What's new

India’s military strength on the rise : Chinese media

“Bharatiya Janata Party, one of the two major political parties in India, has strong nationalist tendencies. It has opposed the partition scheme implemented by the UK and advocates the re-inclusion of Pakistan in India’s territory. This claim, although not recognized by the Indian government and mainstream political forces, is likely to affect the relationship between India and Pakistan,” Tatiana Shomyan, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said in an interview with Nezavisimaya Gazeta.

That must be some pretty good vodka Comrade Tatiana
 
What is this supposed to mean? A country neglects other critical needs, avoids beefing up its population capabilities and makes huge sacrifices - for gaining sympathy?

There are quite a no of "China Threat" topics on PDF alone which are catching attentions and on the Pakistani side your continuous harping of "Terrorists" state - I dont think countries like usa has mentioned these 2 labels as many or as frequently as india. And more so in the reaction to your claim of "China Threats" scenario, your testing/procurement of weapons, construction of military harbours/bases are nearly if not all "China specific".

What are all those sensationalisations about if they are not asking for attention and thus the sympathy for your justification of arms expansion at the expense of more impending domestic issues at hand?

We never designate any weaponry constructions or whatever with a name which is country specific.
 
None of the four directly rules states have got results superior to that of the others. Most of it is propaganda, the champion example being Gujarat.

Is it not true that Gujrat (either in 2012 or 2011) had double digit growth rates, much higher than most of the states in India?

Anyways, the point I was getting at is calling BJP a Hindu chauvinistic party is not fair, just like BJP supporters calling Congress names like an Islamic appeasing party is not fair. There is no doubt it is a right wing party that values the religious aspects of the majority, but thats about it...
 
“Bharatiya Janata Party, one of the two major political parties in India, has strong nationalist tendencies. It has opposed the partition scheme implemented by the UK and advocates the re-inclusion of Pakistan in India’s territory. This claim, although not recognized by the Indian government and mainstream political forces, is likely to affect the relationship between India and Pakistan,” Tatiana Shomyan, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said in an interview with Nezavisimaya Gazeta.

That must be some pretty good vodka Comrade Tatiana

Pretty good vodka? As in, In vino, veritas? What she's saying is what the BJP and its stooges proclaim proudly at every opportunity. And it does get the Pakistanis angry.
 
I didn't see any Chinese media sources in that article claiming the Indian military/army was growing stronger.

I just want to say India seems very paranoid with China to the extent that your media is obsessed with China apparently taking over India. The reality is China doesn't really care about India anywhere as much as the other way around.

not indian media buddy russian.
 
Pretty good vodka? As in, In vino, veritas? What she's saying is what the BJP and its stooges proclaim proudly at every opportunity. And it does get the Pakistanis angry.

Hmm - maybe I am wrong, but I have not seen any talk of BJP and its stooges proclaim that they will take over Pakistan - maybe it happened in the halcyon days of the Rath Yatra? I have not seen it. Perhaps you can shed some light on this.
 
Hmm - maybe I am wrong, but I have not seen any talk of BJP and its stooges proclaim that they will take over Pakistan - maybe it happened in the halcyon days of the Rath Yatra? I have not seen it. Perhaps you can shed some light on this.

Look around, and this time with your eyes open. You will get lots of examples, including examples on this forum.
 
Look around, and this time with your eyes open. You will get lots of examples, including examples on this forum.

Thought of you as a serious guy , one more BJPphobic .:lol:

Show me one example of any on post bjp leader who said to include green gods country into india ?

BJP's constitution is completely secular and the only philosophy it has is integral humanism which is a gandhian principle.

Constitution and Rules
 
Look around, and this time with your eyes open. You will get lots of examples, including examples on this forum.

Yes - on Internet forums there are elements more Catholic than the Pope. I am talking about any mainstream leader from the BJP or VHP or RSS making such a comment or including it in a manifesto. I am hardly a fan of the saffron brigade and neither do I have any faith in the Congress so I don't have preconceived notions. I do recollect reading that the likes of Nathuram Godse did not want his ashes immersed till the reunification of India. But besides that, I don't recollect reading about this.
 
Thought of you as a serious guy , one more BJPphobic .:lol:

Show me one example of any on post bjp leader who said to include green gods country into india ?

BJP's constitution is completely secular and the only philosophy it has is integral humanism which is a gandhian principle.

Constitution and Rules

It was the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha that were behind Gandhi's assassination, since you have not read up on it.

The day the BJP can be described as secular will be the day that you can make your pizza out of bits of the Moon.

I am a serious guy, and BJP phobic. It is difficult to understand why you have problems with this combination.
 
