Narendra Modi diagnosed with swine flu

[The Outsider]

Guess what our fellow indians only like corrupt politicians. Oh well in that case we deserve to be where we are.

It's good that "fellow Indians" like corrupt politicians over genocidal maniacs - perhaps that has prevented India from becoming Pakistan.

[yoda]

Huh......He was in the power already before Godhra happened. Even before him BJP was in power under Keshubhai Patel. So I don't understand yoru point. and if you think people elect him because of riots, man I have never seen this intelligent view point ever. I just want to laugh really. And if you think in riots only muslims suffered you must crazy. because my cousin's shop was burned down too and guess what BJP gov. did not give him any financial help to rebuild his shop. You can hate him, but guy is able administrator. The guy who has singlehandedly removed Patel Raj from Gujarat. He is honest, no corruption behind him. Guess what our fellow indians only like corrupt politicians. Oh well in that case we deserve to be where we are.

I have read some pretty nasty quotes attributed to him. Not sure how much of it to believe. But if they are true, I can see why people would find this guy unacceptable in a secular country like ours. An example is here: http://hindumuslimindia.blogspot.com/2006/09/mr-narendra-modi-in-his-own-words.html

[kabira]

It's good that "fellow Indians" like corrupt politicians over genocidal maniacs - perhaps that has prevented India from becoming Pakistan.

define genocide for me please?

[nikred]

define genocide for me please?

Ans) Systematic killing of a racial or cultural group.

[The Outsider]

define genocide for me please?

We shouldn't be having a discussion if you don't know what genocide means.

[Ram]

I don’t know how Kabira could convince his conscious to defend a mass-murderer who watched silently as thousands burned in riots for petty electoral gains. The issue isn’t whether Modi is a good, clean administrator who has done a lot of good for the people of Gujrat (Muslims included). Every time someone brings up Modi’s genocidal past, Kabira always brings up this point. It’s a classic case of ‘The end justifies the means’ argument that supporters of extreme elements put forward. We have been through this a million times before so I don’t want keep flogging a dead horse, but I am honestly surprised by Kabira’s almost turning a total blind-eye to the Godhra riots (in which both Hindu and Muslim lives were lost) and the implicit role Modi played in it. And just because the electorate of Gujrat voted him back to power does not give him a clean chit. The Americans voted in Bush, the biggest mass murderer in the planet for the last 60 years, for a second term in 2004. Does that absolve him of all blame? I’d like to know what Kabira thinks of Bush and his legacy.

[Ram]

I suppose its no big surprise that right-wingers (And I am going to exclude Kabira from this, coz he sounds an evidently decent and humane person who just wishes well for the state of Gujrat) turn a total blind eye to the genocidal past of their leaders. An excerpt from a post made by Seedhi, one of the more ardent right-wingers here is staggeringly revealing;

With the Taliban ruling over pakistan' date=' that country would be left without nukes (USA would remove them) and possibly an airforce or a proper army. [b']India would be able to bomb away with impunity in pakistan without any international pressure or retaliation. Right now the paki nukes and weapons along with international pressure have tied our hands. There wont be any such restraints against the Taliban.

I am yet to fathom what he means by ‘bomb away with impunity’. For eff’s sake, there are real people living out there, people like you and me, like your mum and father, your sister and brother. And yet, we just bomb them all as though they are some insignificant beings? That is the kind of utter disregard right-wingers (and their evangelical counterparts in the US and those brainwashed Islamic specimens) have for the lives of people whom they consider their enemy. If people like this got into power, we’d all be nuclear dust and residue in a matter of minutes, absolutely destroying years of civilization and human progress, all for blind ideology.

[seedhi]

I suppose its no big surprise that right-wingers (And I am going to exclude Kabira from this, coz he sounds an evidently decent and humane person who just wishes well for the state of Gujrat) turn a total blind eye to the genocidal past of their leaders. An excerpt from a post made by Seedhi, one of the more ardent right-wingers here is staggeringly revealing;

With the Taliban ruling over pakistan, that country would be left without nukes (USA would remove them) and possibly an airforce or a proper army. India would be able to bomb away with impunity in pakistan without any international pressure or retaliation. Right now the paki nukes and weapons along with international pressure have tied our hands. There wont be any such restraints against the Taliban.

