pulsar220
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2010
- Messages
- 93
- Reaction score
- 0
he is just a Sonia Gandhi stooge. but i respect his work as a finance minister in 1991
India 'to cut Kashmir forces by 25%'
- Thread starter Veeru
- Start date
he is just a Sonia Gandhi stooge. but i respect his work as a finance minister in 1991
JanjaWeed
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
- Messages
- 9,772
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
My friend he is nobody's stooge. One man can not turn the whole system on its head. He has two choices. Either be a part of a system & work within that system to correct the flaws. or just don't be a part at all, see it sufferings from outside & do nothing about it. He chose to be the former one!
Peshwa
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
- Messages
- 4,918
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
I can see how its hard for some Pakistanis to fathom such concepts of the army being subserviant to the civilian govt...esp considering that your army has given a middle finger to 90% of your civilian rulers for a majority of your "free" life...
Sometimes I wonder....had the Indian army been as political in its stance as the PA is in Pak, India would have long solved the problem of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.
I think Pakistanis should bless their stars that Democracy is so revered in India.....A military state of India would have been a nightmare for Pakistan!
1. Who told u that i hate congress we were hardcore congress supporters no one have ever voted for any other party then congress for last 63 years.
But the present MMS is American puppet and sonia/rahul are immature. BJP is ruled by the mafia of advani, modi is busy in a state. No option is there.
2. For ur kind info i know everything inside out of present thinking of the govt. specially MMS want to demilitarize the Siachin.
He is not able to do so because of the strong protest from pranab mukherjee, army etc.
Dalai Lama
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2010
- Messages
- 3,628
- Reaction score
- -25
- Country
- Location
Not unless you give us a reason to.
DelhiDareDevil
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2011
- Messages
- 2,242
- Reaction score
- 0
Well said, it was Manmohan Singh, who saved India from turning to a poor and failed state in early 1990s. Since he been involved in politics, he has turned India around.
But we feel he has reached his peak, even though I would like one more term as leader of congress.
garibnawaz
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,088
- Reaction score
- 0
Right under his nose Scorpene scam happened.
Right under his nose the biggest scam of India (2G telecom) happened.
Right under his nose Commonwealth scams happened.
What action he took on any of the ministers responsible? none.
What action did he took on whom?
For inflation and price rise in 2009 he was giving us an excuse of recession and how India is surving the same and how we should bear the price rise.
He also forwarded the excuse of poor rains.
Now recession is over. It rained like hell. We still have inflation and price rise.
First it was dals, then Sugar, now onion. Garlic and Tomatoes are waiting in cue to go up.
The agriculture minister is too busy in his ICC and BCCI affairs and IPL auctions.
What action did he took against him? Again none.
A good talented person does not mean an able and strong leader.
He has the bestest team of qualified financial people with him and yet we have this mess.
He is good as a finance minister without doubt, but PM no way.
GB
Gabbar
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,118
- Reaction score
- 0
India 'to cut Kashmir troops by a quarter'
India's government has said it plans to reduce the number of security forces in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Home Secretary GK Pillai said the aim was to pull out 25% of troops from populated areas in the next 12 months as a confidence-building measure.
There was a mixed reaction to the announcement from Kashmiri separatists.
There are estimated to be between 300,000 and half a million Indian troops and police in Jammu and Kashmir, fighting a two-decade insurgency.
India's government has never released official figures on its forces in the region.
A good step?
In the summer, more than 100 people were killed in violent protests in the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley.
The withdrawal of security forces and the repeal of emergency laws have been the long-standing demands of separatists in the region.
"As a confidence building measure in Jammu and Kashmir, the strength of the security forces would come down by 25%," news agency Press Trust of India quoted the home secretary as saying.
"We would like to reduce it as soon as possible depending on the ground situation," he said in a speech at a university in the Indian capital Delhi. He did not say when such a withdrawal might start.
Mr Pillai said managing with local police would be the ideal situation.
He said if violence declined India would be able to "gradually reduce our presence and make sure that all forces are there only at the border for preventing infiltration."
The government was also considering giving Pakistani Kashmiris six-month, multiple entry permits to visit relatives on the Indian side, Mr Pillai said.
At the moment, they can only get a 15-day permit.
In Indian-administered Kashmir, separatist leaders were divided in their reaction.
