Comparing India and Pakistan 2010

[RiazHaq]

Pakistan is in state of war. Going by that, situation could have been a lot worst. But the way Pakistan Armed Forces have handled the situation is nothing but commendable. Pakistan, therefore is no where close to a failed state. It has a growing economy, and increased amount of graduates. That being said.. i am going to end with a great quote of the so-called MILITARY DIKTATOR of Pakistan.

It's true that Pakistan is in a state of war. But so is India with its Maoists and multiple other insurgencies being fought by hundreds of thousands of Indian troops in central, eastern, and Northeastern India, and Kashmir.

The big difference is that the war has come to the cities of Pakistan, while in India it has remained confined to the rural areas so far.

The net result is that war in Pakistan is badly affecting economic activity, and India's economy has so far been unscathed.

 

[Jade]

If you read my post that started this thread and the links I have provided, it is clear that I have tried to be as objective as possible in my comparison of the two neighbors. If you bother to read it again, you will realize how balanced it is. But you have latched on to the areas where I say Pakistan has done better than India and tried in vain to fight it with all your misguided patriotism.

Given what I have seen so far, I have to sadly conclude that you and many of your Indian cohorts here are part of an anti-Pakistan campaign through the media and cybersace that is described as follows by a former India top spy Vikram Sood:

"Covert action can be of various kinds. One is the paramilitary option, which is what the Pakistanis have been using against us. It is meant to hurt, destabilize or retaliate. The second is the psychological war option, which is a very potent and unseen force. It is an all weather option and constitutes essentially changing perceptions of friends and foes alike. The media is a favorite instrument, provided it is not left to the bureaucrats because then we will end up with some clumsy and implausible propaganda effort. More than the electronic and print media, it is now the internet and YouTube that can be the next-generation weapons of psychological war. Terrorists use these liberally and so should those required to counter terrorism."

Haq's Musings: India's Covert War in Pakistan

Mr. Haq,

I really want to know from you, what misguided patriotism is? Is it love for ones country or haterated for ones neighbor?

Let I make it clear to you, all of your posts are anti-India: your comparisons partial; your writings blurred; and your postings devoid of any logic. I have to sadly conclude that you have brainwashed yourself of being anti-India to such an extent that the pain is clearly evident in each of your posting.

 

[RiazHaq]

I will keep it brief..
1. I am not against you showing India worse than Pakistan (and it is in certain areas) thru objective and real data
2. I am against you using selectively edited articles by 3rd parties to insinuate the above in the areas where its not and you have done this in abundance in this thread
3. If you call a group of Indians reacting in the same manner to your anti India rants as mob mentality, then so be it
4. I havent started this thread.. You have ... so who is running a anti India campaign is fairly obvious. Once someone goes thru rest of your threads, it becomes a no brainer anyway...

Sadly, what could have been a great discussion, has been ruined by unfortunate use of selective editing to score points.. I suggest, lets leave it at this without making it worse...

Let's be honest here.

You have never argued with me on any criticisms of Pakistan, some of it very harsh, that are found in almost all of my posts.

The only time you (and some of the Indian posters here) start attacking me personally and find fault with my posts is when you perceive any criticism of India, no matter how accurate and mild it may be. And then you fight tooth and nail to prove that India is better than Pakistan in every aspect, without allowing for any "inconvenient truths" to intrude.

It's your blind and misguided patriotism that gets in the way of any rational discussion about India and Pakistan. Unfortunately, you are not unique among Indians in this regard.

Pankaj Mishra describes this common Indian trait in the following words:

Apparently, no inconvenient truths are allowed to mar what Foreign Affairs, the foreign policy journal of America's elite, has declared a "roaring capitalist success story". Add Bollywood's singing and dancing stars, beauty queens and Booker prize-winning writers to the Tatas, the Mittals and the IT tycoons, and the picture of Indian confidence, vigour and felicity is complete.

