India Rocks (2 Viewers)

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by Enron ] ++
sometimes the only way to peace is war. like if two friends have beef, the only way they can settle it is to beat the crap our of each other til theyre ready to talk about it. and sometimes they end up better friends.

War claims the lives of soldiers in battle. Not those of innocent and helpless women and children. As for being better friends, I think India and Pakistan have shown warring nations how to pave the path for peace. Unfortunately, these radical Islamic terrorists groups continue to find a way to thrive despite Pakistan's efforts to resolve the issues with Musharraf at the helm. It's really sad.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by Kaiser Franco ] ++


What????

What?

 

[HelterSkelter]

++ [ originally posted by baggio ] ++



I'd expect more sense from you Axl. Both you and Ze, seem to be suggesting Indian groups behind this without actually admitting where the real problem lies. Is it actually that hard for you to admit the involvement of the Lashkar-e-Toiba, which we both know is made up of Islamic extremists that have issues with Kashmir and with India in general. Is it that hard to actually go back 3 years in time and remember how Lashkar-e-Toiba militants were killed for attacking the red fort? Is it that hard for you to remember the bombings in Mumbai, in August of 2003, which had the Lashkar-e-Toiba claiming responsibility. It's a shame that you perhaps, know as well as anybody in India and Pakistan that it could be this atrocious Pakistani based terrorist group, and yet, you suggest the Shiv Sena, a political party governing Maharashtra would kill their own innocent countrymen.

my political knowledge is extrmley limited.even when it comes to pakistani politics.But yes,lashkar-e-tayyaba is a group based of hard core militants.and im NOT trying to drag along politics over here,im not blaming india over here or taking me own country's side,i absoloutley condon those bomb attacks and they do absoloutley no good.
but frankly,what do you expect those kashmiris to do when they havent received what was promised to them back in 1948?wouldnt the whole thing be over if they were given their rights once and for all and were not treated like pawns in a game of chess?
its easier said than done.but jeez,this is turning into a joke.we all know what kashmir was promised in 1948,so give it to them!

 

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by Kaiser Franco ] ++
Here's what : in terms of innocent deaths, any terrorist act is a mosquito fart compared to war.

So how does that in anyway retract from what I've said about war and terrorist acts?

What was said is, war takes the lives of soldiers on the battlefield. That does'nt mean that its 'meant to do so'. In this case its a pre meditated attack on unarmed, helpless people. The lives lost are all innocent and equally valuable, if thats what you're trying to point out.

 

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by axlrose85 ] ++


my political knowledge is extrmley limited.even when it comes to pakistani politics.But yes,lashkar-e-tayyaba is a group based of hard core militants.and im NOT trying to drag along politics over here,im not blaming india over here or taking me own country's side,i absoloutley condon those bomb attacks and they do absoloutley no good.
but frankly,what do you expect those kashmiris to do when they havent received what was promised to them back in 1948?wouldnt the whole thing be over if they were given their rights once and for all and were not treated like pawns in a game of chess?
its easier said than done.but jeez,this is turning into a joke.we all know what kashmir was promised in 1948,so give it to them!

Well, since you bring up Kashmir and claim to have limited knowledge, give me the opportunity to enlighten you a little bit. And maybe also take the liberty to tell you it's funny, even though you are aware of the Lashkar-e-Toiba you still fail to see the logic behind their involvement in this scenario. Instead of which you choose to pick a pro-Hindu political party for being behind this heinous act. Even though I personally dont think you yourself would believe them to be behind it.
What promise are you speaking of Axl? There was talk of a political process which was mentioned in a particular article of the Indian constitution, after Mohammed Ali Jinnah, failed despite his best attempts to lure the then king of Kashmir who chose to accede to India over Pakistan. The State's accession to India has never been challenged by the UN Commission for India and Pakistan or the Security Council. The question of Kashmir has been settled by the people of Kashmir themselves. They decided that Kashmir is an integral part of the Republic of India. Furthermore, the legal adviser to the UN Commission even acknowledged that the State's accession was legal and could not be questioned. This fact was further recognized by the UN Commission in its report submitted to the UN in defining its resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949. Both these resolutions were accepted by India and Pakistan.

Coming to the Lashkar-e-Toiba: Since the early 90s when they began operations in J&K, they were actively promoted by Pakistan’s external intelligence agency, the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), since 1996. And as I've pointed out before they have continued to attack India, at the Red Fort in Delhi, in Mumbai and now in Delhi again, claiming innocent lives each time.

So my point is, I dont see how you can justify these actions, one way or another. Like I've said before, despite Musharraf's best efforts these imbeciles manage to filter through. And even though I personally believe that Pakistan is doing all that it can to curb outfits like this one, it may need to try harder. Or yet again, the entire country stands to get a bad name just because of a **** all minority made up of militants that are brainwashed and dont even know what they're fighting for.

