Jump to content

44 personnel martyred in terror attack on CRPF convoy in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama


Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, maniac said:

I don’t get it. If all members minus China votes in favor of someone being a terrorist, how can 1 member override it? Obviously I am no expert on how the security council works. Can someone explain?

 

Anyways China is in UNSC in a slot that was originally offered  to India. Another great visionary move by the “decent PM” chacha Nehru @Gollum

That's how the Veto system works Bhai.

During Cold War , Russians and Americans used it a lot for their respective vested interests.

Posted
13 minutes ago, maniac said:

Anyways China is in UNSC in a slot that was originally offered  to India. Another great visionary move by the “decent PM” chacha Nehru @Gollum

Isn't that a myth? UNSC came into existence in 1945, China was part of the original 5....India wasn't even independent then. Did Nehru have the option of a time machine? Seriously man hadd hai, you may dislike Nehru, I feel he was decent...chor de abhi. 

Nehru didn't keep India out of UNSC or reject Kennedy offer, it is just rhetoric

LINK

Posted
3 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Isn't that a myth? UNSC came into existence in 1945, China was part of the original 5....India wasn't even independent then. Did Nehru have the option of a time machine? Seriously man hadd hai, you may dislike Nehru, I feel he was decent...chor de abhi. 

Nehru didn't keep India out of UNSC or reject Kennedy offer, it is just rhetoric

LINK

That's right. No such thing happened.

Posted
1 minute ago, Stradlater said:

That's right. No such thing happened.

There's so much fake news out there about Nehru, Gandhi and other freedom fighters, people lap it up without question. It is fine to criticize someone based on facts, but these Whatsapp myths reduce the discourse to a joke. I remember in the run up to 2014 elections the messages that were circulated, hilarious nonsense and the public (incl highly educated people) would repeat that everywhere convinced about the veracity of those stories. BJP IT cell has done so much work, itna effort/time desh ke hith me laga dete to accha hota. Now they are morphing RaGa photos to show him as an associate of the Pulwama suicide bomber...and believe me there are enough people to buy such claims. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Isn't that a myth? UNSC came into existence in 1945, China was part of the original 5....India wasn't even independent then. Did Nehru have the option of a time machine? Seriously man hadd hai, you may dislike Nehru, I feel he was decent...chor de abhi. 

Nehru didn't keep India out of UNSC or reject Kennedy offer, it is just rhetoric

LINK

I am pulling your leg on the Nehru part however, I take offense to any praise on a guy who is responsible for the mess we have in the country today. We had a famine in the 1960s during LBS regime, we had the repercussions till the 90s before the LPG policies. We have too many traitors with a free voice amidst ourselves. He has blood of our brave soldiers on his hands.

 

So excuse me for being bitter. I pretty much am in alignment with most of your views except the banter on Sachin. I will give you a free pass to call SRT names. Go crazy with it but I am still bitter about using the word decent Pm and the asshile Nehru in the same sentence.

Posted

@Gollum Nehru did refuse the UNSC. While the ones who criticize him do it for obvious reasons but the ones who support him do so by saying that he outsmarted an American “bait” whatever the f that means.

 

So the constant remains is that he did refuse the seat.

Posted

Deal with Pakistan later, first we need to handle these anti-national traitors inside.

 

What the hell people, they eat, live and do sh!t here and then praise the killings of our armed forces :hitler:

 

Namak haraami ki bhi hudd hoti hai.

Posted

https://thewire.in/diplomacy/when-nehru-refused-american-bait-on-a-permanent-seat-for-india-at-the-un

 

This quotes Shashi Tharoor a Congress man

 

https://www.thehindu.com/2004/01/10/stories/2004011004021200.htm

 

In his latest book, "Nehru — The Invention of India," Mr. Tharoor writes that Indian diplomats who have seen files swear that Nehru declined the offer about the same time as he turned down "with scorn" John Foster Dulles' support for an Indian Monroe Doctrine.

Nehru had suggested that the seat, till then held by Taiwan, be offered to Beijing instead. He wrote that "the seat was held with scant credibility by Taiwan."

Posted
17 minutes ago, maniac said:

https://thewire.in/diplomacy/when-nehru-refused-american-bait-on-a-permanent-seat-for-india-at-the-un

 

This quotes Shashi Tharoor a Congress man

 

https://www.thehindu.com/2004/01/10/stories/2004011004021200.htm

 

In his latest book, "Nehru — The Invention of India," Mr. Tharoor writes that Indian diplomats who have seen files swear that Nehru declined the offer about the same time as he turned down "with scorn" John Foster Dulles' support for an Indian Monroe Doctrine.