Hardline separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani dismissed the offer as "inconsequential" and demanded a complete withdrawal of Indian forces from Kashmir.
But Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who leads the moderate faction of the All Party Hurriyat Conference, welcomed the announcement.
"We have long been demanding a phased withdrawal of Indian troops," he said. "It could be the first step towards that."
But he said the Indian government had failed to deliver on similar promises in the past.
Yasin Malik, chairman of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, said they would wait and see.
There was also a mixed reaction from ordinary people.
A shopkeeper, Manzoor Ahmed, showed his cynicism by saying "we don't trust the Indian government. Even if they really withdraw some troops, they will bring in more from the other side."
But another businessman, Niyaz Ahmed, said "it is a good step provided it really happens."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12190425
India's government has said it plans to reduce the number of security forces in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Home Secretary GK Pillai said the aim was to pull out 25% of troops from populated areas in the next 12 months as a confidence-building measure.
There was a mixed reaction to the announcement from Kashmiri separatists.
There are estimated to be between 300,000 and half a million Indian troops and police in Jammu and Kashmir, fighting a two-decade insurgency.
India's government has never released official figures on its forces in the region.
A good step?
In the summer, more than 100 people were killed in violent protests in the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley.
The withdrawal of security forces and the repeal of emergency laws have been the long-standing demands of separatists in the region.
"As a confidence building measure in Jammu and Kashmir, the strength of the security forces would come down by 25%," news agency Press Trust of India quoted the home secretary as saying.
"We would like to reduce it as soon as possible depending on the ground situation," he said in a speech at a university in the Indian capital Delhi. He did not say when such a withdrawal might start.
Mr Pillai said managing with local police would be the ideal situation.
He said if violence declined India would be able to "gradually reduce our presence and make sure that all forces are there only at the border for preventing infiltration."
The government was also considering giving Pakistani Kashmiris six-month, multiple entry permits to visit relatives on the Indian side, Mr Pillai said.
At the moment, they can only get a 15-day permit.
In Indian-administered Kashmir, separatist leaders were divided in their reaction.
Hardline separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani dismissed the offer as "inconsequential" and demanded a complete withdrawal of Indian forces from Kashmir.
But Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who leads the moderate faction of the All Party Hurriyat Conference, welcomed the announcement.
"We have long been demanding a phased withdrawal of Indian troops," he said. "It could be the first step towards that."
But he said the Indian government had failed to deliver on similar promises in the past.
Yasin Malik, chairman of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, said they would wait and see.
There was also a mixed reaction from ordinary people.
A shopkeeper, Manzoor Ahmed, showed his cynicism by saying "we don't trust the Indian government. Even if they really withdraw some troops, they will bring in more from the other side."
But another businessman, Niyaz Ahmed, said "it is a good step provided it really happens."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12190425
garibnawaz
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,088
- Reaction score
- 0
General Singh has already rejected this.
GB
GB
Jet Li
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2010
- Messages
- 142
- Reaction score
- 0
Last edited by a moderator:
Mabs
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2009
- Messages
- 911
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
I do not quite understand democracy, and its intricacies because, well I am a Pakistani and it is in our genes I suppose, but should an Army chief express his displeasure publicly over a policy-making decision taken by a strong democratic government?
Pakistanis took a lot of flank when the ISPR made public its reservations about the Kerry-Luger bill, but we can expect that from Pakistan, because we are the melting pot of all the problems in the world and what not, but should the same happen in the biggest democracy in the world?
Seems like the Army chief wants to gather public support in an attempt to guide the policy making process. A simple letter or a meeting with the PM should have sufficed.
Just shooting in the dark here, after all what do we Pakistanis know about democracy anyway?
Pakistanis took a lot of flank when the ISPR made public its reservations about the Kerry-Luger bill, but we can expect that from Pakistan, because we are the melting pot of all the problems in the world and what not, but should the same happen in the biggest democracy in the world?
Seems like the Army chief wants to gather public support in an attempt to guide the policy making process. A simple letter or a meeting with the PM should have sufficed.
Just shooting in the dark here, after all what do we Pakistanis know about democracy anyway?