 

[Snoop]

Sorry to hear that Baggio :down:

 

[Chxta]

But what is this world turning into?

 

[HelterSkelter]

++ [ originally posted by baggio ] ++


What promise are you speaking of Axl? There was talk of a political process which was mentioned in a particular article of the Indian constitution, after Mohammed Ali Jinnah, failed despite his best attempts to lure the then king of Kashmir who chose to accede to India over Pakistan. The State's accession to India has never been challenged by the UN Commission for India and Pakistan or the Security Council. The question of Kashmir has been settled by the people of Kashmir themselves. They decided that Kashmir is an integral part of the Republic of India. Furthermore, the legal adviser to the UN Commission even acknowledged that the State's accession was legal and could not be questioned. This fact was further recognized by the UN Commission in its report submitted to the UN in defining its resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949. Both these resolutions were accepted by India and Pakistan.

when exactly did the people of kashmir decide that it is an integral part of kashimir?
as far i know,they were promised a plebicite by the UN,one that has not been held to this day.and i can assure you baggio,had both india and pakistan agreed on what you mentioned,then things wud have been very rosy between the 2 countries.there would not have been any kashmir based tension and the leaders from either country wud not have kashmir high on their agendas.
and the whole partition process was a joke.hyderabad had a hindu majority but a muslim leader,but it was given to india because of the hindu majority.
kashmir had a muslim majority with a hindu leader,but the majorty wasnt given a damn about in this case.and Jinnah was asking for a place with a MUSLIM MAJORITY to be given to a MUSLIM COUNTRY.i dont see anything wrong with that.Infact,that is totally correct

though being from different countries,it is only normal for you to put forward the indian perspective and me the pakistani perspective.so lets just drop the discussion.i dont want any bitterness around here.

and yes,i agree with what you said about the lashkar-e-tayyaba.

 

[baggio]

Pakistan's agression on the issue has never helped AXL. Do you remember the Lahore declaration in February 1999 to provide a peaceful and bilateral solution to the Kashmiri issue. Despite that elements in the Pakistani government covertly trained and sent troops and paramilitary forces, some allegedly in the guise of mujahideens into the Indian territory. It happened in 1965 and 1971 before that. And each time we had to beat Pakistan till better sense prevailed.

Why are you failing to mention the Hyderabad, that was retained by Pakistan after the 1947 partition, which is your fourth largest city. Having a muslim leader or a hindu majority is irrelavant in the country I live in. What you're saying about Hyderabad makes no sense the way I see it. We both know how secular India is. Do I have to tell you we have a Muslim for a president, the best and most loved bollywood actors here are the Khan trio, hell we've even had Muslim cricket captains and admired them for all their worth. It's not about Muslim and Hindu, because as you've seen by and large these people are one, there's not much difference. Even Pakistani cricketers like Wasim treat India as a second home because they're so welcomed here, look at the music band Strings, Junoon and actress Meera - they're all making a foray here. Why? Because they see that there is no discrimination. Unfortunately, my bone of contention with you is pointing fingers at something so heinous being carried out by Indians within India. I took umbrage to the fact that you happened to overlook the possibily of the prime suspect being from Pakistan.


There is no bitterness obviously, just like I said I didnt take well to your leveraging the Kashmir and Shiv Sena issues to eclipse the Lashkar-e-Toiba.

 

[HelterSkelter]

what you're talking about is the modern day view on hindu-muslim relations.at the time of partition,the relations between the two groups were extremley poor and infact,the religon issue was a BIG motive behind india and pakistan coming into existence back then even though a large majority of muslims stayed in what is modern day india today.

 

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by Kaiser Franco ] ++


No they're not. We just don't see the innocents killed in war like we see those killed by terrorism. Technology, i.e. the ability to kill and maim through the moving of a lever, makes them invisible to us. Below the aerial bombings there are targets, not people about to be eviscerated.

I fail to inherit the point you're trying to make? Is it the scale of misery you're referring to or the sense of loss, terretorially?

 

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by axlrose85 ] ++
what you're talking about is the modern day view on hindu-muslim relations.at the time of partition,the relations between the two groups were extremley poor and infact,the religon issue was a BIG motive behind india and pakistan coming into existence back then even though a large majority of muslims stayed in what is modern day india today.

It was a matter of choice. With the receding British influence, their policy of divide and rule was the last course of action, and that eventually gave rise to Mohammed Ali Jinnah's vision of an independent Pakistan. He, by the way was an Indian congressman up until then with a Parsi wife.

My modern day views may speak of things as they are now, but I'll tell you that my grandparents were born and brought up in model town Lahore and lived a happy life, up until the partition came about and differences grew. And the fact that Muslims chose India even back then, does tell you something.

