Songs of Dissonance Re: # 108

Masadi sahib:
A a reposne to the ``insult to intelligence`` woven by #107, couldnt have materlized better.

Kistiakowsky`s quote: The exquisite order displayed by our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the divine [sic] ``indeed`` re-instates Dr. Einstein`s ( representing perhaps the pinnacle of scientific human intellect to-date) quest to rationalize scientific discovery with religion/God in his later years.

On a second note, and perhaps in response to the ``non-ijtahadis`` ( not to confuse with `jahadis`: for the indians) and the self-praclaimed ``agnostics`` of the forum, what would you say about Dr. Iqbal`s ``The Reconstruction of Religious thought in Islam``. (assuming you`d have read it)

It surprises me, how little commentary there exists on this text, and how eludes a common Pakistani` the very Islamic outlook of the man who envisioned the land.

A Love Affair with Lahore Re: # 30:

< what does that mean?>>

People like you who are oblivious to the most beautiful flower of all the ``motia`` ... who inadvertently bring religion into everything, be it peoples names..and who dont know when to say Irshad or Muqarrar when a Misra or a Sher is read (Ref:post#24) { you say ``Irshad`` prior to the saying of the starting verse, from there on ``Muqarrar`` for praise and repititon}.

And about the names:
Hindu parents of Hindu bollywood stars: Shahid Kapoor and Aftab Shivdisani..both Delhi boys ironically...did their parents run out of Hindu names as well..??

The Time of the Bomb Re:#12
<
there exists no ``EXTENT`` in a nuclear exchange, and there is no empirical evidence in history to suggest as so. Conventional wisdom simply cannot parametrise the damage a nuclear-exchnage can lead to (irrespective of how ever many rhetorical arguments and expertise are laid forth), unless such analysis opts for the maximum upper bound a geographical and demographic entity (for instance the subcontinent) has to offer in terms of damage (read: total annihilation).

Your argument and perhaps the frame-of-mind when coming up with it, tries to super-impose ``comprehensive annihilation`` on military warfare of ``absolute`` damage which simply potrays obliviousness to the wholesome truth. There is no ``score-settling`` in such exchange nor is there a yankee version of tit-for-tat.
All this gives to is to is the most practiced rationale of all time: the ``detterent``. The same detterent which allows a nation like Pakistan to adhere to a first-strike-policy..and simply ingnore those who try to ``gauge-out`` the ``extent`` of a first strike or the resulting retaliatory strikes.

The Time of the Bomb Re:#1 & #2
>>Pakistan has threatened to use its weapons in every crisis since then<<
How hard is it to take this for granted that, a nation over-awed by its enemy in conventional weaponry and military might would have no second thoughts in engaging itself in a FIRST-STRIKE nuclear war when its territorial existence is threatened. It is utterly ridiculous being ``politically-correct`` in this debate or pertain to a facade of no-first-strike when the very purpose of having nuclear arms is to not allow self-marginalization in the face of war.

It really is hard to further articulate this irrefutable view-point of the Pakistani nation (not the military or the political patriarchs, but the common street man). What John F. Burns wrote in the NY Times on 29th of May 1998.
(http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pakans.htm ) a day after Pakistan detonated its nuclear weapons, puts into perspective the status quo i.e. the obtuse nature of Indian emotional discharge at Pakistan`s first-strike policy.

Responding to (tvard) #9:
>>This insecurity comes from one simple fact, viz. Pakistanis can`t figure out the meaning of their existence.>.

Condescending and consistent belittling of its opponents within its masses has led India into being the only geographical entity in the world surrounded by two semi -hostile nuclear-armed nations with whom it exercises fragile ties on all fronts less perhaps the economic ( that too amidst aplenty mistrust and suspicion) . An aspirant of a permanent UN seat and the next Asian economic stronghold, she ought to look within its caste ridden and religiously fervent society which wastes no time turning masses into murdering mobs once every decade, before it questions the meaning in existence of other nations.

And what has just been said is not an opinionated bias. Vir Sanghvi a Hindu nationalistic hawk seconds it with little remorse.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1457178,0008.htm
The Delhi riots of 1984, Bombay riots in 1993 and Gujarat in 2002 merely suggests an ongoing periodic trend of inexplicable human atrocities against its minorities. India a country of many dimensions has recently added a new minority within its ranks ``the secularists``. The well fed, well bred, and well entertained middle, upper-middle and elitist class is only good for sloganeered protests and its efforts to put a human face to the rampant corruption and gross violation of human rights within rural India. That India-of-the-slumps where it will see a nuclear attack only be fitting to put the Shudars , the Muslims, the Sikhs and the Christians out of their misery. …``meaning of existence ..ha! ``