denial?
[i suggest you worry about hinduland and your internal communal strife before worrying about fictional links between pakistan and 9/11.]
Unlike you, I will not deny India has problems. Acceptance is the first step to redemption. The sooner you realize it, the better it is for you.
[no, bill clinton and anthony zinni are not stupid, mr. hashish. nawaz sharif was kept in the dark until the start of the operation.]
Hahaha, so you mean to say Musharraf is lying? You just shot yourself in the foot.
[perhaps he figured it out once india went crying to the US like a little girl that its troops were getting it up the ass by mujahideen and army troops. dont you agree?]
I thought it was the Paki troops that were fleeing once the Bofors howitzers pounded their sangars.
[hmm, i also seem to remember the indian air force trying to be brave and then losing several pilots to anti aircraft guns of pakistan?]
Unlike the Indian pilots, Paki pilots didn`t have the testicular fortitude to even take to the skies for fear of being blown up by the Indian guns.
[yeah, you`re right. that does sound like the side that lost more personnel. `three wars and not an inch to show for it.` unlike india pakistan does not fight for territory. it fights to uphold the plight of those kashmiris that are being subjected to the worse oppression by your army machinery.]
If what you say is true, why does every candidate standing even for the local body elections in ``Azad`` (haha) Kashmir have to sign an undertaking stating that he/she fully supported Kashmir`s accession to Pakistan and would work whole-heartedly towards achieving that?
[pakistan showed in kargil that it could get into india and catch india with its `dhoti` down. way to be alert!]
And got its ass handed to it on a platter. India showed even when caught napping, it could stick it up the enemy`s ass when it decided to wake up.
[if your army was not raping young kashmiri women, pakistan too would never have to fight kargils. unfortunately, it seems this is the only language india would ever understand. if pakistan has lost credibility, ask your government to hold a plebiscite in kashmir and let the kashmiris decide. according to you they would happily stay with india and continue being raped by ugly indian army personnel.]
First hold a plebiscite in South Waziristan. We can worry about Kashmir later. Charity, after all, begins at home.
[mr. `hashish`, if you were to bring something about the `pakistan connection` from a more neutral source and not outlookindia (hahaa) i would have believed it.]
You`re more deluded than I thought if you believe the world press is not talking about Pakistan`s connection with 9/11. What about the 9/11 commission? You find that ridiculous too? Only a deluded Paki would think the way you do.
[were this true, the US would slap sanctions on pakistan before it could say, oh, i dont know, `kargil`. i suggest you watch `farenheit 9/11` by michael moore. if then you still believe pakistan has links with muhammad atta then you obviously heeded my advice to stick something in your pipe and smoke it!]
Gen. Mahmood Ahmad wired $100,000 to Muhammad Atta just days before 9/11. I suppose only Pakis do not know about this. Or are they living in denial?
[i suggest you worry about hinduland and your internal communal strife before worrying about fictional links between pakistan and 9/11.]
Unlike you, I will not deny India has problems. Acceptance is the first step to redemption. The sooner you realize it, the better it is for you.
[no, bill clinton and anthony zinni are not stupid, mr. hashish. nawaz sharif was kept in the dark until the start of the operation.]
Hahaha, so you mean to say Musharraf is lying? You just shot yourself in the foot.
[perhaps he figured it out once india went crying to the US like a little girl that its troops were getting it up the ass by mujahideen and army troops. dont you agree?]
I thought it was the Paki troops that were fleeing once the Bofors howitzers pounded their sangars.
[hmm, i also seem to remember the indian air force trying to be brave and then losing several pilots to anti aircraft guns of pakistan?]
Unlike the Indian pilots, Paki pilots didn`t have the testicular fortitude to even take to the skies for fear of being blown up by the Indian guns.
[yeah, you`re right. that does sound like the side that lost more personnel. `three wars and not an inch to show for it.` unlike india pakistan does not fight for territory. it fights to uphold the plight of those kashmiris that are being subjected to the worse oppression by your army machinery.]
If what you say is true, why does every candidate standing even for the local body elections in ``Azad`` (haha) Kashmir have to sign an undertaking stating that he/she fully supported Kashmir`s accession to Pakistan and would work whole-heartedly towards achieving that?
[pakistan showed in kargil that it could get into india and catch india with its `dhoti` down. way to be alert!]
And got its ass handed to it on a platter. India showed even when caught napping, it could stick it up the enemy`s ass when it decided to wake up.
