Indian Army Continues to Use Civilians as Shield Along LOC

[Joe Shearer]

Ordinary Indians will NEVER support what happened to that poor boy. We are horrified to learn what he went through. This's something the Pakistanis here sometimes just don't get.

It was a horrible obnoxious act, and was reviled by everyone. Only one very special category of Indians wallowed in it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

it doesn't mean summary incarceration of him by his patrons without charge is suddenly defensible from an Indian perspective. This is the behaviour that India regards itself as being above, purely by virtue of being "democratic". It makes no difference who is pointing this fundamental failure of due process out to Hindustan - the facts of the matter are not diminished and those facts remain self evident for all to see. The truth stands out clearly from falsehood.

I would like to know in which post, in what words, I defended his incarceration. When we talk glibly about misdirection, we should remember the adage about people in glass houses.

Furthermore, everybody and his maiden aunt knows that the current political party in power is not particularly impressed by the Rule of Law, and has set its hand to bringing about an alteration in the Indian state on majoritarian lines, based on the wishes of the majority, however skilfully packaged up, and in total disregard of either law or of institutions. India regards herself as above these, but not this party and its fellow-travellers; pointing out 'this fundamental failure of due process out (sic) to Hindustan' is as relevant as offering to iron dry the trousers of a passenger on the Titanic. The truth is something that we Indians of a secular and liberal persuasion saw in 2002; we did not need the citizens of a state floundering from one state of martial law to another to tell us about it, and we still do not. These pointings out are hypocritical at the core; they are clearly intended to serve the purposes of those conferring these benefits of couch-potato expertise to us, and has nothing to do with our success or failure as a state in combating these regressive elements.

That India is actually behaving within the remit of Indian law is a stark reminder of how dangerous the tools of statecraft and legislative powers are in the hands of delusional sociopaths.

Not in the spirit of whataboutery, but in the spirit of encouraging historical memory, those who find this disturbing might like to refresh their memories by reading once again Munir J. on the doctrine of necessity.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

It was a horrible obnoxious act, and was reviled by everyone. Only one very special category of Indians wallowed in it.

That special kind of "super sensitive" Indians always wallow in the other's suffering. They are a crass, uncultured, unfeeling, uncaring lot. Their parents never instilled in them a basic value system consisting of timeless principles: love all human beings as you love yourself, treat people with respect, be nice to the weak and children.

Their parents were scumbags, and the lads (and the young ladies) followed suit.

In India, these "super sensitive" lot are everywhere. Someone should have slapped them at the right time. It's never too late.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

we did not need the citizens of a state floundering from one state of martial law to another to tell us about it, and we still do not. These pointings out are hypocritical at the core; t

Joe I don't think you want to have any reasonable discussion on anything. This is the same whataboutism you accused me of. Moreover, it is the height of arrogance to summarily dismiss criticism on human rights just because they come from a citizen of an autocratic nation state. This is why Pakistanis and Chinese fundamentally are disappointed with Indians. We don't despise you, we pity you, that instead of judging on merit, you dismiss on assumption.

I took up this argument on this thread with you because you have failed to condemn a violation of the Geneva conventions and Rome Statute viz placement of artillery pieces in a civilian areas, despite documented protest by those civilians (not that such protest is mandatory). Hey, you're the military guy. You've explained your army's position. I'm not denying that flat ground is needed for artillery sourcing. Then politely evacuate the civilians.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe I don't think you want to have any reasonable discussion on anything.

You do realise that I cannot tell people what to think. I said whatever I had to say, and if you choose to believe that disagreeing with you constitutes being unreasonable, it leaves me helpless.

 

[Joe Shearer]

This is the same whataboutism you accused me of.

In a sense you are right, if we reduce it to a tit-for-tat exchange. My point is different; from the very outset of the two states coming into existence, one of them has taken it as a prescriptive right to use all means of force against the other. All means is not an exaggeration for effect, it is the most mildly-worded truth.

So please try to understand, even if you do not sympathise - I have no fear of that at all - the raw truth that we are faced with. We are faced with your using every means at your disposal to achieve your aims, and to achieve that vindication of your national existence that is given by winning Kashmir. When we hear you pick at our democracy, pick at the scabs of our wounds from counter-insurgency, and use the foulest language against our icons, all the while having denied the one, created the second and abused us as individuals and as a group, it is hard to smile and to bow and to scrape and to massage your sense of fulfillment.

 

[Joe Shearer]

This is why Pakistanis and Chinese fundamentally are disappointed with Indians. We don't despise you, we pity you, that instead of judging on merit, you dismiss on assumption.

