vroomfondel Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Am dumbstruck. I probably know more padosis than you do' date=' Vroom, living as I do in cosmopolitan UK, and I can tell you we are very, very different. I can't be bothered to write a thesis here, but you seriously need to mull this over. I realise the requirement to be objective, be kind, avoid being pejorative and rise above prejudice, but you couldn't reinvent this stuff.[/quote'] see above. If I am not wrong, I think the differences in our views could be semantic. I know plenty of pleasant padosis, and a few nutters -- but as the saying goes, "data is not a collection of anecdotes".
suraj Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 ^ yeah, i agree. but everything you said above has to do with islam, or the ideology of pakistan, or their leaders. I am saying we are fundamentally the same people, and we were fortunate to have people with foresight and an inclusive ideology. therefore, our weakness (diversity) is our strength, and their strength (homogeneity) is killing them. saying that failed state = failed citizens, is almost like saying biharis and UP-ites are failed citizens compared to Punjabis. I'm sure there are people that actually believe this. It dehumanizes people to the point where you can't stand the sight of them (which is mistaken for a sign of strength, or taking a hard stand -- but it's neither). all the more reason that Kashmir should stay in India for humanity's sake
cochise Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 yeah, i agree. but everything you said above has to do with islam, or the ideology of pakistan, or their leaders. I am saying we are fundamentally the same people, and we were fortunate to have people with foresight and an inclusive ideology. therefore, our weakness (diversity) is our strength, and their strength (homogeneity) is killing them. Fundamentally, all of humanity is the same. It is only our intent and our actions that sets us apart and this may be formed due to a myriad of factors. I evaluate the Pakistani state as a failed state based on the historical record of it's actions and the intent of it's actions. And it's current state is a direct product of those actions and is bordering on failure. As far as the Pakistani people go, it would be harsh to generalise the case from government to the average person. However, one point is salient and valid. The Pakistanis citizens have certainly failed to create, maintain or sustain a viable state with a semblance of law and order and justice for it's inhabitants. A state that lives in peace and constructively with it's neighbours. A state which contributes positively on the global stage....all this they have failed to do. Pointing this out is plain honesty and is perhaps the best thing one can do for a Pakistani. Flattering them with lies only perpetuates their failure even further. They must first acknowledge what their failures are, only then can they proceed to rectify them. On this course of action, I can wish them all the very best.
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Btw, I see a lot of self-congratulation around. You know, the "look at us, woh kahaan hum kahaan", but all that is unfounded. If (or when ) Pakistan splits up or goes haywire, India and Afghanistan will be the only two countries that will pay the immediate cost. It is a huge strategic failure on India's part to let this happen. Spot on! There is definitely a show of one-upmanship going around amongst Indians. There is a distinct difference between the world's sentiments at large and those displayed by many Indians right now. This is partly understandable as no other country has suffered at the hands of Pakistan but at the same time it will also drive International opinion against India. A defunct Pakistan will essentially take down India with it. To what an extent it will happen remains an open question but it is prudent to remember how Kashmir essentially blew up - Soviet Union reign in Afganistan collpased and the mujahideen trained their guns on Kashmir. If Pakistan blows up where exactly will these mujahideens turn their guns next to?? Is that even a question? Not to mention an unstable Pakistan will ensure Army shall come to power and guess what their position is on India. xxx