[if your army was not raping young kashmiri women, pakistan too would never have to fight kargils. unfortunately, it seems this is the only language india would ever understand. if pakistan has lost credibility, ask your government to hold a plebiscite in kashmir and let the kashmiris decide. according to you they would happily stay with india and continue being raped by ugly indian army personnel.]
First hold a plebiscite in South Waziristan. We can worry about Kashmir later. Charity, after all, begins at home.
#68 Posted by stuka on July 26, 2004 8:49:54 pm
#67
So India got its butt kicked for two months and then Nawaz ran to US and agreed to pull out troops.
Well, can`t blame ya. Guess you also think that Kashmir would be handed over to Pakistan??
So India got its butt kicked for two months and then Nawaz ran to US and agreed to pull out troops.
Well, can`t blame ya. Guess you also think that Kashmir would be handed over to Pakistan??
#67 Posted by taqat-e-parvaaz on July 26, 2004 7:04:48 pm
`If that were true, it would have been Vajpayee and not Nawaz who would have run to Washington on the 4th of July, a busy day on any president`s calendar....You seriously expect us to believe Nawaz begged Clinton for a meeting in Washington so he could hear Indian pleas for mercy.... `
..you forget my friend that it was july 4th that nawaz flew to the US. the mujahideen had been inside kargil since early may. thats two whole months before pakistan backed down. however, the first thing india did when it finally did realize that it had been caught sleeping was send memo after memo to the US asking for help. interestingly, at that point the US didnt give a shit really. the BBC reported that it asked Pakistan to call back the mujahideen in June. the fighting continued for another whole month in which we all know what happened to indian security forces...
..you forget my friend that it was july 4th that nawaz flew to the US. the mujahideen had been inside kargil since early may. thats two whole months before pakistan backed down. however, the first thing india did when it finally did realize that it had been caught sleeping was send memo after memo to the US asking for help. interestingly, at that point the US didnt give a shit really. the BBC reported that it asked Pakistan to call back the mujahideen in June. the fighting continued for another whole month in which we all know what happened to indian security forces...
#66 Posted by arjun_m on July 26, 2004 5:17:34 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#65 Posted by taqat-e-parvaaz on July 26, 2004 12:36:19 pm
mr. `hashish`, if you were to bring something about the `pakistan connection` from a more neutral source and not outlookindia (hahaa) i would have believed it. this is the most ridiculous piece of information i have read in weeks. thanks for the amusement though. were this true, the US would slap sanctions on pakistan before it could say, oh, i dont know, `kargil`. i suggest you watch `farenheit 9/11` by michael moore. if then you still believe pakistan has links with muhammad atta then you obviously heeded my advice to stick something in your pipe and smoke it! i suggest you worry about hinduland and your internal communal strife before worrying about fictional links between pakistan and 9/11. you say my posts are rhetoric, but then claim, as most illlogical hardline RSS activists would, that pakistan too has seen gujrats.
no, bill clinton and anthony zinni are not stupid, mr. hashish. nawaz sharif was kept in the dark until the start of the operation. perhaps he figured it out once india went crying to the US like a little girl that its troops were getting it up the ass by mujahideen and army troops. dont you agree? hmm, i also seem to remember the indian air force trying to be brave and then losing several pilots to anti aircraft guns of pakistan? yeah, you`re right. that does sound like the side that lost more personnel. `three wars and not an inch to show for it.` unlike india pakistan does not fight for territory. it fights to uphold the plight of those kashmiris that are being subjected to the worse oppression by your army machinery. pakistan showed in kargil that it could get into india and catch india with its `dhoti` down. way to be alert! if your army was not raping young kashmiri women, pakistan too would never have to fight kargils. unfortunately, it seems this is the only language india would ever understand. if pakistan has lost credibility, ask your government to hold a plebiscite in kashmir and let the kashmiris decide. according to you they would happily stay with india and continue being raped by ugly indian army personnel.
#64 Posted by harish_hyd on July 25, 2004 10:42:14 pm
#62 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[anyone who believes nawaz sharif, who himself admits he was kept in the dark about the entire operation, and his figures of pakistani deaths is even more stupid than him.]
Oh so, Bill Clinton, Anthony Zinny and Bruce Reidel, who say Nawaz Sharif flew into Washington begging them to ask India to stop attacking Pakistan`s fleeing troops are stupid!