 

[Zé Tahir]

I don't think anyone is supporting Lashkar-e-Tayyaba. But, baggio, I do believe you've jumped the gun a little bit here. I was reading on BBC that a group called the "Inqilabi" has taken responsibility for this, and little is known about this new group.

You keep saying that why would someone do something to hurte their own fellow countrymen. Are you saying there are/have never been acts of terrorism from extremists within India? Are you overlooking the Sikh extremists during the 80's? Are you forgetting the whole issue surrounding the Babri mosque?

 

[Zé Tahir]

++ [ originally posted by baggio ] ++
Pakistan's agression on the issue has never helped AXL. Do you remember the Lahore declaration in February 1999 to provide a peaceful and bilateral solution to the Kashmiri issue. Despite that elements in the Pakistani government covertly trained and sent troops and paramilitary forces, some allegedly in the guise of mujahideens into the Indian territory. It happened in 1965 and 1971 before that. And each time we had to beat Pakistan till better sense prevailed.

Why are you failing to mention the Hyderabad, that was retained by Pakistan after the 1947 partition, which is your fourth largest city. Having a muslim leader or a hindu majority is irrelavant in the country I live in. What you're saying about Hyderabad makes no sense the way I see it. We both know how secular India is. Do I have to tell you we have a Muslim for a president, the best and most loved bollywood actors here are the Khan trio, hell we've even had Muslim cricket captains and admired them for all their worth. It's not about Muslim and Hindu, because as you've seen by and large these people are one, there's not much difference. Even Pakistani cricketers like Wasim treat India as a second home because they're so welcomed here, look at the music band Strings, Junoon and actress Meera - they're all making a foray here. Why? Because they see that there is no discrimination. Unfortunately, my bone of contention with you is pointing fingers at something so heinous being carried out by Indians within India. I took umbrage to the fact that you happened to overlook the possibily of the prime suspect being from Pakistan.


There is no bitterness obviously, just like I said I didnt take well to your leveraging the Kashmir and Shiv Sena issues to eclipse the Lashkar-e-Toiba.

Ask the majority of Pakistani's and they have the same view on their Indian neigbors. The views of average Pakistani's are overshadowed by extremists who are out to gain their own personal gains. They've ruined our country, and unfortunately were given power by idiotic leaders like Bhutto and Zia-ul-HAq. They are the cause behind secterial violence between Sunni-Shia, and also behind the persecution of Ahmadi's. They are the biggest enemies of Pakistan and Islam.

 

[HelterSkelter]

Jinnah was an indian congressman only up until 1928 and not until Partition.He left after the Nehru report was published.His parsi wife does not say all that much about what he would go on to achieve.He was in favour of Musliam-Hindu unity up until the late 1920's and when he saw that his efforts were leading nowhere,he left congross,became a part of the muslim league and pressed the case of a seperate homeland for Muslims.
And Jinnah's ideology of a separate homeland had more to do with what he feared would happen if the Britishish left the sub continent without 2 countires not coming into existence.Hindus were far more succesful during that period in terms of Govt jobs,education etc.Muslims were surpressed and the relations between the two parites were horrible as you would very know.Not pressing for partition would have meant that the power would have been handled over to the Hindus which would have been a nightmare from the muslim perspective as it was evident when the Congress won the elections in 1913(i dont remember the exact year) and resigned some time later.

and ive never said that Hindus-Muslims relatons were always poor.the two parites lived together for a very long time in peace,and yes the tensisons did take root at the turn of the 19th century.
and i dont necessarily think that most of the muslims who stayed behind in India actually wanted to.With so many extremist groups in those days(both hindu and muslim),bloodshed was more than common,and having such a huge wave of people moving from one land to another was a logistic nightmare.So a large chunk of muslims not moving over to pakistan had a lot to do with other factors too orther than pure will.

you cant deny that muslim-hindus were at loggerheads with each other at the time,and had the british left the subcontinent without implementing the partition plans,then we would have been living in hell right now.

 

[baggio]

Ze please tell me how that, in anyway changes the scenario. Ok so the name of the group maybe Inquilabi, it still operates like the Toiba, is still outfitted to work like Kashmiri insurgents and for all you know, is a smaller front for the Lashkar-e-Toiba itself? Does claiming responsibility for the act actually mean they're behind it, couldn't it possibly be, that they're trying to get mileage for themselves, given how small they actually are? Is it so hard to admit, that applying logic, even though I could be wrong, it is in all likelihood the Toiba?

Ze, do you know the Sikh extremists you talk about, as well as other Indian seperatist movements from the 1970s and '80s were actually trained in Pakistan as part of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's strategy for forward strategic depth.

Do you even know the whole context of the Babri Masjid mosque and the fact that it was built over a razed Hindu Temple, in the spot that was apparently the birthplace of a mythological god, Rama? The issue there was very poorly handled by the government, and it led to bloodshed of both Hindus and Muslims.