Nehru had suggested that the seat, till then held by Taiwan, be offered to Beijing instead. He wrote that "the seat was held with scant credibility by Taiwan."

This chewt took the biggest bait in hindi cheeni bhai bhai and the whole country is suffering for that. Not to forget the present kashmir problem is all because of this Chacha of chewtiyas 

Posted (edited)

This attack had nothing to do with "Kashmir".

 

The typical Left wing media won't reveal all the details regarding the terrorist due to fear of communal violence.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2wbExE8TvU

 

Watch the full video of this terrorist's message.

 

He mentions Ghazwa-Tul Hind, Hindus detroying Islamic culture, Cow piss drinkers you can't save yourself from us, IC 814 hijack, Parliament attack etc

Ghazwa-Tul Hind is related to Islamic conquest of entire India. "Burhan Wani", who was a commander of "Hizbul Mujahideen" and was killed by our security forces also used to talk about this Islamic conquest of India.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_NWMJ7Qj-k

 

Watch the above youtube video of a Nationalist youtuber's analysis if you want to know more about this Ghazwa-Tul Hind. The Liberal media's bias towards Islam will end up costing us Millions of lives in the next few decades.

 

 

Edited by Captain
Posted
18 minutes ago, vayuu1 said:

This chewt took the biggest bait in hindi cheeni bhai bhai and the whole country is suffering for that. Not to forget the present kashmir problem is all because of this Chacha of chewtiyas 

How difficult it is to understand for people that Nehru made so many blunders that we are still seeing the ripple effect to this day. It is so easy to go the pseudo history and fake news route whenever Nehru’s blunders are brought up.

 

People keep praising his education efforts and how Indian students are better than other countries. Most of us went to convents or private schools, how many people come up through the ranks studying in zilla parishad or municipal schools? 

 

As far as Indian civil services or even IIT and IIm are concerned, we have produced good beuraucrats  and employees not innovators and entertepenurs. 

 

Article 370 discussed to death here. Also every religion except Hindus have their own governing board. Hindu temples under government jurisdiction. When I visit a  temple like Tirupathi which is the richest place of worship in the world, it pains me to see the lack of organizing and even the toilets and other facilities are not all up to the mark. The trustees are mostly government appointed leeches.

 

Most of all coming from an army family, I have heard stories of how our brave soldiers were not even provided basic supplies and still held off the well equipped Chinese soldiers all thanks to Nehru and Menon’s policy.

 

This guy spent money on giving a tribute to

Edwina when she passed away.

 

what he did to Bose is well known.

 

He is modern India’s biggest culprit. Yet the very same people calling Hindus a chew Kaum are defending a guy who hurt our self-respect by brainwashing us to be these Pacificst pussies

 

 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, maniac said:

I am pulling your leg on the Nehru part

I understand that. 

Quote

however I take offense to any praise on a guy who is responsible for the mess we have in the country today. We had a famine in the 1960s during LBS regime, we had the repercussions till the 90s before the LPG policies. We have too many traitors with a free voice amidst ourselves. He has blood of our brave soldiers on his hands.

See man, based on my limited knowledge and reading of Nehru I found him decent. You may be more well read about it, I have no issue if you rate him a bad PM. I don't find Nehru interesting enough to devote time and energy in researching about him or post 1947 India. I might have missed the mark completely, don't deny that possibility....but I can have my opinion about certain things. Only thing I will warn people is not to judge him based on the deeds of his daughter, grandsons and other family members. The dynasty has given enough reasons for us to hate them, but it won't be fair to pin the blame of others on Nehru who passed away in the early 60s. 

Quote

 

So excuse me for being bitter. I pretty much am in alignment with most of your views except the banter on Sachin. I will give you a free pass to call SRT names.

Yeah that Sachin banter is mostly me trolling or letting off some steam. He is my 1st cricket idol, will always be my favorite...strictly talking about SRT the cricketer here. Only when he is extremely overhyped and mythicized do I step in to offer counterweights. It is one thing for me to accept myths about players I never saw, but when someone I followed keenly at least for 14-15 years is presented differently...I don't like being made a fool of.

 

And you have to admit that his fanboys do their best to cover his flaws and make him look like an invincible Titan. I take offence to that...if this were a fan club I would let it pass, maybe even join in because that's what fan clubs are for. But this is a cricket forum and discussion, debates, logical reasoning etc are part and parcel......and no one is beyond reproach. If the other side makes measured well reasoned assertions you counter/agree, when they go OTT you have to balance that :p:.