Haq's Musings: Western Myths About Peaceful, Stable and Prosperous India

 

[karan.1970]

Let's be honest here.

You have never argued with me on any criticisms of Pakistan, some of it very harsh, that are found in almost all of my posts.

Why should I??

The only time you (and some of the Indian posters here) start attacking me personally and find fault with my posts is when you perceive any criticism of India, no matter how accurate and mild it may be. And then you fight tooth and nail to prove that India is better than Pakistan in every aspect, without allowing for any "inconvenient truths" to intrude.

Didnt attack you perosnally (except probably calling you old man once and that too in a figure of speech). Only your methods and intent....

And its the accuracy of your content that is the biggest issue..

It's your blind and misguided patriotism that gets in the way of any rational discussion about India and Pakistan. Unfortunately, you are not unique among Indians in this regard.

Everytime your blind hatered for India will make you say half truths and irrational statements (on which you want to have a rational discussion ) to prove your point, you will find the blind patriotism of an Indian in your way.. And thanks for knowing that I am not unique in rebutting your half truths..

 

[Jade]

Let's be honest here.

You have never argued with me on any criticisms of Pakistan, some of it very harsh, that are found in almost all of my posts.

The only time you (and some of the Indian posters here) start attacking me personally and find fault with my posts is when you perceive any criticism of India, no matter how accurate and mild it may be. And then you fight tooth and nail to prove that India is better than Pakistan in every aspect, without allowing for any "inconvenient truths" to intrude.

It's your blind and misguided patriotism that gets in the way of any rational discussion about India and Pakistan. Unfortunately, you are not unique among Indians in this regard.

Pankaj Mishra describes this common Indian trait in the following words:

Apparently, no inconvenient truths are allowed to mar what Foreign Affairs, the foreign policy journal of America's elite, has declared a "roaring capitalist success story". Add Bollywood's singing and dancing stars, beauty queens and Booker prize-winning writers to the Tatas, the Mittals and the IT tycoons, and the picture of Indian confidence, vigour and felicity is complete.

Haq's Musings: Western Myths About Peaceful, Stable and Prosperous India

Mr. Haq,

You selectively criticize Pakistan on non trivial issues to show that your writings are impartial. Just go through all your posting and you had know whether your criticism of India were mild and accurate. It is your blind and misguided patriotism that has got us all to this nonsense. Fortunately, you are unique among Pakistanis in this regard

 

[desiman]

Let's be honest here.

You have never argued with me on any criticisms of Pakistan, some of it very harsh, that are found in almost all of my posts.

The only time you (and some of the Indian posters here) start attacking me personally and find fault with my posts is when you perceive any criticism of India, no matter how accurate and mild it may be. And then you fight tooth and nail to prove that India is better than Pakistan in every aspect, without allowing for any "inconvenient truths" to intrude.

It's your blind and misguided patriotism that gets in the way of any rational discussion about India and Pakistan. Unfortunately, you are not unique among Indians in this regard.

Pankaj Mishra describes this common Indian trait in the following words:

Apparently, no inconvenient truths are allowed to mar what Foreign Affairs, the foreign policy journal of America's elite, has declared a "roaring capitalist success story". Add Bollywood's singing and dancing stars, beauty queens and Booker prize-winning writers to the Tatas, the Mittals and the IT tycoons, and the picture of Indian confidence, vigour and felicity is complete.

Haq's Musings: Western Myths About Peaceful, Stable and Prosperous India

Again you continue with your propaganda machine. You yourself are to shallow to accept facts. I have explained how credible Pankaj Mishra's editorials are. He is a god for you India haters and a prime example of a negatively tuned personality. Your mindset again is just like a terrorist being brainwashed into thinking that all that is India is wrong. You first start a propaganda machine by plagiarizing articles, cutting them up, playing with statistics, posting outdated number and then when you get debunked nicely you start calling everybody else stupid. Did you even care to watch the ABC video i posted or is that Indian propaganda also ? Seriously Riaz Haq now you are just crying like a baby and indulging in mere finger pointing. Give up and go home. You cannot tolerate anything good that is Indian and that’s the fact. You have been brainwashed to the extent when even after mentioning the likes of many successful Indian companies you still manage to find a point to chase after. Very sad, truly very very sad.

