The SAT Scam cheating in sats is a problem - this article however, is a bigger one.
really, even `dawn staffers` do a better job.

The first time I quit Re: # 2
im generally the first one to concurr that chowk editors are most certainly on a high on a combination of cheaper designer drugs, but i rather liked this one...

Sultan Mints what is wrong with this guy?

India Through Pakistani Eyes Re: # 242

What you say to Yahya is none of my bussiness, but it does seem rather comical that you have decided to `spare him rudeness`. The fact that you actually hold that out as a threat is really pretty pathetic.

But my main issue with you post is how you claim to have a greater understanding of strategic thinking (a bsc. does not a general make, afterall) and yet you do not substantiate how Romair`s view on MAD is really so profoundly flawed..
Really, for the benefit of everybody here- mabye you SHOULD call his bluff.

Oh no, i guess i wont be getting a warning ? ;)

India Through Pakistani Eyes Re: # 241

on the contrary, but no point arguing with gujju

India Through Pakistani Eyes DM:

I think a recurring issue with your posts seems to be your inability to grasp the essence of how important MAD has been in pak. india confrontations.
You (at best) brush it off, and concentrate instead on `american diplomacy` and the like--typically like 99% of indians, that in there constant need for self assurance, will never credit anything pakistan does/achivies etc.
I wil pose a simple question for you.
Given the fact that pakistan would have most assuredly lost a conventional war, and its terriorial sovreignity would have been almost certainly challenged in any indian attack- is it not obvious how tempting the nuclear button would have been? infact, it would have almost been certain.
Given that then, india would still have attacked if
a) it still belivied pakistan would not attack
b)it did not care about having its most of its western states roasted.

Your money is on a. apparently, because you seem to hint that with its threat of retaliation, it could be sure that pakistan would not attack. I say, its a typical Stackelberger leader-follower game theory. Could anyone who actually knew a thing or two defense policy, have actually even found it remotely plausible that a state whoes very existance was threated, would balk at the use of nuclear weapons because of indias (arguable) second strike abilities- especially when the country was run by a general? i mean really, no matter now you proffess a lack of information on all things defense related, i dont see how you can be blind to this.

As for b. i dont think it even warrants a discussion, no matter how many saffron lungies are seen in N. delhi


Again, I was against Vajpayee`s massive mobilisation of forces. But it is a fact that India was poised to strike and was prevented by US diplomacy, just as it was prevented from enlarging the Kargil conflict despite Pakistan`s nuclear threat. You see, two can play the game of nucear chicken: Pakistan`s whole nuclear strategy is to speak out aloud that it will use its nuclear bomb if threatened. India`s response seems to be ``We dont believe you, but if you do we are prepared for a massive counterstrike``. One could however argue that nuclear threat has worked in an indirect way - the US is scared that these two irresponsible countries might indeed pull the nuclear trigger. I wonder if Clinton/Bush would have acted so fast if the two countries were not nuclear.

India Through Pakistani Eyes Re: # 192

If you sincerely and honestly think that Bangladesh, with its soil sinking due to dimishing flows in rivers dammed by india & sirilanka- where the indian airforce flew `humanitariana aid` missions to the tigers are not bullied by India into submission, then i genuinely grievie for you.

More likely however, you are amongst the many smug indians here, who seem to be perpetually blindided by saffron-nationalism and seem to think that every atrocity carried out by india was just, right, and proper.

India Through Pakistani Eyes Re: # 152

DM sahab,

Axioms have a habit of being a little inane if carried to far, and if you apply the logic of history repeating itself, i think the conclusion you reach of Pakistan being attacked from any `historical` routes is manifestly absurd.
While your dream may indeed be laudable, i dont really see how increased indian arms spending is a step in that direction.
Perhaps, you use this logic to hint belligerence against India from its western border? In that case, this amounts to little more than hyper-ventillating scaremongering and hardly befits a mollifying peacenik like yourself.

I have no issues with you considering pakistan a threat, you have a right to your opinions. however, i feel it is slightly disengeous of you to posture as somebody promoting peace and yet manning the battle-drums at the same time.

India Through Pakistani Eyes DM sahab,

You say you are a peacenik, and yet in the same breadth propound further military investment, and that too in a situation where india quite patently tips the balance considerably.
Certainly not your average `peacenik` dreams if you ask me..

Trip to Perversion Re: # 9
On the topic of lameness,
I was being sarcastic.
I completely agree that people often seem to think that groping, leering etc. isnt perverted if a `gora` does it.. my point exactly..

Trip to Perversion Are these men frustrated? yes
Are these men lonely? very
Are these men just pathetic individuals who have no respect for women? probably
Are they just bored? HELL YES!
Are these men uneducated and unaware? err.. hazard a guess..

I hope these asnwer your questions, now can you look at pak. men a little more objectively? I remember Italy was little different (okay, no public crotch scratching mabye), but i guess no one seems to mind if an italian does it.

Independence Re: # 8
Lol. what is it with you people?
if there were any more people like you in india, i doubt anybody could see the `possitive aspects` to a skip across the border.

The Idea of Chowk Hey, i like this new commenting engine..

The Secularity of India Despite the omar`s very wise counsel- i could`nt resist one more stab at it..

The hindu sucession act 1956 notwithstanding-the government has still essentially kept `mitakshara coparcenary` alive. This means that hindu women are discriminated against in relation to inherited property.
In almost all circumstances, the share women receive will be lower compared to there brothers.
In certain instances they are excluded from a right of inheritance altogether; they cannot for example, `obtain the partition of the dwelling house of the family and the general denial of right of residence (subject to some exceptions) of a married daughter.`
However, had you been a christian these laws would not apply (there is also some case law in this regard, i think), and women can be equal recipients of inherited property.
Nevertheless, the nitty gritty of hindu succession law is really irrelevant here- what is beyond question is that the civil laws affect people almost as much (if not more) as the laws that are uniform for all religions. This means the treatment meted out to you by the state is contingent on your religious orientation.
I rest my case.

My earlier posting seemed to suggest that hindu women are excluded from the right of inheritance in all instances (which, I believe, was true before 1956)-this was irresponsible on my part and I should have made the facts clearer.
Apologies.

The Vicious Cycle what!
and chowk rejects all my articles?
I tell you there is something amiss here-a personal vendetta.
Out with it Ed. what did i do wrong?

Angelic Saint of Calcutta Really i think the good mother is overrated-yes she did what she could, but i mean really- i think her contributions are blown out of all proportions.