BeautifulGame Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 ^^ How about you take that morality to Saudi Arabia' date=' i'm sure it will win you billions of barrels of the petroleum that powers your car.[/quote'] When exactly did Saudi Arabia commited genocides.Are u really comparing social rights and genocides?
Clarke Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 When exactly did Saudi Arabia commited genocides.Are u really comparing social rights and genocides? Brought it up since you talk of moral conscience. BTW how do you get to decide that a 'genocide' was what happened in Lanka before the investigation even begins ? Killings yes, its a war zone. Massacres, maybe. Genocide already ? I don't see you guys shouting hoarse over actual genocides like Darfur or many other places across the globe where it might have happened such as Syria currently, Iraq before/after Saddam & Iran in general. Our abstaining on the Libya vote was not an issue but when it comes to even thinking about SL (Tamils involved), OMG moral conscience is lost!!! Frankly none of our business? Like when it was in Bangladesh when Indra Gandhi intervened? If we had the moral right to intervene in a internal Pakistani issue on humanity grounds to stop a genocide happening then we have every right to intervene in sri lanka too. Just so you know, we had fought wars with Pakistan before 1971 and had a good strategic long term reason to intervene. The killings had been going on months before we intervened and in those months there was a lot of political & military preparation that was completed. Sri Lanka never was and simply isn't the same story. But then i'm talking from India's perspective & not a regional/communal ideology. I am not defending the double standards of any political parties here.If anything i completely agree international community should also investigate the atrocities committed by LTTE.But the main issue is just because LTTE committed atrocities doesnt give any govt the right to kill innocent people intentionally or commit genocides. Also considering we(Govt of India) are the key responsible for the growth of a terrorist organisation in LTTE we are also partly responsible for the genocide committed there.So its frankly ignorant to say its none of our business considering our political past with Srilanka. Now India shares responsibility for the genocide ? Had you been around in the 80s, you would have joined in your Tamil brethren advocating intervention in Lanka by whatever means to prevent the killings that were happening there. India thus supported LTTE but the 'moral' support was primarily from Tamil Nadu with clowns like Vaiko openly advocating support of the banned organization to this day. Even after that, we sent a peacekeeping force without much planning and lost so many of its soldiers. So the fact of the matter according to you is, we lost our soldiers fighting the LTTE & its India that's somewhat responsible for what happened in 2009 ?
jairamesh Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Good call, the whole Sri Lankan cabinet is filled with murderers. I would go as far putting fecking embargos in this sh!te hole of tear drop island. Sri Lanka get unbelievable privileges from the rest of the world due to their poverty, for example they are the only country from Asia which the EU doesn't impose quotas or tariffs on their textiles.
BeautifulGame Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 Brought it up since you talk of moral conscience. BTW how do you get to decide that a 'genocide' was what happened in Lanka before the investigation even begins ? Killings yes, its a war zone. Massacres, maybe. Genocide already ? I don't see you guys shouting hoarse over actual genocides like Darfur or many other places across the globe where it might have happened such as Syria currently, Iraq before/after Saddam & Iran in general. Our abstaining on the Libya vote was not an issue but when it comes to even thinking about SL (Tamils involved), OMG moral conscience is lost!!! There are ample proofs and reports by international organizations which states that systematic klling of unarmed tamil civilians (about nearly 40000) was carried out by Lankan army.If u choose to be ignorant of it then its no one else fault. And if the international community are not allowed to investigate it independently how exactly do we know whether genocide happened? P.S And where exactly did i said abstaining