I am yet to fathom what he means by ‘bomb away with impunity’. For eff’s sake, there are real people living out there, people like you and me, like your mum and father, your sister and brother. And yet, we just bomb them all as though they are some insignificant beings? That is the kind of utter disregard right-wingers (and their evangelical counterparts in the US and those brainwashed Islamic specimens) have for the lives of people whom they consider their enemy. If people like this got into power, we’d all be nuclear dust and residue in a matter of minutes, absolutely destroying years of civilization and human progress, all for blind ideology.

Way to go, quoting my post out of context. I was talking of bombing Pakistan in retaliation of terrorist strikes in or aggression against India. In the aftermath of 26/11, the reason India could not strike Pakistan was the possession of nukes by the pakistanis and the international pressure, both of which would be missing if the Taliban take over pakistan. The world would not interfere in us using our airforce against the terrorists in pakistan.

[Ram]

Way to go' date=' quoting my post out of context. [b']I was talking of bombing Pakistan in retaliation of terrorist strikes in or aggression against India.

O rly? Oh, here you go, this is your complete post;

This is the height of naivete. The reason that Musharraf was forced to tighten the tap of terrorism is not western pressure. It was because the Kashmiri militants like Jaish and other Punjabi based ones were turning rogue. And they did so because their mates the Taliban were betrayed by the pakistani establishment. So there is a direct correlation between the turmoil in pakistan and decrease in terrorism in Kashmir. Even the pakistanis are saying this. Currently the situation is that all the terrorist graduates of punjabi madarsas have joined their mates - the TTP. Otherwise they would have headed towards Kashmir. Tomorrow if the situation stabilizes in pakistan all these jehadis would once again be turned towards India. With the Taliban ruling over pakistan, that country would be left without nukes (USA would remove them) and possibly an airforce or a proper army. India would be able to bomb away with impunity in pakistan without any international pressure or retaliation. Right now the paki nukes and weapons along with international pressure have tied our hands. There wont be any such restraints against the Taliban.

Now, what part of that post even remotely suggests anything close to 'retaliation of terrorist strikes in or aggression against India'. All you were exhibiting was a shocking streak of opportunism were you were hoping that, somehow, rather bizarrely, the world will strip Pakistan of its nuclear weapons and we can just go in and browbeat them from the air. Leave aside the absolute fallacy of logic shown in your thinking (no one is going strip Pakistan of itself of the nuclear weapons, EVER. You think a sovereign nation of 140 million will allow outsiders to just come in and strip them of their most value strategic deterrent?), what left me almost open-mouthed was the casual air with which you said ‘Oh, lets go bomb them all..’.. Of course, you then moderate your own opinion adding different caveats like ‘since it’s the taliban that’s ruling them, we can bomb them without international pressure’, as though the world will watch silently as a big proportion of humanity comes under attack in one hell of an important region (south asia) in the world. I have seen some extreme cases of wishful thinking in my time here, but I have to say your assertions take the cake by a light year. You seem so clueless and oblivious to the prevailing geopolitical realities, it almost unbelievable.

The world would not interfere in us using our airforce against the terrorists in pakistan.

Oh absolutely. All the taliban will conveniently gather in particular region of the country and hold placards saying ‘Come on IAF, Bomb us! Bomb us!’, while the civilians will be able lead their normal lives in other parts right? :haha:

[seedhi]

O rly? Oh, here you go, this is your complete post;

Hey man, enough of your distortions. Let me post my full post along with the part that I was responding to Here we go, this post number 101 in the other thread, in which I am responding to the part in italics:

Obviously, the rise of extremism and the Taliban in Waziristan and the other FATA areas does have role in keeping the Pakistani military occupied to the extent to which they now don’t have the time, resources and bandwidth to actively arm, train and foster Kashmiri insurgents. But, to make a swooping statement like ‘Violence in Kashmir is down because Taliban is taking control’ is so naïve on two fronts; 1) After 9/11, when Afghanistan became the frontier on the War on Terror, the US and its allies chose Pakistan as some sort of base from which operations into Pakistan were launched. Consequently, on one side, the Pakistani establishment and military got billions of dollars worth of aid. On the other side, investigations into the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent 7/7 London bombings and the Spain bombings revealed that a significant portions of these attacks were planned by extremist elements in Pakistan, with both the covert and overt support from ISI and other Pakistani institutional elements. This very same people were also actively promoting Jihad in Kashmir. And this is when the Western allies told Pakistan that they cannot claim to be a frontline ally on the war on terror on their western front in Afghanistan and then actively support insurgency in Indian Kashmir. This categorical assertion by leaders from the west was what forced Pervez Musharraf to give the landmark speech that he gave in 2002, in which, for the first time, Pakistan openly declared that it will not promote violence or extremism. So, Pakistan had to tone down its activities in Indian Kashmir not because they wanted to, but because they were forced to, partly by their preoccupation on the Western front, but mostly due to pressure from Western governments.

