Why some Muslims in India support Jihadists? Does that mean India do not treat Muslims well?
A Kind of yes & No, If you see a movie Redention and 'The Kingdom', I don't have first hand account, but based on the reading... It seems it is very easy to brainwash the Muslim youths by making them feel that Jihad is the way to reach god soon and some mullahs claiming that they will get 72 virgins in heaven after they die of Jihad and showing them videos of how the Muslims were oppressed by the west, Israel, India and else where!
There was a Pakistani guy Faisal Shahzad aged 30, educated, married and have a kid, settled in US... tried to bomb Times Square.... Let alone the uneducated youth stricken with poverty.
Also the incidents like 1992 Babri Masjid destruction and Godra riots in 2002 happened in India... And there are still many fools in RSS and Shiva Sena, Who would like to make India a Hindu state and add fuel.
Saffron terrorism which our Pakistani friends speak so enthusiastically... BJP supported it... It gave them the power... Anyone will do it... If it gives the government to them!
When we speak of Sinhalese it is racist but when Tamils speak of themselves it is ok. What kind a hypocrisy it that?
No Buddy... Your words were
like Singalese are everything... Tamils should behave like slaves... May be I felt that way.. So I stopped.
How did we marginalized Tamils? elaborate.
Sinhala Only Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BBC News - Sri Lanka profile - Timeline
Interesting that the above article notes that Tamils got settled in 3rd Century BC.....!
Why not? Sinhalese are a mix of other ethnicities just like Americans. And Tamils are like African Americans only Tamils were not brought here as slaves. Also Unlike African Americans Tamils did not connected with the main ethnic group.
The British gave freedom to all citizens of SL, NOT just for the Sinhalese.... Between the Tamils held high positions in British rule rather the Americans were marginalized for many centuries after America got independence!
In Sri Lanka no one is pushing any one to learn any thing. It is a personal choice.
Was it the case in 1950's and 1960's, Can a person who don't know Singala can get a government job?
Who ever said it according to you it will be pushing some foreign language on to others. Why you support it then? Why Tamils should not learn Sinhala?
Buddy the thing is simple, If you think Tamil is a foreign language to you and you will NOT learn then why push Tamils to learn your language? So you mean to say that we are arrogant that we are majority?
Everything should be bilateral? Then even our language has to change to some new bilateral language. What good will do to Sri Lanka when every thing is bilateral. Every problem will be solved when a Tamilian see a Sinhalese speak Tamil?
Trust me you are arrogant like the Hindi speaking people of India... When they come south they expect everyone to speak Hindi... Which is NOT at all correct... Let me ask the same question in different way, What is Sri Lanka going to lose if All Singalese learn Tamil and All Tamils learn Singala! And everyone is bilingual? The Language was the first barrier which separated the SL citizens... If this was NOT there, then
may be there would NOT have 30 year long blood shed in SL!
The real notion behind this learn Tamil IMO is that your ego to submit Sinhalese to bow down. I do not thing any good will come out from that.
The Tamils also can think like that right?
The real notion behind that All Tamils should learn Singala and We will NOT learn Tamil is your ego that we are majority in numbers.... If this has happened in 1950's I see people would have mingled and SL would NOT have passed Singala only act.... Which in turn avoided the civil war and lot of lives saved.... If you learn Spanish or French... It does NOT mean that you are bowing before the Spainiards or the French... It is your ego which prevents you.... Not the other way around!
There are better ways to solve the ethnic issue rather than be bilateral to everything.
If you are living together then you should have a way to communicate....
(i) Either all SL learn Tamil - NOT a possible solution and it is stupidity.
(ii) All learn both Sinala and Tamil - Best Possible solution.
(iii) Use a third language like English - Best solution which India adopted along with Hindi.. Which worked!
(iv) Force minorities to learn Singala - That is NOT their preferred solution!
There homes. Where else they go! They left there homes for British and they should left there working place for Sinhalese. If sending those Tamils away from SL is bad, isn't it equally bad to leave their native homes to work in some foreign land because their colonial master said so?
Easy question.... but they had NO choice then... Seems that they were treated sub-human then, So they should be treated the same way now also?
Nothing is fair in this world. In SL anyone has to play by the SL government rules.
It is the basic human nature to revolt if things goes against them... Then they will strike back... Which I hope they did very violently, It could have been avoided if the planners did a good job.
No No answer my query. Don't slip away.
I am NOT slipping away... I cannot answer for your thoughts which did NOT happen, I thought India missed the opportunity to annex Nepal, SL, Bhutan in 1948.... If such a thing happened then India would have been in a stronger position now! Can to explain why Indian fools like Nehru or Sardar Patel did NOT get that thought? My question is very weird right?
Gibbs do not know history I have ask him to give a credible source to back his claims but he didn't yield one yet. I can give you countless sources to back my theories.
PS. I do intend to attacked you. Sorry if you felt that way. Let's continue this discussion like friends.
Indeed he is right, See the BBC Timeline article!!!!
I appreciate your friendly tone!