from voting against Syria was the right thing? Dont think everyone has the same opinion as u just because they dont comment in every thread or every issue. Just so you know, we had fought wars with Pakistan before 1971 and had a good strategic long term reason to intervene. The killings had been going on months before we intervened and in those months there was a lot of political & military preparation that was completed. If that was the case we would have intervened way before because there was uprisings alomost every month in Bangladesh ever since they became east pakistan.But we intervened only after we came to know there were concrete proofs that there were systematic killings of Bangladeshis. And again this is not about whether its strategically good or not.Neither is this about whether we should have intervened during the war or not.It was comment about India not intervening other country's internal politics.bangladesh was just a well known example.India also intervened in Egypt Suez canel issue , Titebian issue , Congo's internal conflict and tried to intervene even in Korean war. Sri Lanka never was and simply isn't the same story. But then i'm talking from India's perspective & not a regional/communal ideology. Oh cut this crap.Not every indian shares your view of turning a blind eye when a genocide is happening in a neighbouring country.And not everyone who condemns killings of innocent people has a regional agenda. Now India shares responsibility for the genocide ? Had you been around in the 80s, you would have joined in your Tamil brethren advocating intervention in Lanka by whatever means to prevent the killings that were happening there. India thus supported LTTE but the 'moral' support was primarily from Tamil Nadu with clowns like Vaiko openly advocating support of the banned organization to this day. Even after that, we sent a peacekeeping force without much planning and lost so many of its soldiers. So the fact of the matter according to you is, we lost our soldiers fighting the LTTE & its India that's somewhat responsible for what happened in 2009 ? So much ignorance.Do u even know it was Indra Gandhi who publically supported LTTE and gave them training in forests of Tamil Nadu in late 70s and early 80s so that she can use them as a weapon in the political manuovering with Lanka.Seriously where do u think LTTE initially got their financial support? When in 70s most Tamil people wanted India to intervene in Lankan issue either we should have tried to create peace talks or military intervention.Not supporting and harboring a terrorist organization like LTTE.And supporting tamils in sri lanka doesnt mean supporting LTTE.Dont confuse the 2 things.LTTE is a terrorist organization which was rightly eliminated but that doesnt mean tamils in Lanka can be slaughtered. If Pakistan is responsible for the atrocities commited in Kashmir by the terrorists (which Pak Harbour) then we also have moral responsible for the after effects of harboring a terrorist organization like LTTE.So yes we are partially responsible for these killings that happened in Sri lanka. Ever thought why most of Singhalese in Srilanka hate India despite India being one of the few countries who banned LTTE and supported Lanka in their war against LTTE?
hari504504 Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 They have threatened us on a similar vote on Kashmir :haha:
Hell Raiser Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 What's the big issue with these lankans. Hate for India on their forum is intense. They would like to see Mumbai like attacks in India again. Pathetic.
1983-2011 Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 the complete list of countries which cast vote against and for Sri Lanka http://news.oneindia.in/2012/03/22/countries-which-vote-against-for-sri-lanka-war-crimes.html