 

I do the same with Kohli, some posters think I am anti-Kohli or anti-Delhi, anti-North, whatever ****.....you will never see me going OTT when it comes to Laxman, Kumble, Gambhir, Pujara etc because they are mostly rated objectively over here. 

Quote

Go crazy with it but I am still bitter about using the word decent Pm and the asshile Nehru in the same sentence.

Bhai I don't even bring Nehru in my posts. That was one thread where unpopular opinions were asked and I gave mine. I find Nehru and that phase of our history very tedious, you probably won't see me bringing his name on a regular basis here....hell that must be the first post on ICF where I mentioned Nehru. Boring :sleep:

 

Cheers. 

Edited by Gollum
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, maniac said:

@Gollum Nehru did refuse the UNSC. While the ones who criticize him do it for obvious reasons but the ones who support him do so by saying that he outsmarted an American “bait” whatever the f that means.

 

So the constant remains is that he did refuse the seat.

 

2 hours ago, maniac said:

https://thewire.in/diplomacy/when-nehru-refused-american-bait-on-a-permanent-seat-for-india-at-the-un

 

This quotes Shashi Tharoor a Congress man

 

https://www.thehindu.com/2004/01/10/stories/2004011004021200.htm

 

In his latest book, "Nehru — The Invention of India," Mr. Tharoor writes that Indian diplomats who have seen files swear that Nehru declined the offer about the same time as he turned down "with scorn" John Foster Dulles' support for an Indian Monroe Doctrine.

Nehru had suggested that the seat, till then held by Taiwan, be offered to Beijing instead. He wrote that "the seat was held with scant credibility by Taiwan."

Haven't read the full article, just my two cents.

 

To become a permanent member of UNSC, each of the original 5 has to support the motion. If even one vetoes that's game over. So how exactly did Nehru refuse UNSC permanent seat ? From your post and a cursory reading of the article only USA Sec of State offered him,with some caveats, even that isn't gospel truth. Tharoor writes 'those who have seen swear blah blah blah...' nothing concrete. Assuming such an offer was made, what about the other 4? Knowing the politics of that era if USA wanted deep friendship with a country, Stalin's USSR would definitely oppose it as would China (represented in UN then by modern day Taiwan). Veto is such a power, there's a reason no new country has joined the permanent council all these years, not even economic and military/tech heavyweights like Japan, Germany, South Korea...all 3 have high credibility internationally. Tomorrow Trump may offer Modi a UNSC seat in exchange for something or certain T&C but will the Indian PM blindly follow him? China can't declare Masood Azhar a terrorist despite mountains of evidence, do you think they will ever support India's bid?  

 

Taiwan was representing whole of China in UN during Nehru's time. After the Chinese civil war, Communists under Mao took over mainland China (PRC) while Kuomintang fled to Taiwan forming Republic of China (ROC). Since the Kuomintang were already holding the UNSC permanent seat from 1945 they continued to hold it. PRC said it represented whole of China, KMT said the same...in fact even today Taiwan claims Aksai Chin and Arunachal as part of its territory. So China in some form always had the permanent seat, only question was who represented it, PRC or ROC. It seems PRC got the mantle in 1971 (7 years after Nehrus' death, so the question of his involvement doesn't even arise !!!), when the world decided that PRC was the sole legal China. USSR supported them because they were fellow communists, USA under the bastards Nixon-Kissinger supported to relax trade restrictions but mainly to get an honorable retreat from the disastrous Vietnam war. 

 

The question of India getting permanent seat from Taiwan doesn't even arise. It was a China matter, the only question was which China. It is like assuming that USSR's permanent UN seat after 1991 dissolution was up for grabs and India, Japan or Germany would get an offer. Woh sab log pagal hai kya? Obviously it would stay with one of the Soviet countries. Since Russia was the dominant (economy, military, nuclear, culture...) and historical power it got the privilege, had Ukraine or Georgia been comparable powers it would have been interesting. But hypothetically had Reagan made a phone call to PVNR offering USSR's seat to India and had he said yes, the USSR units would have come together aur woh India aa jaate hamari g@nd maarne. Max PVNR could have said was give it to Ukraine, or Georgia...but Russia was the big daddy and no one could seriously say anything except Moscow. Anyway that wouldn't have mattered because hamari koi aukaat nahi thi us samay. 

 

If I could conclude in a couple of sentences India was never in reckoning to get a permanent seat in UNSC. Everything was already set in stone before our independence. 

