The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: Perhaps you should try passing grade 9 civics first. Sovereignty is the right that CAN BE accorded to a state. Sovereignty does not apply to individuals or people. Nahin sir. Saare grades aap hi pass kar lo. Saanu ki karna! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeautifulGame Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 When citizens refuse to obey the law, they are no longer protected against the state. You cannot simply overturn the law because it is unpopular and because tens of thousands protested against it. That's a facist ideology and luckily we India as a nation aren't that low. Even Indira Gandhi didn't steep that low during emergency. Law is for the people .If the large majority of the people are against the law and rule then it's the duty of the government to address the issue and reconcile with the citizens .Not commit genocides. It's disgusting to even think that someone is seriously advocating it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 10 minutes ago, radhika said: Cease and desist from what...from trying to control terrorism ,from trying to save innocent Indians who would be their target. Do you expect the forces to step back every time? It is not a war zone where you only fight adults.How do the forces stop these terrorists if every time they take action,a child or a woman is involved by them. The difference is that the terrorists and their supporters are using some kids to stop the security forces from catching and stopping them......while the security forces are trying to stop these terrorists from killing innocent Indians...some of whom are children too. How are these people different from the terrorists/militia who use children as soldiers? You're giving an exaggerated view of what happens in Kashmir protests. If we can deal with mass arson and rape in GJ/HR without resorting to killing children, surely we can do it in Kashmir as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 2 minutes ago, BeautifulGame said: That's a facist ideology and luckily we India as a nation aren't that low. Even Indira Gandhi didn't steep that low during emergency. Law is for the people .If the large majority of the people are against the law and rule then it's the duty of the government to address the issue and reconcile with the citizens .Not commit genocides. It's disgusting to even think that someone is seriously advocating it . Law is not just for the people. The state has certain inalienable rights too,since the state is the guarantor of civic functionality for the future generations as well. Not just the people who are alive today. If the large majority are against the law, it is the duty of the government to address it and reconcile with its citizens. But UNTIL it has been addressed/ammended/modified, it is still the standing law and breaking the law is breaking the law. I do not support advocating breaking the law just because people do not like it. In a democracy, the mechanism exists to alter any law by the people, via their elected representatives. It is that mechanism that is legal and effective. Goondagardi and violent demonstrations are illegal actions and not just in Kashmir, anywhere in India, if there is mob violence, it should be dealt with in the harshest possible terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 4 minutes ago, The Outsider said: You're giving an exaggerated view of what happens in Kashmir protests. If we can deal with mass arson and rape in GJ/HR without resorting to killing children, surely we can do it in Kashmir as well. There were no five years olds being made to protest there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 4 minutes ago, The Outsider said: You're giving an exaggerated view of what happens in Kashmir protests. If we can deal with mass arson and rape in GJ/HR without resorting to killing children, surely we can do it in Kashmir as well. No. GJ/HR does not have foreign sponsorship of the problem or terrorism activities. Kashmir is a special zone, as legally dictated by our constitution and government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomGuy Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 India Govt. is doing it's job but it's dealing with a retarded neighbour with nuclear weapons. Few observations: 1. Shouldn't have handed over that terrorist Burhan wanis dead body. Have to be much much more mature here. 2. Opposition (congress, jdu and aap mainly) should not play politicsat this point and support the government (and the country). 3. Kashmiri party NC has been a huge letdown. It seems as if umer abdullah is also responsible for inciting the people by his comments . 4. Pakistan is basically doing and gonna continue doing nuclear blackmail. Modi did a good job with restraint in his speech yesterday. Whatever that has to be done need not be spoken about and it's going to be a long drawn hostility (or a state of war). Citizens Just have to have the confidence and pride in country's agencies. Do not seek war mongering speeches. 5. Good thing that happened is whole country is united and united against pak. No illusions. No doubts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, radhika said: There were no five years olds being made to protest there. You just proved my point. If we don't have to resort to such indiscreet violence to deal with adult protests do we need to where a few children are there as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: No. GJ/HR does not have foreign sponsorship of the problem or terrorism activities. Kashmir is a special zone, as legally dictated by our constitution and government. They have local sponsors of terrorism called Cow Saviors. I know this point is irrelevant but wrote it down to show how irrelevant your point is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 8 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: Law is not just for the people. The state has certain inalienable rights too,since the state is the guarantor of civic