What's new

Story Behind Balochistan

Originally posted by Sid@Mar 3 2006, 11:03 PM
Everyone, please refrain from further mud-slinging and get back to the topic at hand. "Balochistan's troubles" in simple wording. Thnx.
[post=6610]Quoted post[/post]​

i dont know what u had termed as mud slinging. as whatever had been said on our part i mean most of the Pakistanis, thts wht going on there in Balochistan with so much externalities if u dont wana take or cant take these viwes just close the thread cuz u people might be abroad having not much concern whts going on here but we living in the country had to face the burnt of all this.

sorry for being too harsh even if u ban me for this i wont mind. i think such forums should either dont have moderators from rival countries be they Pakistanis or Indian or the forums should not choose their names such as ---- defence forum
 
.
I'm sure you are aware what mud-slinging means. It is something that you and Prashant were engaged in; accusing each other's country and media for things going wrong in your native countries.

There will always be externalities of such scenarios but accusing fellow country-men of not knowing enough just because they're abroad doesn't really solve the issue or show any effort on part of those who are still back there in the subcontinent to really change things. If you bore the brunt of all what is happening in Balochistan, why didn't you and people like you do something about it? That is the problem in Pakistan (being a Pakistani it is difficult to accept this but I have to). People accuse everyone 'else' for being the cause of their troubles while they clearly IGNORE the fact that them not doing anything themselves against what is going on in their homeland, is the biggest cause and crime.

Why aren't there mass rallies (peaceful) in support of the government or in support of the Balochis' rights (excluding the selfish sardars)? Why aren't Pakistanis taking sides instead playing safe by being neutral like it doesn't even matter to them? Why don't we rally in support of minorities when their Churches are burnt down and Synogogues torched? It is because we fear the opposing side (mostly the radical Islamists) and stay locked up in our houses. It is only when we overcome this fear will we be able to bring about a revolution to stabilize our motherland and clearly make it 'the land of the pure'. We need national mobilization but not behind the mad Mullahs. The moderates and liberals need to further their efforts in order to eradicate Zia Ul-Haq's legacy of religious fanaticism and intolerance.

Zeeshan S: What can we do (regarding Balochistan)? For starters, it would be better if we just learnt from history and avoided a repetition of 1971. I am against the sardars myself but the average Balochi is someone I can sympathise with. For too long they have been denied their rights as have people in other provinces with Punjab in full command of everything.

Now I'm a 'nationalist liberal' if I were to define my political views (meaning Pakistan comes first and ethnicity; whether Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, Pakhtoon, Mohajir doesn't matter because at the end of the day, we're all Pakistanis) but at the same time you have to give thought to the dominance over others by one province. I think our successive governments and Punjabi members of those establishments forget that Pakistan was created because of Hindu majority's stubborness and unwillingness to co-operate with the minority Muslims. Here we deal with the same situation, the dominant Punjab has to realize that it has to compromise and be willing to give up certain aspirations to obtain the goodwill of smaller provinces. The power cannot be just given entirely to the central federal government. Provinces need to be given more autonomy. Take the exampe of Canada or any other 'federation' type nation-state. Autonomy is central to solving all disputes.

Why is the average Baloch angry and unhappy? Because the central government exploits their province's natural resources and pays them meagre royalties. There are other issues as well. Discrimination is also a problem to some extent. There's so much unemployment among the Baloch (because of rampant illiteracy) that when a sardar offers Rs. 6000/month to a youngster in exchange for his services in that sardar's private militia, there's no doubt that the youngster would take up the offer (to support his family or for other reasons) because the opportunity cost of not taking up that offer is too high for that poverty stricken youngster plus all he has to do is go out a couple of times a month with his AK-47, fire a few rounds at a Frontier Corps. check post and return. The central government has to lure these young men away by giving them better incentives such as subsidized or even free education and job training so that they become economically productive instead of leaving them to waste their lives for the selfish cause of a particular sardar.
 
.
[Mod Edit: If you have something to talk about with a Mod or criticize something, please use the PM feature instead of posting in the main forum. Its one of the basic online etiquettes. Thnx]
 
.
Originally posted by Jana@Mar 2 2006, 08:03 PM
i exctly know what yellow journalism is m a journalist myself with sound education. wht i want to say that all these wrong things shoule be called bad journalism even not journalism at all
[post=6559]Quoted post[/post]​

pt taken
 
.
Originally posted by Sid@Mar 5 2006, 07:49 PM
I'm sure you are aware what mud-slinging means. It is something that you and Prashant were engaged in; accusing each other's country and media for things going wrong in your native countries.