Clarke Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 There are ample proofs and reports by international organizations which states that systematic klling of unarmed tamil civilians (about nearly 40000) was carried out by Lankan army.If u choose to be ignorant of it then its no one else fault. The UN report suggests war crimes & crimes against humanity. Genocide is a far more serious charge and its your ignorance that assumes all of the above are the same. And where exactly did i said abstaining from voting against Syria was the right thing? Dont think everyone has the same opinion as u just because they dont comment in every thread or every issue. Of course, they don't. Its not like moral consciousness comes into play in the case of Syria. If that was the case we would have intervened way before because there was uprisings alomost every month in Bangladesh ever since they became east pakistan.But we intervened only after we came to know there were concrete proofs that there were systematic killings of Bangladeshis. Yeah BULL **** Operation searchlight was started in March 1971. Major publications had published of the atrocities in the middle of 1971. We provided material/logistical support to the rebels but intervened only when our western bases were attacked. We didn't jump in to prevent a genocide, it had already happened. How two faced do you have to be to twist history so as to compare Pakistan & Sri Lanka ? Oh cut this crap.Not every indian shares your view of turning a blind eye when a genocide is happening in a neighbouring country.And not everyone who condemns killings of innocent people has a regional agenda. Err, i never said we should have strictly abstained or voted against the resolution. The problem i have is the thekedari business you have to show for tamils and bring in moral conscience as an excuse. Not every group has protests and legal efforts to save the murderers of our former PM. Other groups don't have multiple immolations to protest a foreign war. Not every troubled area in the country's neighborhood like Tibet or Myanmar, just Lanka. Yeah sure there isn't a regional agenda. So much ignorance.Do u even know it was Indra Gandhi who publically supported LTTE and gave them training in forests of Tamil Nadu in late 70s and early 80s so that she can use them as a weapon in the political manuovering with Lanka.Seriously where do u think LTTE initially got their financial support? What does that have to do with the events of 2009, in particular the 'genocide' you refer to ? Did Indira Gandhi's ghost force the Lankan army to target Lankan civilians, thus making India partially responsible for the killings in your book ? When in 70s most Tamil people wanted India to intervene in Lankan issue either we should have tried to create peace talks or military intervention.Not supporting and harboring a terrorist organization like LTTE.And supporting tamils in sri lanka doesnt mean supporting LTTE.Dont confuse the 2 things.LTTE is a terrorist organization which was rightly eliminated but that doesnt mean tamils in Lanka can be slaughtered. Hindsight ~ 20/20 vision as they say. I don't like the idea of creating/supporting/harboring a rebel army at all. But that's what we did do in Bangladesh and it worked out well. Its easy for us to sit and discuss could have-should have for decades old events. One can blame India for the creation of LTTE, there's no two directions about that. Suggesting that as a reason for the killings of 2009 is nonsense. Why do you prefer military intervention as opposed to arming rebels ? Why should Indian soldiers shed their own blood before those seeking independence ? If Pakistan is responsible for the atrocities commited in Kashmir by the terrorists (which Pak Harbour) then we also have moral responsible for the after effects of harboring a terrorist organization like LTTE.So yes we are partially responsible for these killings that happened in Sri lanka. :facepalm: We fought the LTTE in late 80s, left the Lankan territory in 1990 and banned the group in 1992. There wasn't an iota of federal support for more than two decades until they were crushed in 2009. How on earth can you compare that to Pakistan's involvement at the highest levels in Kashmir, which remains significant to this day ? Lets have the Pakistan Army crack down on LeT, JuD and umpteen other terror groups like we fought against the LTTE before you even compare the two, which even then would be baseless.
SLICKR392 Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Hasn't 25 other Nations voted against the SLankans too?
yoda Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Didn't we object when Gujjus and Gujju run govt was hijacked in Fiji a few years back? I don't see what's wrong in India voicing it's opinion in favor of people of it's origin, SL tamils did after all migrate from India. Remember, this has nothing to do with the LTTE, they are gone. We are talking ordinary tamil refugees and civilians and what the SL govt did to them during and after the war, at least that's my take.