It was the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha that were behind Gandhi's assassination, since you have not read up on it.

The day the BJP can be described as secular will be the day that you can make your pizza out of bits of the Moon.

I am a serious guy, and BJP phobic. It is difficult to understand why you have problems with this combination.

BJP's constitution is secular but just like the congress it uses religious polarization to its benefits .

The problem with bjp phobia is that you think with prejudice in your mind rather than just taking it as any other political party.
 
BJP's constitution is secular but just like the congress it uses religious polarization to its benefits .

The problem with bjp phobia is that you think with prejudice in your mind rather than just taking it as any other political party.

Those pieces of paper mean nothing. They take their views from Savarkar, and those other monsters, Hedgewar and Golwalkar.

Read their writings to learn which is the Master's Voice that the little BJP leaders listen to, with rapt attention.
 
Those pieces of paper mean nothing. They take their views from Savarkar, and those other monsters, Hedgewar and Golwalkar.

Read their writings to learn which is the Master's Voice that the little BJP leaders listen to, with rapt attention.

In india most people are not secular because they believe in some ideology or the other but because we are constitutionally secular , india has progressed.

BJP was much more hardliner in 90's than it is now and will be even less tomorrow ,you just have to view it as a normal political party rather than viewing with an anti-bjp mindset.

BTW gowalkar &RSS disowned we the people.
 
In india most people are not secular because they believe in some ideology or the other but because we are constitutionally secular , india has progressed.

BJP was much more hardliner in 90's than it is now and will be even less tomorrow ,you just have to view it as a normal political party rather than viewing with a anti-bjp mindset.

First, the positives. There is some truth in what you say, that people are not secular because of some ideology, they are secular because the constitution says so. But not, sadly, much truth, for two reasons. Did you not know, O wise one, that the secularism clause entered the Constitution through an amendment in 1976? Is it your contention that the Indian people were not secular until then? Secondly, the secularism that we have is not secularism at all. Secularism is the removal of all religion from public life. Our secularism, by contrast, seeks to appease religions, and religious leaders by allowing equality of all religions in public life. A subtle difference but a damaging one. As a direct result, in practice, especially in Congress practice, the effect of secularism has been to repress the nationalist aspects of secularism, and play up the minority appeasement. There are thousands of examples of this.

So what is the point? The point is that you are mistaken in citing secularism being present in India only due to its constitutional sanction. The point is that it cannot be part of India and of Indian public life until it is part of any ideology, and that ideology is inculcated in the citizenry. Merely leaving it in the Constitution is worth nothing.

So, leading from that, the pious sanctimony of the BJP constitution means less than nothing. It is not even an aspect that any BJP leader needs to feel the need for, it is a very quotable aspect, which can be drawn out and flourished as a matter of policy and propaganda, without in any way affecting the daily day-to-day horrors that they inflict on those whom they see as beyond the pale.

Your argument about the BJP softening down is endearing but entirely mistaken. It is like arguing that a sadist and torturing monster is now reformed because he cuts off a finger, where earlier he would cut off the whole hand. Not much of an improvement, except to those hopefully looking for signs of humanity that they can display to their sceptical proximity.

I am happy to know that you know about the hostility of Golwalkar and the RSS to the constitution.

I am sad that you have not worked out yet that this hostility has gone nowhere, but lives on. Even a slight familiarity with the views and voiced opinions of the BJP leadership would show you the innate bigotry which still runs in their veins.

BTW gowalkar &RSS disowned we the people.

I am amused by your earnest efforts to defend the indefensible. At the same time, there is a charming innocence about your efforts. It is difficult to be entirely dismissive or to ridicule these.

However, you should know that the constitution introduced secularism through a constitutional amendment only in 1976. If the secularism of the Indian people depends on the constitution, apparently, going by your logic, we were not secular before 1976. Strange, that. I don't remember feeling more secular after 1976 than before. Must be my thick skin.

You should also know that if that be the reasoning, then the constitution has really had no effect on Indian secularism or the lack of it among the people. Following from that, the BJP constitution is unlikely to have had any influence on the views of their leaders and workers.

Your argument about the gradual mellowing of the BJP is very endearing. However, the unpleasant thought strikes one's mind that this merely changes an axe-murderer to a sweet little man who merely chops off a hand, or two. A wonderful plea, but lacking conviction.

Finally, it is good to speak to one who knows the views of Golwalkar about the constitution. They are fully reflected in the views of his erstwhile spiritual descendants; you have only to see the actions of these leaders, rather than their pious mouthings, to see that the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree.
 
Back
Top Bottom