Can India & Pakistan come out of the spiral of mutual destruction ?

[khail007]

Actually, I don't. I always retain the right to decide what I should respond to and what I should not take into account.

It is not only you, everyone here entitled to it. However, one of the symptoms of your genuine issues.

 

[Irfan AH]

Agreed.

I believe we are discussing a complex matter here, and we cannot whip out tape measures and assign the amount of penitence that each should show. These greater and lesser measures mean so little. Suffice it to say that introspection is needed, for us to decide how much for ourselves, not for you, and for you to decide how much for yourselves.


Let us make a start right here, right now.

'BE THE CHANGE THAT YOU WISH TO SEE'.


That was, ironically, where it started, as early as 1905, by one measure, as early as Syed Ahmed Khan, by another. Why we still believe in today's world to generalise and say 'Hindus', and 'Muslims', is not a very mature way of looking at things.

hindu and muslim is not just a religious identity, its a political mindset as well. Perhaps you want to avoid using the words because of the stigma associated with it in the political context. But this is the reality, in fact more you try to persuade someone to give up their religious ideology for something more rational something better, more they want to stick with their religious belief.

Don't use syed ahmad's deed to balance what happened earlier, there lies greater blame with congress for its intransigence. And syed ahmad is not the reference. Its Jinnah who sincerely worked to bridge the gap between two, but was forced to arrive at the same conclusion.

Let's say you want to look forward to the future as an optimist with positive thoughts on your mind, this alone wouldn't suffice. The ability to confront the idiocy in each country by respective countrymen is going to shape the course for future. Problem is that stupid people are not only bluntly vocal, but they got strong convictions even if rooted in falsehood. Whereas sane/rational people are mild and reluctant, or better say mildly reluctant.

In between myself and you, if you and I are going to shape the future for the country. I got the ability to criticize whether its army, any religious/political figurehead or any pseudointellectual. Whereas you are reluctant in owning certain ugly truths, and therefore cannot confront them.

Also a thing in general, they say there is no future without past. If both sides tell a distorted/manipulated version of history to its people, differences/hostilities are only going to multiply.

 

[khail007]

I rather suspect you have run out of things to say. Think about what you are doing here, in this argument, and if you are doing anything that either strengthens your case, or informs others.

I am also susceptible of you for the same.

 

[Joe Shearer]

hindu and muslim is not just a religious identity, its a political mindset as well. Perhaps you want to avoid using the words because of the stigma associated with it in the political context. But this is the reality, in fact more you try to persuade someone to give up their religious ideology for something more rational something better, more they want to stick with their religious belief.

I really don't think this has any validity, whatsoever.

Don't use syed ahmad's deed to balance what happened earlier, there lies greater blame with congress for its intransigence. And syed ahmad is not the reference. Its Jinnah who sincerely worked to bridge the gap between two, but was forced to arrive at the same conclusion.

I have already said to @SIPRA that I will not bring Jinnah into the conversation on PDF.

Let's say you want to look forward to the future as an optimist with positive thoughts on your mind, this alone wouldn't suffice.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion on this.

The ability to confront the idiocy in each country by respective countrymen is going to shape the course for future. Problem is that stupid people are not only bluntly vocal, but they got strong convictions even if rooted in falsehood. Whereas sane/rational people are mild and reluctant, or better say mildly reluctant.

And where is this taking us? I am still reading.

In between myself and you, if you and I are going to shape the future for the country. I got the ability to criticize whether its army, any religious/political figurehead or any pseudointellectual. Whereas you are reluctant in owning certain ugly truths, and therefore cannot confront them.

Again, this is your opinion, and adds nothing to the discussion. This is not a fact. It remains an opinion.

Also a thing in general, they say there is no future without past. If both sides tell a distorted/manipulated version of history to its people, differences/hostilities are only going to multiply.

True enough.

In my book, this is a platitude.

Not without weight, but in no way of any value in taking things forward, unless it is aimed at an objective.

I am also susceptible of you for the same.

I get from this that English is not our first language for either of us.

 

[khail007]

I get from this that English is not our first language for either of us.

Indeed, where you find the mistakes correct yourself, after all, you are the wisest of the wise and it should be not a problem for you or do things get harder to comprehend when you don't like it?

 

[Irfan AH]

I really do not know what to say....keep going and holding same thoughts.
Please don't respond. Let's leave it here.

So you don't need introspection? And aren't you obsessed with possessive mentality when you want to claim entire subcontinent for yourselves only?