BeautifulGame Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 The UN report suggests war crimes & crimes against humanity. Genocide is a far more serious charge and its your ignorance that assumes all of the above are the same. The estimate of those death tolls because of the war crimes decide genocide. Of course, they don't. Its not like moral consciousness comes into play in the case of Syria. WTF are u trying to say? Yeah BULL **** Operation searchlight was started in March 1971. Major publications had published of the atrocities in the middle of 1971. We provided material/logistical support to the rebels but intervened only when our western bases were attacked. We didn't jump in to prevent a genocide, it had already happened. How two faced do you have to be to twist history so as to compare Pakistan & Sri Lanka ? So we intervened in Bangladesh only because it benifited politically not because we had a chance to prevent thousands of innocent people dieing? :facepalm: Err, i never said we should have strictly abstained or voted against the resolution. The problem i have is the thekedari business you have to show for tamils and bring in moral conscience as an excuse. Not every group has protests and legal efforts to save the murderers of our former PM. Other groups don't have multiple immolations to protest a foreign war. Not every troubled area in the country's neighborhood like Tibet or Myanmar, just Lanka. Yeah sure there isn't a regional agenda. Ur problem is u cant differentiate btw LTTE and srilankan tamils. What does that have to do with the events of 2009, in particular the 'genocide' you refer to ? Did Indira Gandhi's ghost force the Lankan army to target Lankan civilians, thus making India partially responsible for the killings in your book ? Because these killings are a result of a 30 year war started by the creation of LTTE harboured by India. Hindsight ~ 20/20 vision as they say. I don't like the idea of creating/supporting/harboring a rebel army at all. But that's what we did do in Bangladesh and it worked out well. Its easy for us to sit and discuss could have-should have for decades old events. One can blame India for the creation of LTTE, there's no two directions about that. Suggesting that as a reason for the killings of 2009 is nonsense. Creation of LTTE has no impact on the Srilanka war in 2009? :facepalm: Why do you prefer military intervention as opposed to arming rebels ? Why should Indian soldiers shed their own blood before those seeking independence ? Where did i preferred a military intervention? I said military intervention is better than harboring terrorists because the later plays with the lives of innocent unarmed people.It's a coward's option like Pak is doing now. We fought the LTTE in late 80s, left the Lankan territory in 1990 and banned the group in 1992. There wasn't an iota of federal support for more than two decades until they were crushed in 2009. How on earth can you compare that to Pakistan's involvement at the highest levels in Kashmir, which remains significant to this day ? Lets have the Pakistan Army crack down on LeT, JuD and umpteen other terror groups like we fought against the LTTE before you even compare the two, which even then would be baseless. I compared the impacts of harboring a terrorist organization on the people suffering not whether we are supporting a terrorist organization now or not.
chainsmoker1985 Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 the complete list of countries which cast vote against and for Sri Lanka http://news.oneindia.in/2012/03/22/countries-which-vote-against-for-sri-lanka-war-crimes.html The type of countries names that I am seeing in this list, it'd have been difficult for US to influence most of these countries to vote in favor of US resolution... Although, I am not in favor of SL, but US I always believe is just like 'flat track bully' or 'weak countries bully'.
achilles Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Hasn't 25 other Nations voted against the SLankans too? We are SLs friends/brothers. The other nations are not. Frankly, this is going to be one of the most historic blunders of our foreign policy. The ramifications will be felt for years and China will make sure we pay for this. Didn't we object when Gujjus and Gujju run govt was hijacked in Fiji a few years back? I don't see what's wrong in India voicing it's opinion in favor of people of it's origin' date=' SL tamils did after all migrate from India. Remember, this has nothing to do with the LTTE, they are gone. We are talking ordinary tamil refugees and civilians and what the SL govt did to them during and after the war, at least that's my take.[/quote'] Objecting is one thing. Voting against a friendly country at the UN is another. What complicates this is that many nations who wish to work towards provoking SL against India, have been presented a fair chance.... by, guess who...... Indians themselves! We had frankly NO business to let regional appeasing dominate important foreign policy decision. History might not forgive your state's leaders, who somehow project terrorists to be freedom-fighters on foreign soil and people surprisingly buy it!
yoda Posted March 29, 2012 Posted March 29, 2012 We had frankly NO business to let regional appeasing dominate important foreign policy decision. History might not forgive your state's leaders, who somehow project terrorists to be freedom-fighters on foreign soil and people surprisingly buy it! The region is still part of India, so you do need to appease them as a country. Who else will you appease? People of another country? :winky: Regarding the bolded part, most people know the clear separation between plight of ordinary tamils and the LTTE. Those who sympathize with the latter mainly belong to the DMK, which is at least for now out of power.
achilles Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 The region is still part of India' date=' so you do need to appease them as a country. Who else will you appease? People of another country? :winky:[/quote'] Appease is one thing. What India has done here is beyond ridiculous :facepalm: Sometimes, I wish TN had intelligent people like you running it.
Recommended Posts