This is the height of naivete. The reason that Musharraf was forced to tighten the tap of terrorism is not western pressure. It was because the Kashmiri militants like Jaish and other Punjabi based ones were turning rogue. And they did so because their mates the Taliban were betrayed by the pakistani establishment. So there is a direct correlation between the turmoil in pakistan and decrease in terrorism in Kashmir. Even the pakistanis are saying this. Currently the situation is that all the terrorist graduates of punjabi madarsas have joined their mates - the TTP. Otherwise they would have headed towards Kashmir. Tomorrow if the situation stabilizes in pakistan all these jehadis would once again be turned towards India.

2) In your assertion' date=' you speak as though the rise of Taliban in Pakistan is a good thing, which is sort of incredulous. Can you even imagine what would happen if the entire Pakistani nation of 140 million were to be under the control of radicalized elements? Assuming they do manage to take control of Pakistan, do you know where they’re going to set their next sights on? Of course, it’d be Kashmir. So, rather than having to deal with some rogue elements within the current Pakistani establishment promoting Jihad in Kashmir, if the Taliban takes over Pakistan, we will now have an entire army of extremists gunning for Kashmir. Do you think that’s a good thing? For now, at least the Indian govt. can hope to negotiate and put pressure on the Pakistani govt. If that country is taken over by extremists, who will we talk to? The terrorists? And you know what they will say…? - ‘Eff you!’

With the Taliban ruling over pakistan, that country would be left without nukes (USA would remove them) and possibly an airforce or a proper army. India would be able to bomb away with impunity in pakistan without any international pressure or retaliation. Right now the paki nukes and weapons along with international pressure have tied our hands. There wont be any such restraints against the Taliban.

As you can see, I was responding to your fear that the Taliban would mount an insurgency attack on Kashmir and we would have a tough time about it. To which I responded that we will actually be able to use our full military power against the Taliban without any fear of nukes or international opposition. Please dont distort my posts, and if you want to post them, also post the part that I was responding to.

[Ram]

Hey man' date=' enough of your distortions. Let me post my full post [b']along with the part that I was responding to Here we go, this post number 101 in the other thread, in which I am responding to the part in italics: As you can see, I was responding to your fear that the Taliban would mount an insurgency attack on Kashmir and we would have a tough time about it. To which I responded that we will actually be able to use our full military power against the Taliban without any fear of nukes or international opposition. Please dont distort my posts, and if you want to post them, also post the part that I was responding to.

I have not distorted anything. I have quoted specific parts of your own arguments where you have shown a dangerous combination of total ignorance of geopolitical realities and utter disregard for the cost of human casualties in a war and I challenge you to show otherwise.

[seedhi]

I have not distorted anything. I have quoted specific parts of your own arguments where you have shown a dangerous combination of total ignorance of geopolitical realities and utter disregard for the cost of human casualties in a war.

You claimed that my contention about bombing pakistan was not about retaliating to a terrorist attack, which is simply not true. You wrote, regarding my post # 101 in the other thread:

Now, what part of that post even remotely suggests anything close to 'retaliation of terrorist strikes in or aggression against India'.

which is completely a distortion since you ignored the specific scenario of Taliban targetting Kashmir that I was responding to. Let me repeat: I was replying to your post about Taliban attacking Kashmir when I wrote that India could then bomb targets pakistan in retaliation without any fear of nukes or international pressure.

[Ram]

You claimed that my contention about bombing pakistan was not about retaliating to a terrorist attack, which is simply not true. You wrote, regarding my post # 101 in the other thread: which is completely a distortion since you ignored the specific scenario of Taliban targetting Kashmir that I was responding to. Let me repeat: I was replying to your post about Taliban attacking Kashmir when I wrote that India could then bomb targets pakistan in retaliation without any fear of nukes or international pressure.