Last edited:
desiman
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 3,957
- Reaction score
- 0
rockstarIN
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 6,168
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
We don't feel need to cut down forces in J&K: Gen V K Singh
NEW DELHI: Even as home secretary G K Pillai hinted at reducing 25 per cent reduction in security forces' strength in Jammu and Kashmir, Army Chief General V K Singh today said they did not feel the need to "cut down" their forces in the state.
He also said it will be ensured that "extra pressure" is not put on his "already-stretched" deployments.
"We have not yet felt that we have to cut down our forces. If they want to cut down para-military and police forces, I won't say anything...
"So when that is done, it will be ensured that extra pressure is not brought on our already-stretched deployments there," Singh told a press conference on the eve of Army Day.
Maintaining that Army was not aware of any troop reduction plans, the Army chief said he was sure that any step in this direction would be taken in consultation with the Unified Command headquarters operating in the state.
The security forces operating in the state work under a Unified Command, which is headed by the State Chief Minister.
He was responding to a question on Pillai's statement and whether the Army felt that the situation had improved to an extent the that the troops' presence could be reduced.
Declining to make any direct comments on Pillai's remarks, Singh said the Army had deployed its troops in the state as per the requirements on the Line of Control and other areas.
"Same way in the hinterland, some Army columns are deployed to maintain peace and counter terrorism. We have not yet felt that we have cut to down our forces. If they want to cut down paramilitary or police forces, I won't say anything," he added.
Singh said security forces in the state included the police, paramilitary and the Army and probably only those people, who are considered to be dispensable, would be taken out of the state.
When asked if the Army would agree with the demand for repealing the controversial Armed Forces Special Powers Act ( AFSPA) from some parts of the State, Singh said, "you know the views of the Army in this regard. The issue is already before the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) and I would not like to say anything further."
The Army chief said after putting in a lot of effort and creating anti-terrorism obstacles in place, the security forces have been able to check infiltration to a large extent.
"As per the data of the Multi Agency Centre (MAC), there were 468 infiltration attempts in the state in 2010 out of which only 95 could be successful and 40 terrorists were killed there," Singh said.
Read more: We don't feel need to cut down forces in J&K: Gen V K Singh - The Times of India We don't feel need to cut down forces in J&K: Gen V K Singh - The Times of India
NEW DELHI: Even as home secretary G K Pillai hinted at reducing 25 per cent reduction in security forces' strength in Jammu and Kashmir, Army Chief General V K Singh today said they did not feel the need to "cut down" their forces in the state.
He also said it will be ensured that "extra pressure" is not put on his "already-stretched" deployments.
"We have not yet felt that we have to cut down our forces. If they want to cut down para-military and police forces, I won't say anything...
"So when that is done, it will be ensured that extra pressure is not brought on our already-stretched deployments there," Singh told a press conference on the eve of Army Day.
Maintaining that Army was not aware of any troop reduction plans, the Army chief said he was sure that any step in this direction would be taken in consultation with the Unified Command headquarters operating in the state.
The security forces operating in the state work under a Unified Command, which is headed by the State Chief Minister.
He was responding to a question on Pillai's statement and whether the Army felt that the situation had improved to an extent the that the troops' presence could be reduced.
Declining to make any direct comments on Pillai's remarks, Singh said the Army had deployed its troops in the state as per the requirements on the Line of Control and other areas.
"Same way in the hinterland, some Army columns are deployed to maintain peace and counter terrorism. We have not yet felt that we have cut to down our forces. If they want to cut down paramilitary or police forces, I won't say anything," he added.
Singh said security forces in the state included the police, paramilitary and the Army and probably only those people, who are considered to be dispensable, would be taken out of the state.
When asked if the Army would agree with the demand for repealing the controversial Armed Forces Special Powers Act ( AFSPA) from some parts of the State, Singh said, "you know the views of the Army in this regard. The issue is already before the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) and I would not like to say anything further."
The Army chief said after putting in a lot of effort and creating anti-terrorism obstacles in place, the security forces have been able to check infiltration to a large extent.
"As per the data of the Multi Agency Centre (MAC), there were 468 infiltration attempts in the state in 2010 out of which only 95 could be successful and 40 terrorists were killed there," Singh said.
Read more: We don't feel need to cut down forces in J&K: Gen V K Singh - The Times of India We don't feel need to cut down forces in J&K: Gen V K Singh - The Times of India
Similar threads