#56 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[Remember how mujahideen and SSG commandos stole your land from you and rained down heavy mortars and artillery on your heads for three months.]
For once, I agree with you. The SSG commandos stole our land. They couldn`t invade it like any self-respecting Army would do.
#52 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[eat this. never mess with the pakistan army.]
Why would India mess with the Paki Army when it has done a fabulous job all by itself? Three wars and not an inch of land to show for it.
#51 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[and yes, mrs. harish, the awacs that india bought were lousy. the only reason pakistan makes a fuss is in the hopes that the US panics and blocks the sale.]
You`re contradicting yourself my friend. If it were as lousy as you claim they are, Pakistan would have been more than happy at the sale.
[pakistan has just recently purchased a state of the art AWACS from Sweden. so stick that in your pipe and smoke it.]
Oooooh!!!! The AWACS that Pakistan bought from Sweden are state-of-the-art, and the AWACS that India bought from Israel are lousy. Nice logic mate.
[and anyways, if india considers itself so technologically superior, it never forgets that any misadventure will result in a whole arsenal of Ghauris and Shaheens raining on the crowded and poverty stricken streets of calcutta and madras.]
Only, India will still exist. But Pakistan won`t.
#50 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[mr harish, if you are implying that pakistan has seen ethnic cleansing on the scale of gujrat and bombay than you`re severely deluded. i severely doubt that hindus in india are more unsafe than their muslim counterparts in india. pakistan will never see the rise of crazed fanatics like the RSS, the bajrang dal, and the shiv sena. sorry. never will hindus in pakistan be dragged out into the streets, beaten, and chopped into pieces. never in pakistan will hindu women be gang raped by muslim men and then stabbed repeatedly. never will pregnant women have their fetuses ripped out and killed violently. hurray for india`s secularism! these are all incidents that have occured in the past gujrat.]
No, I never said Pakistan has seen an ethnic cleansing on the scale of Gujarat. If anything, it has seen worse. And if you think you are being smart by substituting rhetoric for fact, let me assure you I can see through it.
[its a known fact that pakistan has a considerable advantage in this situation, but has foolishly not been able to leverage it properly.]
That Pakistan has not been able to take advantage is not for want of trying. Pakistan has tried it all, but is not an inch closer to Kashmir. And worse, it has lost all credibility after the elections in J&K last year. All it can now do is clutch at the crumbs it hopes India might throw its way.
[ha! who the hell is india fooling?]
It looks like you`re one helluva frustrated man.
[anyone who believes nawaz sharif, who himself admits he was kept in the dark about the entire operation, and his figures of pakistani deaths is even more stupid than him.]
Oh so, Bill Clinton, Anthony Zinny and Bruce Reidel, who say Nawaz Sharif flew into Washington begging them to ask India to stop attacking Pakistan`s fleeing troops are stupid!
#56 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[Remember how mujahideen and SSG commandos stole your land from you and rained down heavy mortars and artillery on your heads for three months.]
For once, I agree with you. The SSG commandos stole our land. They couldn`t invade it like any self-respecting Army would do.
#52 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[eat this. never mess with the pakistan army.]
Why would India mess with the Paki Army when it has done a fabulous job all by itself? Three wars and not an inch of land to show for it.
#51 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[and yes, mrs. harish, the awacs that india bought were lousy. the only reason pakistan makes a fuss is in the hopes that the US panics and blocks the sale.]
You`re contradicting yourself my friend. If it were as lousy as you claim they are, Pakistan would have been more than happy at the sale.
[pakistan has just recently purchased a state of the art AWACS from Sweden. so stick that in your pipe and smoke it.]
Oooooh!!!! The AWACS that Pakistan bought from Sweden are state-of-the-art, and the AWACS that India bought from Israel are lousy. Nice logic mate.
[and anyways, if india considers itself so technologically superior, it never forgets that any misadventure will result in a whole arsenal of Ghauris and Shaheens raining on the crowded and poverty stricken streets of calcutta and madras.]
Only, India will still exist. But Pakistan won`t.
#50 by taqat-e-parvaaz
[mr harish, if you are implying that pakistan has seen ethnic cleansing on the scale of gujrat and bombay than you`re severely deluded. i severely doubt that hindus in india are more unsafe than their muslim counterparts in india. pakistan will never see the rise of crazed fanatics like the RSS, the bajrang dal, and the shiv sena. sorry. never will hindus in pakistan be dragged out into the streets, beaten, and chopped into pieces. never in pakistan will hindu women be gang raped by muslim men and then stabbed repeatedly. never will pregnant women have their fetuses ripped out and killed violently. hurray for india`s secularism! these are all incidents that have occured in the past gujrat.]