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Cliche. South Korea , West Germany and the Republic of Ireland have lived with turbulence at their borders for decades and remain (or remained) stable and relatively untouched. You are smart enough to realize there is no comparison between India Pakistan vis a vis Germany/Ireland etc etc. As a child growing in 80s I am sure you remember a couple of things about Indo-Pak relations: a) Even at the worst of time Indian cricket magazines would keep compiling a list of the Best Indo-Pak XI. b) Even at the best of time Indian political magazines would compile a list of Indian Defence capabilities vis a vis Pakistan. I can distinctly remember how India Todays, Dharamyugs, Saptahik Hindustans would compile India having 1200 T-72s and Pakistan 400 Patton tanks etc etc. Point being no two country have the same relation/history as India Pakistan does. The examples I have given above was at a time when terrorism was largely absent and the fight between the two countries was limited to United Nations Security Council. How do you compare this with Germany?? Were Beider Meinhoff gang thinking on Spain, France or any other country? Was IRA thinking of taking down Portugal with them. Obviously not. The only relevant example perhaps is North Korea vs South Korea. Then again the only thing North Koreans did was to embark on Arm Race. The South Asian geo-polity is unique and it should be treated that way. xxx
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Am dumbstruck. I probably know more padosis than you do' date= Vroom, living as I do in cosmopolitan UK, and I can tell you we are very, very different. I can't be bothered to write a thesis here, but you seriously need to mull this over. I realise the requirement to be objective, be kind, avoid being pejorative and rise above prejudice, but you couldn't reinvent this stuff. I will like the British residents to shade more light on this. As far as I am concerned I beleive British Pakistanis are the worst of Pakistani expatriate lot and it would be extremely dangerous to base ones opinion on them. In fact even ordinary Pakistanis wont touch British Pakistanis if the tag of "phoren" was removed. British Pakistanis suffer from the following: a) The bulk of them are comprised from one part of Pakistan which is very orthodox. b) The bulk of them are comprised of people who moved to UK for low end jobs. c) The bulk of them are influenced by the West African, Middle Eastern wahabi school of thought. This is a legacy of European countries policy of "We dont care so long as you dont anything on our soil". Extremist elements ranging from Algeria to Egypt have made London their home right from the days of Margaret Thatcher and since British authorities didnt clamp them on time for their own interest, these have spawned people who now have world Security at ransome. xxx
triam Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Spot on! There is definitely a show of one-upmanship going around amongst Indians. There is a distinct difference between the world's sentiments at large and those displayed by many Indians right now. This is partly understandable as no other country has suffered at the hands of Pakistan but at the same time it will also drive International opinion against India. A defunct Pakistan will essentially take down India with it. To what an extent it will happen remains an open question but it is prudent to remember how Kashmir essentially blew up - Soviet Union reign in Afganistan collpased and the mujahideen trained their guns on Kashmir. If Pakistan blows up where exactly will these mujahideens turn their guns next to?? Is that even a question? Not to mention an unstable Pakistan will ensure Army shall come to power and guess what their position is on India. xxx You got the reason spot on there Lurker. No one has suffered as much as India did, worse yet, there was no empathy by and large to the Indian condition from the West. So you have to cut the Indian public some major slack, although that should not extent to the Indian Politicaldom, they should be more suave and more diplomatic in handling this, so that the western sympathy and empathy falls on the Indian plight.
Dhondy Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Lurker, I feel that you and Vroom have been intellectually dishonest on this issue. I simply don't feel like debating you.
suraj Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Lurker' date= I feel that you and Vroom have been intellectually dishonest on this issue. I simply don't feel like debating you. You have seen the light that I saw a couple months ago!!!
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Lurker' date=' I feel that you and Vroom have been intellectually dishonest on this issue. I simply don't feel like debating you.[/quote'] Fair enough.