 

[RiazHaq]

Why should I??


Didnt attack you perosnally (except probably calling you old man once and that too in a figure of speech). Only your methods and intent....

And its the accuracy of your content that is the biggest issue..


Everytime your blind hatered for India will make you say half truths and irrational statements (on which you want to have a rational discussion ) to prove your point, you will find the blind patriotism of an Indian in your way.. And thanks for knowing that I am not unique in rebutting your half truths..

Just go back to my thread starter post and look at the hateful responses to know the organized efforts by you and others to dismiss any and all of my negatives about India, while ignoring any of negatives about Pakistan.

I know it'll still upset you, but go and look at the sources I have provided, such as IFPRI, UNICEF, UNDP, WHO, UNESCO, others to verify the bottom line that India is home to the largest population of poor, hungry and illiterate people in the world, two-thirds of whom still defecate in the open, in spite India' rapid economic growth in the lat two decades.

Your response is similar to the howls of protests that greeted "Slumdog Millionaire" upon its release.

As Times reported, Slumdog producers were also accused of "selective manipulation" by Indians, because it showed a side of India that Indians like to hide.

Here's an excerpt from the Times story:

"As a review on the same website by Vrinda Nabar, an Indian professor at a US university, put it: “Slumdog's eventual victory comes at a price. When the selective manipulation of Third World squalor can make for a feel-good movie in a dismal year, the global village has a long way to go.”

Shocked by Slumdog's poverty **** | Alice Miles - Times Online

Here's another excerpt from Slate:

"It is understandable that the conversation has taken on a more serious tone in India, which has long been sensitive to depictions, by Indians and outsiders alike, of its lower socioeconomic classes. The great Indian filmmaker Satyajit Ray was criticized in Parliament for "exporting poverty." When the BBC aired French director Louis Malle's Phantom India, an epic travelogue that sought to capture the contradictions and complexities of Indian society, it led to a minor international incident, culminating in the expulsion of the BBC's New Delhi bureau."

Is Slumdog Millionaire a portrait of the real India or a stylishly shot collection of clichés? - By Dennis Lim - Slate Magazine

 

[Aspirin]

Can't we go by leaving it here for once and for all....

 

[karan.1970]

Just go back to my thread starter post and look at the hateful responses to know the organized efforts by you and others to dismiss any and all of my negatives about India, while ignoring any of negatives about Pakistan.

I dont know what the hell you are talking about..You started this thread in the 1st week of Jan and my first response was

I generally find the below site (based on CIA worldbook) fairly accurate

Population - Country Comparison

My second response was after 2 months and it was

And guys.. trust me.. I am talking from experience.. A lot more can be achieved by simply talking offline to the moderators and /or the person you think is posting bad stuff.

Understand that most of us are fairly normal everday people and respond well to normal positive stimulii..

Try it and hopefully you will be pleasently surprised....

What hateful responses from me are you talking about..??

I know it'll still upset you, but go and look at the sources I have provided, such as IFPRI, UNICEF, UNDP, WHO, UNESCO, others to verify the bottom line that India is home to the largest population of poor, hungry and illiterate people in the world, two-thirds of whom still defecate in the open, in spite India' rapid economic growth in the lat two decades.

And I argued with similar statistics from UNDP, HDR, WEF, World Bank to prove that in most of the cases, Pakistan fared worse than India despite doing better in some of the individual factors..

Your response is similar to the howls of protests that greeted "Slumdog Millionaire" upon its release.

As Times reported, Slumdog producers were also accused of "selective manipulation" by Indians, because it showed a side of India that Indians like to hide.