No, I never said Pakistan has seen an ethnic cleansing on the scale of Gujarat. If anything, it has seen worse. And if you think you are being smart by substituting rhetoric for fact, let me assure you I can see through it.
[its a known fact that pakistan has a considerable advantage in this situation, but has foolishly not been able to leverage it properly.]
That Pakistan has not been able to take advantage is not for want of trying. Pakistan has tried it all, but is not an inch closer to Kashmir. And worse, it has lost all credibility after the elections in J&K last year. All it can now do is clutch at the crumbs it hopes India might throw its way.
[ha! who the hell is india fooling?]
It looks like you`re one helluva frustrated man.
#63 Posted by harish_hyd on July 25, 2004 10:42:14 pm
Mr.taaqat, look what this Labour MP has to say about Pakiland. Stick this in your pipe and smoke it mate.
Excerpts:
``Significantly, Sheikh is also the man who, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. It is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. Why not?
Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to ``retire`` by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn`t the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?``
``Daniel Ellsberg, the former US defence department whistleblower who has accompanied Edmonds in court, has stated: ``It seems to me quite plausible that Pakistan was quite involved in this ... To say Pakistan is, to me, to say CIA because ... it`s hard to say that the ISI knew something that the CIA had no knowledge of.````
``Senator Bob Graham, chairman of the Senate select committee on intelligence, has said: ``I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted, not just in financing ... by a sovereign foreign government.````
Excerpts:
``Significantly, Sheikh is also the man who, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. It is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. Why not?
Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to ``retire`` by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn`t the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?``
``Daniel Ellsberg, the former US defence department whistleblower who has accompanied Edmonds in court, has stated: ``It seems to me quite plausible that Pakistan was quite involved in this ... To say Pakistan is, to me, to say CIA because ... it`s hard to say that the ISI knew something that the CIA had no knowledge of.````
``Senator Bob Graham, chairman of the Senate select committee on intelligence, has said: ``I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted, not just in financing ... by a sovereign foreign government.````
#62 Posted by taqat-e-parvaaz on July 25, 2004 5:07:47 pm
GREAT comeback arjun. you`ve checkmated me now. anyone who believes nawaz sharif, who himself admits he was kept in the dark about the entire operation, and his figures of pakistani deaths is even more stupid than him. the only reason kargil is not pakistans is because of leaders like nawaz sharif, who gave in timidly to US threats. and yes, your complete lack of reasoning in this argument shows itself again. how is it possible for an opponent who is sitting on top of you in mountains to lose more soldiers than the side getting mortars and missiles up their skinny asses below you? you`re obviously smarter than i thought. and i`m the one who`s deluded? hey arjun, are you bal thackarey in disguise? or are you narendra modi?
#61 Posted by Mukhlis on July 25, 2004 9:20:10 am
Shall we try to get back to the main subject of the article –Palestine- rather than drag Kargil in? :-)
“#29 by nikki7777 on July 21, 2004 6:12pm PT
# 27....Mukhlis.....All`s fair in love and war..The jews were able to turn back the clock almost two millenia and what did the palestinians do about it???...Well, the results are there for all to see......”
nikki7777.. if all’s fair in love & war.. and if Jews can turn back the clock 1800 years and occupy the land of their dreams (even though most of the Jews now living in Israel are of European origin & had never been associated with the land of Palestine in the first place) then why ask Palestinians to stop trying after only 5 decades? If all’s fair in love & war.. then I guess Palestinians have the right to wage war any which way they want…till they achieve victory too.. be it 5 decades .. 2 millenia… or 5 millenia. Would it make sense to say to a Palestinian “Yup… Jews are one determined lot heh.. got back to Palestine after 1800 years. But, hey, why don’t you Palestinians just give up on getting back to your homes, even though it’s only been 5 decades of struggle. Stop wasting time and effort & blood, it’s not gonna help much”.
The Jews didn’t let go of the dream for 1800 years but the Palestinians should understand the “reality” only after 5 decades and let go of their right to live in the land where they and countless of their generations lived?
“#33 by rahulmal on July 21, 2004 9:50pm PT
Mukhlis has posted some figures about Israeli army/militia in `48. So, 600,000 settlers were able to field an army twice the size of armies of 60 million Arabs...doesn`t show the Arabs in a very good light.”