However if it suits you better, you can opt to not respond to what I said just now.

 

[MultaniGuy]

The problem is the Kashmir dispute. It needs to be resolved in a just and honest manner.

Couple more:
- Was India ever a country.
- Were there conflicts based on religion before British?
- Did muslims or hindus fought each other or fought together in an army?

Few things Pakistanis also need to fix in their head is:
Reality of Mohammed bin Qasim. What was the ‘real’ reason for Raja Dahir to give refuge to some Muslims. What a prick and suppressor Hajaj bin Yusuf was actually to own Muslims and how was Mohammed bin Qasim executed.

Republic of India did not exist before 1947.

Republic of India is a country created after the British left South Asia.

 

[Irfan AH]

Again, this is your opinion, and adds nothing to the discussion. This is not a fact. It remains an opinion.

For anyone wanting to see things improve between india and pakistan, it is more important to confront bigotry and falsehood at home than engaging the other side. And its not a favor to other side, its in the best interest of the country if it confronts bigotry at home.

 

[satyamev]

inspite of more than 70 % voters saying not in the next 20 years.
I am more optimistic as seen by the totally cold LOC for the last 2 years.
The present COAS is a pragmatist and seems to want no unnecessary hostilities with India.
And this is so unexpected as the common wisdom was that with the Americans out of Afghanistan, kashmir would become the next hot spot.
Another extension for him would be in the best interests of India and Pakistan.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

Sir Jee: Those were not "Sanghis", who attacked Kashmir on October 27, 1947. The attack was ordered by a so-called secular and progressive leader Nehru, in connivance with another so-called liberal Mountbatten. We shall come out of this well-propagated myth that INC is any different than BJP, as far as Pakistan is concerned.

It was INC, under the leadership of Nehru and Patel; who laid the foundations of enmity between India and Pakistan, and not some Savarkar or Golwalkar.

In the Indian army attack, this massacre of Kashmir Muslims is also a part of the history by the Dogra Raj, supported by the Indian mil.

'In November 1947, thousands of Muslims were massacred in Jammu region by mobs and paramilitaries led by the army of Dogra ruler Hari Singh.

The exact number of casualties in the killings that continued for two months is not known but estimates range from 20,000 to 237,000 and nearly half million forced into displacement across the border into the newly created nation of Pakistan and its administered part of Kashmir.'


In the context of India and Indian politics there ought to be difference in INC and RSS backed BJP.

But when it comes to Pakistan, it is difficult to choose who is a lesser evil, actually I think with the open-to-all and, can be seen hatred by BJP backed by the Hindu hardliners are of lesser evil.

They don't hide their hate and vendetta.

 

[Joe Shearer]

inspite of more than 70 % voters saying not in the next 20 years.
I am more optimistic as seen by the totally cold LOC for the last 2 years.
The present COAS is a pragmatist and seems to want no unnecessary hostilities with India.
And this is so unexpected as the common wisdom was that with the Americans out of Afghanistan, kashmir would become the next hot spot.
Another extension for him would be in the best interests of India and Pakistan.

I completely, unreservedly agree, but for a different set of reasons.

In the Indian army attack, this massacre of Kashmir Muslims is also a part of the history by the Dogra Raj, supported by the Indian mil.

'In November 1947, thousands of Muslims were massacred in Jammu region by mobs and paramilitaries led by the army of Dogra ruler Hari Singh.

Not by the Indian military. It is convenient to conflate states' troops with the regular army, but not very accurate. The first word I chose was not 'accurate'; my respect for you individually made me change it.

But when it comes to Pakistan, it is difficult to choose who is a lesser evil, actually I think with the open-to-all and, can be seen hatred by BJP backed by the Hindu hardliners are of lesser evil.

They don't hide their hate and vendetta.

Not difficult to choose between a fact in existence and a non-existent notion (disclaimer: I am NOT, and never have been, a Congress supporter).

So you don't need introspection? And aren't you obsessed with possessive mentality when you want to claim entire subcontinent for yourselves only?

However if it suits you better, you can opt to not respond to what I said just now.

I think you are being unfair to him, not with regard to his specific posts and comments - those may be whatever they are - but with regard to the clear and harsh outline of the non-member Sangh Parivar supporter - the fellow-traveller, so to speak - that baffles many - most - Pakistanis.

I might remind members of the classification used by the Allies during the pacification of Germany that they used for their de-Nazification campaign.