Edited by Gollum
Posted
Just now, Gollum said:

 

Haven't read the full article, just my two cents.

 

To become a permanent member of UNSC, each of the original 5 has to support the motion. If even one vetoes that's game over. So how exactly did Nehru refuse UNSC? From your post  and a cursory reading of the article only USA Sec of State offered him,with some caveats, even that isn't gospel truth. Tharoor writes that those who have seen swear blah blah blah...nothing concrete. Assuming such an offer was made, what about the other 4? Knowing the politics of that era if USA wanted deep friendship with a country, Stalin's USSR would definitely oppose it as would China (represented in UN then by modern day Taiwan). Veto is such a power, there's a reason no new country has joined the permanent council all these years, not even economic and military/tech heavyweights like Japan, Germany, South Korea...all 3 have high credibility internationally. Tomorrow Trump may offer Modi a UNSC seat in exchange for something or certain T&C but will the Indian PM blindly follow him? China can't declare Masood Azhar a terrorist despite mountains of evidence, do you think they will ever support India's bid?  

 

Taiwan was representing whole of China then. After the Chinese civil war, Communists under Mao took over mainland China (PRC) while Kuomintang fled to Taiwan forming Republic of China (ROC). Since the Kuomintang were already holding the UNSC permanent seat from 1945 they continued to hold it. PRC said it represented whole of China, KMT said the same...in fact after even today Taiwan claims Aksai Chin and Arunachal as part of its territory. So China in some form always had the permanent seat, only question was who represented it, PRC or ROC. It seems PRC got the mantle in 1971, (7 years after Nehrus' death, so the question of his involvement doesn't even arise !!!) when the world decided that PRC was the sole legal China. USSR supported them because they were fellow communists, USA under the bastards Nixon-Kissinger supported to relax trade restrictions but mainly to get an honorable retreat from the disastrous Vietnam war. 

 

The question of India getting permanent seat from Taiwan doesn't even arise. It was a China matter, the only question was which China. It is like assuming that USSR's permanent UN seat after 1991 dissolution was up for grabs and India, Japan or Germany would get an offer. Woh sab log kya pagal hai kya? Obviously it would stay with one of the Soviet countries. Since Russia was the dominant and historical power it got the privilege, had Ukraine or Georgia been comparable powers it would have been interesting. But hypothetically had Reagan made a phone call to PVNR offering USSR's seat to India and had he said yes, the USSR units would have come together aur woh India aa jaate hamari g@nd maarne. Max PVNR could have said was give it to Ukraine, or Georgia...but Russia was the big daddy and no one could seriously say anything except Moscow. Anyway that wouldn't have mattered because hamari koi aukaat nahi thi us samay. 

 

If I could conclude in a couple of sentences India was never in reckoning to get a permanent seat in UNSC. Everything was already set in stone before our independence. 

Nehru fked this country badly period. Rest are all semantics.

 

We owe a lot to LBS,PVN and Vjapayee. 

 

Just like Modi needs to act fast or else all the other semantics like marginally better than UPA etc hold no value.

 

 

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, maniac said:

Nehru fked this country badly period. Rest are all semantics.

 

We owe a lot to LBS,PVN and Vjapayee. 

 

Just like Modi needs to act fast or else all the other semantics like marginally better than UPA etc hold no value.

 

 

Did you read my post, took me 30+ minutes to write it :whack:. At least do you agree that he isn't responsible for the UNSC seat? Have I at least convinced 1 person on the planet about the India-UNSC myth? I wasn't talking about Nehru's overall career as PM, just addressed the one point. 

Edited by Gollum
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Did you read my post, took me 30+ minutes to write it :whack:. At least do you agree that he isn't responsible for the UNSC seat? Have I at least convinced 1 person on the planet about the India-UNSC myth? I wasn't talking about Nehru's overall career as PM, just addressed the one point. 

I read your previous post about “discussion” about Nehru being boring and accepted it.

 

Your one line had a more profound impact than a 30 minute surely well articulated thesis. That’s a compliment

 

Ab saat saat bolo “fk Nehru”

Edited by maniac
Posted
2 minutes ago, maniac said:

I read your previous post about “discussion” about Nehru being boring and accepted it.

 

Your one line had a more profound impact than a 30 minute surely well articulated thesis. That’s a compliment

 

Ab saat saat bolo “fk Nehru”

Saath saath not saat saat

 

You southies add a h when not required and don't add when it's required  :facepalm:

×
×
  • Create New...