Rahulmal.. the figures I posted were to show that the Jewish Army in 1948 was not a rag tag army as opined by you in your post #17. My post was just to show that the popular perception of a rag tag army is not entirely accurate. The ability of the Zionists to be able to field an army greater than their adversaries is a separate topic. But may be a few words on that anyway.
I guess Jews were a more motivated lot than their adversaries because their age old dream of a separate homeland was about to come true. Whereas the Arabs’ motivation was not as great as the Jews. “The Jewish immigrants were in Palestine because they had chosen to go there in pursuit of an ideal; the Palestinian Arabs, however lived there because they and countless generations before them were born there, and therefore did not have the same political awareness and pioneering motivation.”(1)
Besides, there were other factors, e.g. a lot of Jews who made up the Israeli fighting forces in 1948 were WW-2 vets who had served on the Allied side. There were 136,043 Jews who volunteered their services for the British Military during WW-2. These recruits eventually formed the basis of the Israeli armed forces.
“#33 by rahulmal on July 21, 2004 9:50pm PT
Jews lived in harmony with Arabs like Paki Hindus live in harmony with Muslims in today`s Pakistan...as if there are a plethora of options.”
As mentioned by taqat-e-parvaaz in post#35, many a times when Jews were persecuted in Europe, they found solace in Muslim countries. There was no large scale killing of Jews in Muslim lands as opposed to what happened in Europe. It’s only after the creation of Israel that things have come to this stage. “The Ottoman Empire, of which Palestine was a part at the time of Balfour Declaration, had, over the centuries, provided refuge for Jews fleeing from persecution, including the Sephardim who fled the reconquista and the inquisition in Spain in the fifteenth century.” (2)
“#33 by rahulmal on July 21, 2004 9:50pm PT
“I agree that coming of Ashkenazi Zionist Jews from Europe was bad, but not worse than coming of assortment of Turks, Persians and Arabs in India.”
There is, however, a vast difference between the scale of immigration represented by those seeking refuge from persecution, and the calculated usurpation and ethnic cleansing of an inhabited land…. A great deal of land was acquired by Jews by perfectly legitimate means, and this is not disputed, but the purchase of land in another country does not entitle one to establish one’s own state therein.(2)
(1) “The Palestine Triangle” by Nicholas Bethell
(2) ``The Palestine-Israeli Conflict`` by Dan Cohn-Sherbok & Dawoud El-Alami
“#29 by nikki7777 on July 21, 2004 6:12pm PT
# 27....Mukhlis.....All`s fair in love and war..The jews were able to turn back the clock almost two millenia and what did the palestinians do about it???...Well, the results are there for all to see......”
nikki7777.. if all’s fair in love & war.. and if Jews can turn back the clock 1800 years and occupy the land of their dreams (even though most of the Jews now living in Israel are of European origin & had never been associated with the land of Palestine in the first place) then why ask Palestinians to stop trying after only 5 decades? If all’s fair in love & war.. then I guess Palestinians have the right to wage war any which way they want…till they achieve victory too.. be it 5 decades .. 2 millenia… or 5 millenia. Would it make sense to say to a Palestinian “Yup… Jews are one determined lot heh.. got back to Palestine after 1800 years. But, hey, why don’t you Palestinians just give up on getting back to your homes, even though it’s only been 5 decades of struggle. Stop wasting time and effort & blood, it’s not gonna help much”.
The Jews didn’t let go of the dream for 1800 years but the Palestinians should understand the “reality” only after 5 decades and let go of their right to live in the land where they and countless of their generations lived?
“#33 by rahulmal on July 21, 2004 9:50pm PT
Mukhlis has posted some figures about Israeli army/militia in `48. So, 600,000 settlers were able to field an army twice the size of armies of 60 million Arabs...doesn`t show the Arabs in a very good light.”
Rahulmal.. the figures I posted were to show that the Jewish Army in 1948 was not a rag tag army as opined by you in your post #17. My post was just to show that the popular perception of a rag tag army is not entirely accurate. The ability of the Zionists to be able to field an army greater than their adversaries is a separate topic. But may be a few words on that anyway.