Sure, you were responding to my point how the rise of the Taliban was bad for India since they will then train their guns on India (specifically Kashmir). But that still does not in ANY way dilute the essence of your argument which can be roughly characterized by these two statements, both of which are dangerously delusional a) The world powers (specifically the US), will somehow strip Pakistan of its nuclear weapons. I have repeatedly challenged that assertion of yours and till now, all I have got in response from you is stoic silence. b) If there a be a situation where the Taliban takes control of Pakistan (again how do you expect a rag-tag group of tribal warlords to overthrow one of the largest militaries in the world?) and if the Taliban pose a threat to us, we can go inside Pakistan and attack them without impunity without fear of world condemnation (which is again false) and a nuclear response. I only said if you came to power, you’d attack a Pakistan, stripped of nuclear weapons, with the Taliban at the helm, without mercy. I never said you would do it without provocation. So, insofar as I can see, there’s no distortion of your points whatsoever. But I need you to give specific answers to these question because they really lie at the heart of this entire debate; 1) How do you expect a group of war-lords and their followers, held together by tribal and ethnic loyalties to overthrow a military of over a million soldiers and some of the most sophisticated weaponry in the world 2) How do you also expect any power in the world, to go inside Pakistan and totally strip it of its nuclear capabilities, knowing that a nation of 140 million will never give up its single most strategic defence deterrent?

[seedhi]

But I need you to give specific answers to these question because they really lie at the heart of this entire debate; 1) How do you expect a group of war-lords and their followers, held together by tribal and ethnic loyalties to overthrow a military of over a million soldiers and some of the most sophisticated weaponry in the world

That is my hope. I have never said that it is highly likely event. The assumption that this event takes place is the basis of my posts about its mechanism and consequences. I have said that if it does happen, it will probably be through a torturous civil war which will render pakistan impotent anyway. Be that as it may, I can still imagine some scenarios that could lead to it. One is that the pakistani army gets weary and bogged down, maybe a lot of soldiers desert it. There is a reason why the pakistani army has hesitated in going completely after the groups. A significant portion of the military might revolt and a civil war ensues after which the Taliban emerges victorious - it is possible.

2) How do you also expect any power in the world, to go inside Pakistan and totally strip it of its nuclear capabilities, knowing that a nation of 140 million will never give up its single most strategic defence deterrent?

My contention is that US and the rest of the world will never allow pakistani nukes to fall to the Taliban. They probably already have a contingency plan. As for the population of pakistan - they wont even know when the nukes are gone, its not as if the US will knock on the doors of every pakistani asking for nukes stored in their houses.

[kabira]

I don’t know how Kabira could convince his conscious to defend a mass-murderer who watched silently as thousands burned in riots for petty electoral gains. The issue isn’t whether Modi is a good, clean administrator who has done a lot of good for the people of Gujrat (Muslims included). Every time someone brings up Modi’s genocidal past, Kabira always brings up this point. It’s a classic case of ‘The end justifies the means’ argument that supporters of extreme elements put forward. We have been through this a million times before so I don’t want keep flogging a dead horse, but I am honestly surprised by Kabira’s almost turning a total blind-eye to the Godhra riots (in which both Hindu and Muslim lives were lost) and the implicit role Modi played in it. And just because the electorate of Gujrat voted him back to power does not give him a clean chit. The Americans voted in Bush, the biggest mass murderer in the planet for the last 60 years, for a second term in 2004. Does that absolve him of all blame? I’d like to know what Kabira thinks of Bush and his legacy.

sorry, but where does it say that he did play role is riots?? So far Congress has tried hard to prove that, but they have failed it. To be honest with you, I am sick and tired of your posts as well. You keep referring him mass murderer without knowing the history of Gujarat and its riot history. Do you knwo how riots take place? Have you ever witnessed it?? I have and I know how it all starts. Let me tell you this, if Godhra happens again, Modi or No Modi, BJP or Congress, there will be riots in Gujarat.

[kabira]

We shouldn't be having a discussion if you don't know what genocide means.

I know the meaning, I don't think you do else you would not bring such a heavy word in this discussion.

[kabira]

btw I asked my knowledgeble friends like Marirs and outsider, how many policemen died in stopping riots? Any idea??

[Lurker]

btw I asked my knowledgeble friends like Marirs and outsider, how many policemen died in stopping riots? Any idea??

I know no-one died from swine flu :giggle:

[kabira]

^wrong man, few have died of swine flu

[Lurker]

^wrong man' date=' few have died of swine flu[/quote'] In Gujrat? :((