There will always be externalities of such scenarios but accusing fellow country-men of not knowing enough just because they're abroad doesn't really solve the issue or show any effort on part of those who are still back there in the subcontinent to really change things. If you bore the brunt of all what is happening in Balochistan, why didn't you and people like you do something about it? That is the problem in Pakistan (being a Pakistani it is difficult to accept this but I have to). People accuse everyone 'else' for being the cause of their troubles while they clearly IGNORE the fact that them not doing anything themselves against what is going on in their homeland, is the biggest cause and crime.

Why aren't there mass rallies (peaceful) in support of the government or in support of the Balochis' rights (excluding the selfish sardars)? Why aren't Pakistanis taking sides instead playing safe by being neutral like it doesn't even matter to them? Why don't we rally in support of minorities when their Churches are burnt down and Synogogues torched? It is because we fear the opposing side (mostly the radical Islamists) and stay locked up in our houses. It is only when we overcome this fear will we be able to bring about a revolution to stabilize our motherland and clearly make it 'the land of the pure'. We need national mobilization but not behind the mad Mullahs. The moderates and liberals need to further their efforts in order to eradicate Zia Ul-Haq's legacy of religious fanaticism and intolerance.

Zeeshan S: What can we do (regarding Balochistan)? For starters, it would be better if we just learnt from history and avoided a repetition of 1971. I am against the sardars myself but the average Balochi is someone I can sympathise with. For too long they have been denied their rights as have people in other provinces with Punjab in full command of everything.

Now I'm a 'nationalist liberal' if I were to define my political views (meaning Pakistan comes first and ethnicity; whether Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, Pakhtoon, Mohajir doesn't matter because at the end of the day, we're all Pakistanis) but at the same time you have to give thought to the dominance over others by one province. I think our successive governments and Punjabi members of those establishments forget that Pakistan was created because of Hindu majority's stubborness and unwillingness to co-operate with the minority Muslims. Here we deal with the same situation, the dominant Punjab has to realize that it has to compromise and be willing to give up certain aspirations to obtain the goodwill of smaller provinces. The power cannot be just given entirely to the central federal government. Provinces need to be given more autonomy. Take the exampe of Canada or any other 'federation' type nation-state. Autonomy is central to solving all disputes.

Why is the average Baloch angry and unhappy? Because the central government exploits their province's natural resources and pays them meagre royalties. There are other issues as well. Discrimination is also a problem to some extent. There's so much unemployment among the Baloch (because of rampant illiteracy) that when a sardar offers Rs. 6000/month to a youngster in exchange for his services in that sardar's private militia, there's no doubt that the youngster would take up the offer (to support his family or for other reasons) because the opportunity cost of not taking up that offer is too high for that poverty stricken youngster plus all he has to do is go out a couple of times a month with his AK-47, fire a few rounds at a Frontier Corps. check post and return. The central government has to lure these young men away by giving them better incentives such as subsidized or even free education and job training so that they become economically productive instead of leaving them to waste their lives for the selfish cause of a particular sardar.
[post=6675]Quoted post[/post]​


Oh Sid, you are so correct. Those damn Mullahs, they are killing those Palestinians. They are bombings entire cities to ruble in Iraq. The Mullahs are throwing people into boiling in Uzbeckistan. The Mullahs are destroying Pakistan because they just can't accept [Mod Edit: Respect others' religion and its personalities. The question of the Prophet's cartoons extends beyond any Mullah because even a Liberal like myself was 'outraged' to see such a thing being allowed to happen. Mutual respect is the key.]


In fact the Mullahs were responsible for Iraq invading Iran and the destruction of one million people. [Mullahs had nothing to do with the World Wars. I know you might be having ulterior motives and you're trying to lay low by patronizing me but trust me, I'm NOT thinking what you are thinking]Put them behind bars and we will live in a Utopia where freedom and prosperity will reign for eternity without the interfernce of God, Prophets and Faith.
 
.
Originally posted by Sid@Mar 5 2006, 11:49 PM
I'm sure you are aware what mud-slinging means. It is something that you and Prashant were engaged in; accusing each other's country and media for things going wrong in your native countries.
[post=6675]Quoted post[/post]​

it wasnt that bad,it was rather a friendly chat. :rolleyes:
 
.
It isnt that easy sid,to come out in support and do selfless things in this world where each and every individual is tied up to his/her day day to tensions and targets.

No one has time for each other.