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 You got the reason spot on there Lurker. No one has suffered as much as India did' date= worse yet, there was no empathy by and large to the Indian condition from the West. So you have to cut the Indian public some major slack, although that should not extent to the Indian Politicaldom, they should be more suave and more diplomatic in handling this, so that the western sympathy and empathy falls on the Indian plight. Thats very diabolical now isnt it Triam. Instead of raising the question about West, which is indeed a relevant one if I may add, we are completing dismissing that angle and training all our guns towards Pakistan. Yes Pakistan has its faults but the behaviour of many Indians at this tragedy is nothing but stupid. For example. Many Indian posters are currently saying - The chicken has come home to roost. Now would you expect the same Indians to same the exact same line to an ordinary American after 911?? Course not. They would be kicked in their face and sent packing home with their H1B striked out. It is fairly easy to agree that 911 happened because of US policies. So well chicken did come home to roost back then, doesn't it? Further your point about West, oddly enough the worst Pakistan critics are also those who happen to reside in US/UK and spew venom. I dare say I am one of those who have been more criticial of Western hypocracy than many others who simply have jumped on hate bandwagon. xxx
King Tendulkar Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 The chicken has come home to roost. Now would you expect the same Indians to same the exact same line to an ordinary American after 911?? Course not. They would be kicked in their face and sent packing home with their H1B striked out. It is fairly easy to agree that 911 happened because of US policies. So well chicken did come home to roost back then, doesn't it? The chickens have come to roost. You are just being dishonest in not seeing this. Pak allowed, funded and frankly created jihadi terrorists on their sole. These same terrorists have hit them as well. USA have done no such thing. Quite frankly lurker has lost in his defence of his pak brothers
King Tendulkar Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Lurker needs to read the story of Frankestein
punjabi_khota Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Spot on! There is definitely a show of one-upmanship going around amongst Indians. There is a distinct difference between the world's sentiments at large and those displayed by many Indians right now. This is partly understandable as no other country has suffered at the hands of Pakistan but at the same time it will also drive International opinion against India. A defunct Pakistan will essentially take down India with it. To what an extent it will happen remains an open question but it is prudent to remember how Kashmir essentially blew up - Soviet Union reign in Afganistan collpased and the mujahideen trained their guns on Kashmir. If Pakistan blows up where exactly will these mujahideens turn their guns next to?? Is that even a question? Not to mention an unstable Pakistan will ensure Army shall come to power and guess what their position is on India. xxx I think your theory of'stable Pakistan is good for India' is full of fail. Pakistan doesn't need to blow for India to suffer. We have been suffering for too long, and IT SIMPLY DOESN'T matter what state Pakistan is in, they will always be looking to bleed India. In that sense, a weaker Pakistan is what we can hope for. It is either their Mujahideen ****ers or the politicians, and mostly both hand in hand that look for hurting India. You are saying Kashmir happened because Mujahideen had no where to go. But why did Kargil happen ? That period of time was relatively peaceful, wasn't it ? Their weak leaders have India in mind, all the time, since they are not capable fo actually pushing a peaceful developmental agenda. The point is, they are always going to hurt us, and they have enough of madmen to do the job. Our best bet is to see it dismantle, and tighten our borders and security. yyyyy
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 It is either their Mujahideen ****ers or the politicians, and mostly both hand in hand that look for hurting India. You are saying Kashmir happened because Mujahideen had no where to go. But why did Kargil happen ? That period of time was relatively peaceful, wasn't it ? Their weak leaders have India in mind, all the time, since they are not capable fo actually pushing a peaceful developmental agenda. Who said the time period before or during Kargil was peaceful?? Kargil happened in the matter of months, or maybe a year or two , of the two nation testing out Nuclear weapon. Indeed the reason why the West got "sympathetic" towards Indian casue during Kargil was due to the Nuclea Blackmail by Pakistan Armed Forces. The fear of Nuclear war was very real and anyone who has some rememberance of that will tell you that. The point is, they are always going to hurt us, and they have enough of madmen to do the job. Our best bet is to see it dismantle, and tighten our borders and security. That logic is wrong on so many fronts. But for argument sake can you tell me of the time in your living memory when Pakistan was "weak" and it worked extremely well for India? xx
punjabi_khota Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Who said the time period before or during Kargil was peaceful?? Kargil happened in the matter of months, or maybe a year or two , of the two nation testing out Nuclear weapon. Indeed the reason why the West got "sympathetic" towards Indian casue during Kargil was due to the Nuclea Blackmail by Pakistan Armed Forces. The fear of Nuclear war was very real and anyone who has some rememberance of that will tell you that. That logic is wrong on so many fronts. But for argument sake can you tell me of the time in your living memory when Pakistan was "weak" and it worked extremely well for India? xx Did Vajpayee not visit Pakistan a few months earlier ? When did such a visit happen by a Indian PM before ? If those ****ers can go from bhai-chara to taking Indian posts in Kargil in a matter of 5 months, why do we ever give them a benefit of doubt ? Talking about weak Pakistan, it is weak RIGHT NOW. The immediate period after 9/11, the fidayeen attacks and Pakistan government support towards decreased considerably. The reason we have had attacks like Mumbai is because of our own incompetencies. The coast gaurd/navy goofed in big way, even in the presence of quite a lot of information. Most attacks from foriegners could have been prevented, and obviously, the ones done by home grown jihadis can definitely be stopped if we cut off their supply chains, and stop being PC in our country by playing to the bearded and burqad gallery. And the logic you talk about is even more wrong, because it totally ignores the mentality of people who have been governing Pakistan for ever. Plus it has never been stable, so I don't know what you are smoking to think it ever will be, since it has been only going downhill with the amount of radicalization going on there.