Here's an excerpt from the Times story:

"As a review on the same website by Vrinda Nabar, an Indian professor at a US university, put it: “Slumdog's eventual victory comes at a price. When the selective manipulation of Third World squalor can make for a feel-good movie in a dismal year, the global village has a long way to go.”

Shocked by Slumdog's poverty **** | Alice Miles - Times Online

Here's another excerpt from Slate:

"It is understandable that the conversation has taken on a more serious tone in India, which has long been sensitive to depictions, by Indians and outsiders alike, of its lower socioeconomic classes. The great Indian filmmaker Satyajit Ray was criticized in Parliament for "exporting poverty." When the BBC aired French director Louis Malle's Phantom India, an epic travelogue that sought to capture the contradictions and complexities of Indian society, it led to a minor international incident, culminating in the expulsion of the BBC's New Delhi bureau."

Is Slumdog Millionaire a portrait of the real India or a stylishly shot collection of clichés? - By Dennis Lim - Slate Magazine

Not worth responding to.. We are talking about your posting of selectively edited text to score points and not putting the whole article while refering to it.. Simply by drawing a parallel to a misguided effort by some folks in INdia you cant back away from the half truths you tried to propogate..

 

[RiazHaq]

Not worth responding to.. We are talking about your posting of selectively edited text to score points and not putting the whole article while refering to it.. Simply by drawing a parallel to a misguided effort by some folks in INdia you cant back away from the half truths you tried to propogate..

There's a lt in common between you and those who protested against Slumdog.

You are repeating the same false accusation as other Indians who accused Slumdog's producers of "selective manipulation" because the movie exposed things about India that they find embarrassing.

Nobody puts up an entire article when they are quoting from it. It makes no sense at all. It's impractical. The right thing to do is provide links to the entire article which I did on my website and here. And I posted the entire videoclip from Intelligence Squared debate.

And what you did was distort the articles (from the links I provided) to take the attention away from any thing that you find embarrassing, just like those who protested about Slumdog.

 

[karan.1970]

There's a lt in common between you and those who protested against Slumdog.

You are repeating the same false accusation as other Indians who accused Slumdog's producers of "selective manipulation" because the movie exposed things about India that they find embarrassing.

Nobody puts up an entire article when they are quoting from it. It makes no sense at all. It's impractical. The right thing to do is provide links to the entire article which I did on my website and here. And I posted the entire videoclip from Intelligence Squared debate.

And what you did was distort the articles (from the links I provided) to take the attention away from any thing that you find embarrassing, just like those who protested about Slumdog.

You are at it again.. You falsely accuse me of making hateful comments about you when you posted your initial article. And when proven wrong, move to your next statement...

Now its your opinion that what I am saying is similar to the issue people had with Slumdog millionaire. You are most welcome to have an opinion and I really dont have to defend myself there.

You are somewhat right in saying that at times one doesnt post the whole article but, what you do is something different. Lets take an example

1. You picked up an article that concludes that Pakistan's survival is at stake because of its problems that are vastly different scale than that of what India faces (like Naxals, Poverty etc)
2. You find a paragraph in that article that talks well about pakistan
3. You use that paragraph as an example to show that Pakistan is better off than India..

This is very different than quoting an intro from an article and then providing a link below it. Also in such cases the link you provide is to your blog which repeats the same tactic and not the original source. Agreed that in your blog you have the link but thats multiple steps away from the post you make at Pakdef.. And hence the ruse..


Edit:: What articles did I distort.. ??

 

[desiman]

You are at it again.. You falsely accuse me of making hateful comments about you when you posted your initial article. And when proven wrong, move to your next statement...

Now its your opinion that what I am saying is similar to the issue people had with Slumdog millionaire. You are most welcome to have an opinion and I really dont have to defend myself there.