 

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by axlrose85 ] ++
Jinnah was an indian congressman only up until 1928 and not until Partition.He left after the Nehru report was published.His parsi wife does not say all that much about what he would go on to achieve.He was in favour of Musliam-Hindu unity up until the late 1920's and when he saw that his efforts were leading nowhere,he left congross,became a part of the muslim league and pressed the case of a seperate homeland for Muslims.
And Jinnah's ideology of a separate homeland had more to do with what he feared would happen if the Britishish left the sub continent without 2 countires not coming into existence.Hindus were far more succesful during that period in terms of Govt jobs,education etc.Muslims were surpressed and the relations between the two parites were horrible as you would very know.Not pressing for partition would have meant that the power would have been handled over to the Hindus which would have been a nightmare from the muslim perspective as it was evident when the Congress won the elections in 1913(i dont remember the exact year) and resigned some time later.

and ive never said that Hindus-Muslims relatons were always poor.the two parites lived together for a very long time in peace,and yes the tensisons did take root at the turn of the 19th century.
and i dont necessarily think that most of the muslims who stayed behind in India actually wanted to.With so many extremist groups in those days(both hindu and muslim),bloodshed was more than common,and having such a huge wave of people moving from one land to another was a logistic nightmare.So a large chunk of muslims not moving over to pakistan had a lot to do with other factors too orther than pure will.

you cant deny that muslim-hindus were at loggerheads with each other at the time,and had the british left the subcontinent without implementing the partition plans,then we would have been living in hell right now.

Yes, AXL, your ideologies about Jinnah obviously arise from your roots as a modern day Pakistani. But I can tell you, before the partition, this country was one. And there were never any differences at least in terms of religion and race. The country was thriving. And like I said, it was a British mindset that left Jinnah wondering about the fate of what would be, left under 'Hindu Indian' rule. But trust me, if it wasn't for his sudden vision, the subcontinent would've been thriving in prosperity. Look at Pakistan itself, it only hurt the country to set up an independent state, at least from an economic point of view. And guess what? As for the muslims that stayed back, they seem to be having it real good here, perhaps better than their relatives or ancestors that started familes back home.

 

[Zé Tahir]

++ [ originally posted by baggio ] ++
Ze please tell me how that, in anyway changes the scenario. Ok so the name of the group maybe Inquilabi, it still operates like the Toiba, is still outfitted to work like Kashmiri insurgents and for all you know, is a smaller front for the Lashkar-e-Toiba itself? Does claiming responsibility for the act actually mean they're behind it, couldn't it possibly be, that they're trying to get mileage for themselves, given how small they actually are? Is it so hard to admit, that applying logic, even though I could be wrong, it is in all likelihood the Toiba?

Ze, do you know the Sikh extremists you talk about, as well as other Indian seperatist movements from the 1970s and '80s were actually trained in Pakistan as part of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's strategy for forward strategic depth.

Do you even know the whole context of the Babri Masjid mosque and the fact that it was built over a razed Hindu Temple, in the spot that was apparently the birthplace of a mythological god, Rama? The issue there was very poorly handled by the government, and it led to bloodshed of both Hindus and Muslims.

Yes, I do know the Babri Masjid issue. But I think this has turned into a Pakistan v India, Hindu v Muslim thing, so I'm gonna step out. Obviously you're going to back the Indian perspective and I the Pakistani.

 

[baggio]

++ [ originally posted by Zé Tahir ] ++


Yes, I do know the Babri Masjid issue. But I think this has turned into a Pakistan v India, Hindu v Muslim thing, so I'm gonna step out. Obviously you're going to back the Indian perspective and I the Pakistani.

In conclusion I'll say, its very unfortunate that despite Musharraf and his apparent efforts, Pakistan and Islam stands to get a bad name, because of outfits such as the 'Inquilabi' or Toiba.

I hate to see that despite such similarities in our people, fundamentalists are out to create irreversible differences.

 

[Zé Tahir]

++ [ originally posted by baggio ] ++



Yes, AXL, your ideologies about Jinnah obviously arise from your roots as a modern day Pakistani. But I can tell you, before the partition, this country was one. And there were never any differences at least in terms of religion and race. The country was thriving. And like I said, it was a British mindset that left Jinnah wondering about the fate of what would be, left under 'Hindu Indian' rule. But trust me, if it wasn't for his sudden vision, the subcontinent would've been thriving in prosperity. Look at Pakistan itself, it only hurt the country to set up an independent state, at least from an economic point of view. And guess what? As for the muslims that stayed back, they seem to be having it real good here, perhaps better than their relatives or ancestors that started familes back home.

I have family members who are still a live that lived during the partition, and they consider Pakistan their home and they've always supported the creation of Pakisatn. Just curious, who are these people that "having it real good here" ?