Noted. All Indians will be informed that they are currently in the dog-house.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I took up this argument on this thread with you because you have failed to condemn a violation of the Geneva conventions and Rome Statute viz placement of artillery pieces in a civilian areas, despite documented protest by those civilians (not that such protest is mandatory).

That is completely wrong. This is a war going on; nations at peace do not fire 105 mm and 155 mm guns at each other. When there was war earlier, neither you nor we stopped placing ordnance where it was most effective - sometimes, inside villages. You can check with your own military people.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

That is completely wrong. This is a war going on; nations at peace do not fire 105 mm and 155 mm guns at each other. When there was war earlier, neither you nor we stopped placing ordnance where it was most effective - sometimes, inside villages. You can check with your own military people.

Joe, if some of us visit Pakistan next year (as discussed in another thread), we'll force you to share accommodation with Mirza.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

In a sense you are right, if we reduce it to a tit-for-tat exchange. My point is different; from the very outset of the two states coming into existence, one of them has taken it as a prescriptive right to use all means of force against the other. All means is not an exaggeration for effect, it is the most mildly-worded truth.

So please try to understand, even if you do not sympathise - I have no fear of that at all - the raw truth that we are faced with. We are faced with your using every means at your disposal to achieve your aims, and to achieve that vindication of your national existence that is given by winning Kashmir. When we hear you pick at our democracy, pick at the scabs of our wounds from counter-insurgency, and use the foulest language against our icons, all the while having denied the one, created the second and abused us as individuals and as a group, it is hard to smile and to bow and to scrape and to massage your sense of fulfillment.

Ultimately, we reduce both our arguments to subjectivity. I could just as easily argue that Hindustan in its nascent form along with its allies used all vile and inhuman means at its disposal to achieve its objectives in the erstwhile Dogra fiefdom. I think you realise this bitter truth. Hence, I shall take your jingoistic simplifications with a pinch of salt.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

Ultimately, we reduce both our arguments to subjectivity. I could just as easily argue that Hindustan in its nascent form along with its allies used all vile and inhuman means at its disposal to achieve its objectives in the erstwhile Dogra fiefdom. I think you realise this bitter truth. Hence, I shall take your jingoistic simplifications with a pinch of salt.

A lot of Pakistanis hate the Dogras. Northern India has 7-8 million of them, I hope the hatred is only against the rulers and not the entire ethnicity. Of course, there are Muslim Dogra clans.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I could just as easily argue that Hindustan in its nascent form along with its allies used all vile and inhuman means at its disposal to achieve its objectives in the erstwhile Dogra fiefdom.

Of course you could. Presenting your argument in these terms is neither new nor unpractised.

That is all there is to it. Two generations of quibbling over details to hide the murderous intent behind the childish tantrums. One side now fully exposed in its degradation and toxic social outlook, the other pursuing the same goals with all the unctuous virtue and hypocrisy of a debauched Vestal Virgin.

It has been time-hallowed to present convoluted arguments that deny that all who today live in three countries won freedom on terms decided and imposed legally but not practically by our common overlords, who acquired their right to do that through battle and conquest, just as they had who were replaced by the overlords; that one side in the quarrel realised with a start that they had lost imperium and what that meant to their sheltered existence in terms of daily life; that the other side found for the first time in several centuries the courage to openly consider the unequal status that had been forced on them, and found that they did not like the feeling of being unequal and disenfranchised in the lands of their fathers (mothers didn't figure in those politically incorrect days); that both sides took to expressing their common and completely interchangeable dread of inequality through short, sharp bursts of vicious killing separated by years of living together peacefully; that both sides worked hard at converting these feelings of humiliation into grotesque theories of exclusivity; that both spent their time in perfecting these theories, and neglected the obvious opportunities available to fight for freedom from the overlords; that finally both disgraced themselves, neither more nor less than the other in reviving their vision of equality on the bodies and minds of defenceless men, women and children.

And that was just the introduction to two generations of lies made up to justify each other's fitness for slaughter.

We really have reason to be proud of ourselves.

No wonder that you Pancha Pandavas are now bent on another Final Solution. What you could not do in real life, being unable to summon the heroism and urge to martyrdom that separate the dull clay of common humanity from the burning zeal of the warrior, being each one roped and chained by the laws of the lands in which you choose to live, that you adopted for your own personal comforts, you are now venting with all your venom in an online forum against other members of that forum!

How blessed is the rarefied air in the unapproachable world of the elect.