You are somewhat right in saying that at times one doesnt post the whole article but, what you do is something different. Lets take an example

1. You picked up an article that concludes that Pakistan's survival is at stake because of its problems that are vastly different scale than that of what India faces (like Naxals, Poverty etc)
2. You find a paragraph in that article that talks well about pakistan
3. You use that paragraph as an example to show that Pakistan is better off than India..

This is very different than quoting an intro from an article and then providing a link below it. Also in such cases the link you provide is to your blog which repeats the same tactic and not the original source. Agreed that in your blog you have the link but thats multiple steps away from the post you make at Pakdef.. And hence the ruse..


Edit:: What articles did I distort.. ??

Dont worry Karan we all know who is distorting what.

 

[RiazHaq]

You are at it again.. You falsely accuse me of making hateful comments about you when you posted your initial article. And when proven wrong, move to your next statement...

Now its your opinion that what I am saying is similar to the issue people had with Slumdog millionaire. You are most welcome to have an opinion and I really dont have to defend myself there.

You are somewhat right in saying that at times one doesnt post the whole article but, what you do is something different. Lets take an example

1. You picked up an article that concludes that Pakistan's survival is at stake because of its problems that are vastly different scale than that of what India faces (like Naxals, Poverty etc)
2. You find a paragraph in that article that talks well about pakistan
3. You use that paragraph as an example to show that Pakistan is better off than India..

This is very different than quoting an intro from an article and then providing a link below it. Also in such cases the link you provide is to your blog which repeats the same tactic and not the original source. Agreed that in your blog you have the link but thats multiple steps away from the post you make at Pakdef.. And hence the ruse..


Edit:: What articles did I distort.. ??

By taking attention away from its key message, you have fundamentally distorted the entire thrust of Dalrymple's presentation that debunks the media myths that "India is super power and Pakistan a failed state".

While this distortion may have fed your ego and served your purpose of making Pakistan look bad, it has served to mislead in the same way that the Indian and western media are misleading the world about the differences between India and Pakistan.

 

[Chiru]

By taking attention away from its key message, you have fundamentally distorted the entire thrust of Dalrymple's presentation that debunks the media myths that "India is super power and Pakistan a failed state".

While this distortion may have fed your ego and served your purpose of making Pakistan look bad, it has served to mislead in the same way that the Indian and western media are misleading the world about the differences between India and Pakistan.

Leave about indian and western media bias. Dalrymple is not westerner?

is he not biased??

BTW show me which media favors pakistan. it is hard to pick good cherry from pakistan. but easy to pick couple of bad cherry from india and other countries.

 

[karan.1970]

By taking attention away from its key message, you have fundamentally distorted the entire thrust of Dalrymple's presentation that debunks the media myths that "India is super power and Pakistan a failed state".

While this distortion may have fed your ego and served your purpose of making Pakistan look bad, it has served to mislead in the same way that the Indian and western media are misleading the world about the differences between India and Pakistan.

I really think you enjoy this and are intentionally missing the point. But lets carry on if this is the path you want to go..

First, lets look at what Dalrymple said in his final paragraph...


Sixty years after its birth, India faces a number of serious problems -not least the growing gap between rich and poor, the criminalisation of politics, and the flourishing Maoist and Naxalite groups that have recently proliferated in the east of the country. But Pakistan's problems are on a different scale; indeed, the country finds itself at a crossroads. As Jugnu Mohsin, the publisher of the Lahore-based Friday Times, put it recently, "After a period of relative quiet, for the first time in a decade, we are back to the old question: it is not just whether Pakistan, but will Pakistan survive?" On the country's 60th birthday, the answer is by no means clear

And this was in 2007, significantly before the $hit hit the fan in 2008 in Pakistan. As I said before, I dont buy into the whole arguement of failed state anyway, but there is no place in his article that this gentleman says that Pakistan is better off than India.. Actually quite opposite as highlighted above..

And this is the thrust of your thread anyway.. Not to debunk the notion of India - superpower and pakistan - failed state...

About misleading, its fairly visible on who is trying to do that.. But sorry to say, unsuccessfully...