functionality for the future generations as well. Not just the people who are alive today. If the large majority are against the law, it is the duty of the government to address it and reconcile with its citizens. But UNTIL it has been addressed/ammended/modified, it is still the standing law and breaking the law is breaking the law. I do not support advocating breaking the law just because people do not like it. In a democracy, the mechanism exists to alter any law by the people, via their elected representatives. It is that mechanism that is legal and effective. Goondagardi and violent demonstrations are illegal actions and not just in Kashmir, anywhere in India, if there is mob violence, it should be dealt with in the harshest possible terms. Yeah. Gandhi was a terrorist because he regularly broke the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 20 minutes ago, The Outsider said: You just proved my point. If we don't have to resort to such indiscreet violence to deal with adult protests do we need to where a few children are there as well? What nonsense.....that makes no sense. The police were incompetent in those two states during unrest that lasted for a limited period of time .If the police had acted according to the law...there would have been more deaths of rioters and protesters. That is not the same as organized terrorism over decades sponsored by an enemy state . When children are used to prevent forces from doing there job over ages...there is no other way out. Besides it is not like kids are getting killed every day.It is a rare exception that that is used to run a campaign against the forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 27 minutes ago, The Outsider said: Yeah. Gandhi was a terrorist because he regularly broke the law. So you are calling the terrorists freedom fighters.That just makes you a terrorist supporter. No need for a debate then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 32 minutes ago, The Outsider said: They have local sponsors of terrorism called Cow Saviors. I know this point is irrelevant but wrote it down to show how irrelevant your point is. There is a huge difference between state-sponsored terrorism and religious vigilantism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 31 minutes ago, The Outsider said: Yeah. Gandhi was a terrorist because he regularly broke the law. No, he was not a terrorist, i did not say that breaking the law makes you a terrorist. Or did you fail basic mathematics as well, which is why your logic is so wonky ? I said breaking the law makes you a criminal. If you are criminal, the government is authorized to take any action necessary to detain you. Gandhi went to jail for breaking the law. As he should have. Gandhi didnt resist arrest, which is why it was not necessary to shoot him dead. If he resisted arrest, he would've been shot dead and that too, would've been thoroughly justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 5 minutes ago, radhika said: What nonsense.....that makes no sense. The police were incompetent in those two states during unrest that lasted for a limited period of time .If the police had acted according to the law...there would have been more deaths of rioters and protesters. That is not the same as organized terrorism over decades sponsored by an enemy state . When children are used to prevent forces from doing there job over ages...there is no other way out. Besides it is not like kids are getting killed every day.It is a rare exception that that is used to run a campaign against the forces. Oh my! Besides that kids aren't being killed every day? Is that which will wake you up to reality? Speechless! 4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: There is a huge difference between state-sponsored terrorism and religious vigilantism. Gau Rakshaks are state sponsored in case you didn't notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, radhika said: So you are calling the terrorists freedom fighters.That just makes you a terrorist supporter. No need for a debate then. No, I'm not. So there is still room for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 9 minutes ago, The Outsider said: Oh my! Besides that kids aren't being killed every day? Is that which will wake you up to reality? Speechless! Gau Rakshaks are state sponsored in case you didn't notice. Ok. So shoot them too. Unlike you, i am not arguing different treatment for different groups of people when they are all violating the law. if it can be established that Gau Rakshaks are causing terrorism, they should be shot dead too. beetle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 5 minutes ago, The Outsider said: Oh my! Besides that kids aren't being killed every day? Is that which will wake you up to reality? Speechless! Gau Rakshaks are state sponsored in case you didn't notice. No...It means people who sympathize with the terrorists take the few unfortunate exceptions like that and make it look like it is state policy and use it to malign not just the country/forces but also the atttempt to fight terrorism. Gau rakshak are religious vigilantes who are losing sympathy fast.Besides the law is there to take care of them . These are crimes that are dealt according to the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velu Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 Gau Rakshaks are state sponsored in case you didn't notice. Which state ? Solid or liquid or gas Adi_91 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 2 minutes ago, radhika said: No...It means people who sympathize with the terrorists take the few unfortunate exceptions like that and make it look like it is state policy and use it to malign not just the country/forces but also the atttempt to fight terrorism. Gau rakshak are religious vigilantes who are losing sympathy fast.Besides the law is there to take care of them . These are crimes that are dealt according to the law. Please let me know when a Gau Rakshak is punished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts