What's new

Kayani wants India’s Afghan mission closed

Vinod

Ideology is always "selective" -- you quote Will Durant, and you imagine you did a service to India and Hindus? Many temples were destroyed in numerous invasions from what is now Afghnaistan -- but also many Masajid were built -- the very language you speak is mostly what "mohammadans" brought to India -- it as Mr. Hussain says, a very mixed picture, of good bad, sweet and bitter - yet you present memory in a selective fashion, and in doing so run your argument to ground.

Recall the caution offered to you about trick question and taking care before attempting to answer it -- you went for it without thinking and exposed your argument, namely that it's substance is ideology.
 
Vinod

Ideology is always "selective" -- you quote Will Durant, and you imagine you did a service to India and Hindus?

Not really! I am here as an individual and I don't think any forum is so important that posting there is a service to anything but expressing yourself.

Many temples were destroyed in numerous invasions from what is now Afghnaistan -- but also many Masajid were built -- the very language you speak is mostly what "mohammadans" brought to India -- it as Mr. Hussain says, a very mixed picture, of good bad, sweet and bitter - yet you present memory in a selective fashion, and in doing so run your argument to ground.

Yes. Obviously my memory would be of those temples being destroyed and many times mosques being built on their ruins. Only fair!

If I am more than a bit skeptical about claims of "peaceful and tolerant" after those events and the fact that those people are considered heroes by far too many, you can't really blame me.

Or may be you can!

And most invasions came from beyond Afghanistan. Afghans were just the first to fall to those invaders and become their base in most cases. They were as much victims as perpetrators. Even Babur made mounds of Pushtun skulls on the way to Delhi.

Recall the caution offered to you about trick question and taking care before attempting to answer it -- you went for it without thinking and exposed your argument, namely that it's substance is ideology.

That's the problem with cryptic questions. You may not get what you may have intended.
 
Obviously my memory would be of those temples being destroyed and many times mosques being built on their ruins. Only fair!

Even more examples of ideology -- you say that's only fair, are Masajid not part of your memories? Or is the India you inhabit one where only temples may exist?? Perhaps an example of barabarians from within?

When I say you ran your own argument into bground by exposing the basis of your position as an ideology, I'm being cryptic:cheers:
 
First, Pakistan and Kayani should realize that they are not in control of Pakistan to begin with and so should stop dreaming of ruling Afghanistan by proxy. Instead, he should co-operate with international powers including India to make Afghanistan a better place. Indian mission in Afghanistan are there for the good purpose of building better infrastructure, new institutions, training of people to gain skills and thus helping constructively in building a better Afghanistan.

Kayani's demands obviously indicates that he and Pakistan have no good intentions of having a strong and independent Afghanistan as a neighbour.
 
Even more examples of ideology -- you say that's only fair, are Masajid not part of your memories? Or is the India you inhabit one where only temples may exist?? Perhaps an example of barabarians from within?

Not mosques built on the ruins of temples!

Islam came in peace in Kerala (through traders) and the Keralites have a different memory.

North India (up to Deccan where the Bahamanis indulged in several genocides and temple destructions) is a different story and it has different memories.

Even now do I see a trace of regret or apology for that mindless destruction! Nope, only blaming the victims! Perhaps typical for some people.

Every place of worship has a place in India. Those that come up by destorying others' worship places don't have my approval.

When I say you ran your own argument into bground by exposing the basis of your position as an ideology, I'm being cryptic:cheers:

No, I don't think I quite understand what you intend here.

Don't you think Muslims should come forward to close that chapter so that we can all move on and have a proper closure?

Else don't you think it would be an open wound that may have consequences at some point. Won't all those deeds come back to bite?

Have they already started to bite? Is the current condition of some countries a very minor payback for those crimes?

Food for thought. May be.
 
Don't you think Muslims should come forward to close that chapter so that we can all move on and have a proper closure?

Else don't you think it would be an open wound that may have consequences at some point. Won't all those deeds come back to bite?

Have they already started to bite? Is the current condition of some countries a very minor payback for those crimes?


Perhaps Hindus can lead the way to such a reconciliation, I mean the attrocities of the caste system and those poor untouchables, you know.