I guess Jews were a more motivated lot than their adversaries because their age old dream of a separate homeland was about to come true. Whereas the Arabs’ motivation was not as great as the Jews. “The Jewish immigrants were in Palestine because they had chosen to go there in pursuit of an ideal; the Palestinian Arabs, however lived there because they and countless generations before them were born there, and therefore did not have the same political awareness and pioneering motivation.”(1)
Besides, there were other factors, e.g. a lot of Jews who made up the Israeli fighting forces in 1948 were WW-2 vets who had served on the Allied side. There were 136,043 Jews who volunteered their services for the British Military during WW-2. These recruits eventually formed the basis of the Israeli armed forces.
“#33 by rahulmal on July 21, 2004 9:50pm PT
Jews lived in harmony with Arabs like Paki Hindus live in harmony with Muslims in today`s Pakistan...as if there are a plethora of options.”
As mentioned by taqat-e-parvaaz in post#35, many a times when Jews were persecuted in Europe, they found solace in Muslim countries. There was no large scale killing of Jews in Muslim lands as opposed to what happened in Europe. It’s only after the creation of Israel that things have come to this stage. “The Ottoman Empire, of which Palestine was a part at the time of Balfour Declaration, had, over the centuries, provided refuge for Jews fleeing from persecution, including the Sephardim who fled the reconquista and the inquisition in Spain in the fifteenth century.” (2)
“#33 by rahulmal on July 21, 2004 9:50pm PT
“I agree that coming of Ashkenazi Zionist Jews from Europe was bad, but not worse than coming of assortment of Turks, Persians and Arabs in India.”
There is, however, a vast difference between the scale of immigration represented by those seeking refuge from persecution, and the calculated usurpation and ethnic cleansing of an inhabited land…. A great deal of land was acquired by Jews by perfectly legitimate means, and this is not disputed, but the purchase of land in another country does not entitle one to establish one’s own state therein.(2)
(1) “The Palestine Triangle” by Nicholas Bethell
(2) ``The Palestine-Israeli Conflict`` by Dan Cohn-Sherbok & Dawoud El-Alami
#60 Posted by arjun_m on July 25, 2004 7:38:07 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#59 Posted by jang on July 24, 2004 5:02:19 pm
#57 by taqat-e-parvaaz
Lt Sharma being probed is indeed good. You guys also should probe and sack loser generals so that the army becomes more professional. Poor jap generals had to commit harakiris. But wait, you do make losers deal in Manure..i mean make them heads of Fauji Fertilizer Corp,right? Or for a more challengin position of Karachi Sewer Authority?
Lt Sharma being probed is indeed good. You guys also should probe and sack loser generals so that the army becomes more professional. Poor jap generals had to commit harakiris. But wait, you do make losers deal in Manure..i mean make them heads of Fauji Fertilizer Corp,right? Or for a more challengin position of Karachi Sewer Authority?
#58 Posted by arjun_m on July 24, 2004 3:51:58 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#57 Posted by taqat-e-parvaaz on July 24, 2004 1:25:56 pm
for your reading pleasure, arjun. hail to the brave indian army with the biggest cojones!!
India sacks Siachen commander
ISLAMABAD, June 21: Lt-Gen Arvind Sharma vacated the command of the Siachen Corps for Lt-Gen M.L. Naidu with immediate effect, even as the court of inquiry probing the fake kills cases in Siachen continued with its proceedings in Jodhpur.
Gen Sharma became the first casualty of a scandal that has exposed the culture of fake encounters by Indian Army in occupied Kashmir and Siachen. -APP
http://www.dawn.com/2004/06/22/top13.htm
India sacks Siachen commander
ISLAMABAD, June 21: Lt-Gen Arvind Sharma vacated the command of the Siachen Corps for Lt-Gen M.L. Naidu with immediate effect, even as the court of inquiry probing the fake kills cases in Siachen continued with its proceedings in Jodhpur.
Gen Sharma became the first casualty of a scandal that has exposed the culture of fake encounters by Indian Army in occupied Kashmir and Siachen. -APP
http://www.dawn.com/2004/06/22/top13.htm
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- masadi: And for the 1000th... Why is Karachi Turning
- masadi: In the right wing... Why is Karachi Turning
- masadi: Btw, no present day... Why is Karachi Turning
- masadi: tahmed writes "now i... Dhokha and Being a
- masadi: #348 laddu writes "Re:... Dhokha and Being a
- pakistan3: Re: # 90 Tahir, Your post... Government Wins Manmohan Singh
- masadi: Anil don't hide behind... Why is Karachi Turning
- peonofthewest: masadi saab, howcome they... Dhokha and Being a