Lurker Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Did Vajpayee not visit Pakistan a few months earlier ? When did such a visit happen by a Indian PM before ? And that proves what?? If visiting dignitory was the barometer then even Musharraf visited India. Am I to assume he was a great friend of India?? During Kargil fiasco Western interests turned towards South Asia simply because of Nuclear warheads else no-one would give a damn about who visited whom. If those ****ers can go from bhai-chara to taking Indian posts in Kargil in a matter of 5 months, why do we ever give them a benefit of doubt ? Thats ridiculous. Kargil debacle was two pronged. On its side Pakistan was wrong, on our side we were wrong to be caught with our pants down. Just who here is suggesting to keep our pants down?? Talking about weak Pakistan, it is weak RIGHT NOW. The immediate period after 9/11, the fidayeen attacks and Pakistan government support towards decreased considerably. And what exactly has been the situation vis a vis India RIGHT NOW? A total sense of mistrust, a dwindling country that comes together only at the sight of India. You seriously think the worse it gets for Pakistan, the better is it for India? How? The reason we have had attacks like Mumbai is because of our own incompetencies. The coast gaurd/navy goofed in big way, even in the presence of quite a lot of information. Most attacks from foriegners could have been prevented, and obviously, the ones done by home grown jihadis can definitely be stopped if we cut off their supply chains. NO different than Kargil then. So whats your point? xxx
punjabi_khota Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 And what exactly has been the situation vis a vis India RIGHT NOW? A total sense of mistrust, a dwindling country that comes together only at the sight of India. You seriously think the worse it gets for Pakistan, the better is it for India? How? Why do we HAVE to have a sense of trust ? We don't want anything to do with them, and we should in no way be friendly with them. They don't deserve any sympathy at all. Pakistan has always come together at the sight of India and it always will. You can't change that. What you can do is make them harder to come together by letting them fight among themselves and blowing their own **** up. NO different than Kargil then. So whats your point? xxx My point is simple. As big as Mumbai was, it was no Kargil. Because of the deep **** that Pakistan currently is in, there is no way it can handle another misadventure like Kargil. If a big chunk of its resources are spent fighting fires inside the country, and at the western border, that can only mean it has less of them to fight India. We need a weaker pakistan, and home grown jehadis under check to have peace.
triam Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 Thats very diabolical now isnt it Triam. Instead of raising the question about West, which is indeed a relevant one if I may add, we are completing dismissing that angle and training all our guns towards Pakistan. Yes Pakistan has its faults but the behaviour of many Indians at this tragedy is nothing but stupid. For example. Many Indian posters are currently saying - The chicken has come home to roost. Now would you expect the same Indians to same the exact same line to an ordinary American after 911?? Course not. They would be kicked in their face and sent packing home with their H1B striked out. It is fairly easy to agree that 911 happened because of US policies. So well chicken did come home to roost back then, doesn't it? Further your point about West, oddly enough the worst Pakistan critics are also those who happen to reside in US/UK and spew venom. I dare say I am one of those who have been more criticial of Western hypocracy than many others who simply have jumped on hate bandwagon. xxx Most Indians do not know the history where the US funded and trained alqaeda etc, so they probably would not say that. The difference between US against the middle east and Pakistan vs India, is that US almost always kept these things at a strategic level, meaning what ever they did was according to them to keep USSR in check, where as in India vs Pak it is idelogical (mainly religious) so religion being a more passionate object people are more emotional. There were a lot of people especially Indians in the US and abroad who were relieved, not because of the human life loss or the economic loss but more because atlast US realizes the monster that India complains about so often and I am sure a lot of people would have the same thing online (anonymously) if message boards and blogs are as common as now.
Recommended Posts