Food for thought. May be.? But why play victim - social problems once attached to history (another exercise in ideology) always prove divisive - but perhaps that's the intent. -- Extra double cryptic
 
Perhaps Hindus can lead the way to such a reconciliation, I mean the attrocities of the caste system and those poor untouchables, you know.

Food for thought. May be.? But why play victim - social problems once attached to history (another exercise in ideology) always prove divisive - but perhaps that's the intent. -- Extra double cryptic

I knew the next attempt would be deflection. So predictable. ;)

As long as it works for you.

But you are right about correcting the wrongs of the caste system. India is trying to do that in its own way.

PS: BTW, I didn't bring up your sectarian violence, hundreds of sects, only one eligible for heaven etc. into the picture. Here the topic was memory and what it means to people.
 
Last edited:
India is trying to do that in its own way.

That comes across as "too wimpy" - apparently there is an Indian way of doing just about everything, and this way is different from everybody else's because iIndia is TRYING to do that, in it's own way"

I knew the next attempt would be deflection. So predictable

A self fullfilling prophesy? In india's own way? -- please, please don't wimp out - just never!
 
There you go getting wimpy on me again- OK, I play --

You say Indians in their own way are TRYING to reconcile - well that's good enough for me. You can be sure that we'll all be watching this attempt to "TRY" to reconcile. There may be lessons in it for us.
 
There you go getting wimpy on me again- OK, I play --

You say Indians in their own way are TRYING to reconcile - well that's good enough for me. You can be sure that we'll all be watching this attempt to "TRY" to reconcile. There may be lessons in it for us.

Perhaps you are finding it too difficult to see what should be obvious to all.

Caste discrimination is constitutionally banned in India. There are reservations for members of SC communities (positive discrimination). A mere complaint of caste based atrocity by weaker sections would land you in jail. They have become presidents, cabinet ministers and CMs. They are getting admissions to top Indian universities, getting top jobs and so on.

Has all discrimination ended? no!

Is India making an attempt, a bloody serious one? Yes!

I would rather you don't use words like "wimp" of you really want a serious discussion. I am here not for scoring cheap points but to understand your point of view and to present mine.
 
Muslims exploited the Hindu Cast system, The Brits did the same when they landed in the subcontinent, Alot of shuders(untouchables) converted to Chiristianity.. !!!
 
Even more examples of ideology -- you say that's only fair, are Masajid not part of your memories? Or is the India you inhabit one where only temples may exist??

Let me make it easy for you. So that the context is very clear and we are on the same page.

Let's take a hypothetical scenario. USA has occupied Afghanistan and Iraq (may be Pakistan as well if that helps you get the context better). Along with the soldiers comes an army of pastors ready to convert the heathens and deliver them from hell. The official policy is to levy a tax on all Muslims and kill many of them just for being Muslims.

After a time the situation is like: One third of people are Christians. 10,000 mosques destroyed and Churches built on their ruins. Millions are killed. The Christians coverts think they should be supporting Americans as they share the religion.

Needless to say the relations between the Muslims and the Christian converts are not the best. The Christians even divide the country as they can't live with the Muslims they think they were ruling till just the other day. Many Christians are still left behind in the old country though.

Now, an Iraqi (or Afghan or Pakistani) Muslim says that we should move beyond those hatreds. Let's reconcile and close the chapter, you just say sorry for those atrocities and destruction of mosques.

The Christian convert replies: Didn't we build Churches in place of those destroyed mosques? Do you have no place for Churches in your country?

Sounds a bit silly! Doesn't it?
 
Vinod

I welcome the change in your tone and ask if as you claim you are serious why is that you have chosen to disregard comments by labeling them cryptic?

And why is it, if you are serious, that you have allowed yourself to fall on the backfoot with defensive arguments?

Look fella, this discussion began by asking what the role of "memory" is and ought to be - it turned out that it's role is that of ideology.

From there you took it to insulting all Muslims in your Will Durant quote - having come up with zilch there you are on the backfoot with trying to defend your caste system and it's outrages.

You want to be serious? get back to the original idea.
 
Back
Top Bottom