When i was home this dec, a muslim tea shop owner made a strange but stunning comment.

the radio was playing news and was saying about car bomb blast in iraq in which 38 iraqis was halaled, and he commented 'kitne ko martha hei;yeh log kya kar reha he?aiso hoga to is duniya mein musalman hi nahi rahega'
 
.
Originally posted by sigatoka@Mar 7 2006, 03:47 PM
Oh Sid, you are so correct. Those damn Mullahs, they are killing those Palestinians. They are bombings entire cities to ruble in Iraq. The Mullahs are throwing people into boiling in Uzbeckistan. The Mullahs are destroying Pakistan because they just can't accept that people can depict the Prophet Muhamed as a Suicide Bomber Terrorist with a bomb on his turban.
In fact the Mullahs were responsible for Iraq invading Iran and the destruction of one million people. Before I forget, how can the Attrocities of World War 1 and 2 be forgotten. The war the Mullahs initiated have destroyed millions upon millions of people. Put them behind bars and we will live in a Utopia where freedom and prosperity will reign for eternity without the interfernce of God, Prophets and Faith.
[post=6758]Quoted post[/post]​

well (Sid) will u please now comment on this and also give Sigatoka the kind of advise u were giving me, i think its also one-sided and should be sent to trash.

Mr sigatoka Mullahs r used by many powers so please do ur home work and come up with some solid arguements u r just propogating some1s view point here.
and by the way Mullahs have nothing to do with Palestine or Uzbeckistan as for as Pakistan is concerned well they had been trained and used by CIA everyone knows it.
 
.
Relax Janaa, sigatoka's post has been edited to inform him of a few things.

He was trying to patronize me when infact what I said and meant to imply was quite different from what he has up his mind (I believe).
 
.
Originally posted by Jana@Mar 7 2006, 01:11 PM
well (Sid) will u please now comment on this and also give Sigatoka the kind of advise u were giving me, i think its also one-sided and should be sent to trash.

Mr sigatoka Mullahs r used by many powers so please do ur home work and come up with some solid arguements u r just propogating some1s view point here.
and by the way Mullahs have nothing to do with Palestine or Uzbeckistan as for as Pakistan is concerned well they had been trained and used by CIA everyone knows it.
[post=6766]Quoted post[/post]​


I know Jana that Mullahs had nothing to do with Palestine and Uzbeckistan and World War 1 and 2 And the Iraq Iran war and the current conflict in Iraq. Even by putting Mullahs behind bars and if people were to turn away from God, faith and the prophets wouldnt end conflicts in the world.

Then why did i say all these things? It was to show that the natural extension of Sid's argument was ultimately flawed. The Vast majority of people who have been killed in the last 200 years hasnt been by Mullahs. It has been by Nationalists, Communists and Fasicsts and Liberals and so forth. Not by Mullahs or religious armies.
 
.
The natural extension to my arguement couldn't be flawed as it was Pakistan specific and the time frame I discussed was from the time Zia Ul-Haq came in to power to this present day. Obviously the 'mullah' factor does not apply to the 'world' scenario.
 
.
Originally posted by sigatoka@Mar 8 2006, 07:40 AM

Then why did i say all these things? It was to show that the natural extension of Sid's argument was ultimately flawed. The Vast majority of people who have been killed in the last 200 years hasnt been by Mullahs. It has been by Nationalists, Communists and Fasicsts and Liberals and so forth. Not by Mullahs or religious armies.
[post=6804]Quoted post[/post]​

ok cleared. agreed with u. ithink you are right seondly i have no love the religiouse extremists but terming everyone as Mullah and saying that all these things or problems are beacuse of them is very unfair as u said.

in some cases these very peopel were trained by all the involved parties.
 
.
Originally posted by WebMaster@Feb 2 2006, 01:34 AM
India is trying to discourage a sort of unity we have, and patriotism we have to fight for our country.
No we are not destroying your unity, it would be silly of us to even contemplate that we are just trying to distract the attention of the PA/ISI.
In this matter they are really crap, no one wants to join the IAF, they are recruiting hard to get the people in, but the people of India dont want to risk their lives with such a low pay.
Do you have data to back this up?
Besides what would be the comparitive pay scales with respect to PAF vs IAF officers? It would be interesting to know.
I see an advantage for Pakistan when attacking India, fighting with hindus will be a lot easier,...
If you remember the Gurkhas, Kumaonis, Garhwalis and a whole lot of other regiments happen to be hindu.
but i see a thoughness against Rajputs and Sikhs, they will fight until the end. So for that matter first all out offensive attack in the future shall be against the Rajputs and Sikh units.
Bravo.
 
.
but i see a thoughness against Rajputs and Sikhs, they will fight until the end. So for that matter first all out offensive attack in the future shall be against the Rajputs and Sikh units

That's not thoughness. That's someething they're forced to do. Same goes for the punjibis in pakistani side. Indian and pakistani punjibis are the ones that live near the border, so when ever there is a war, you'll see a punjibi killing his counterpart.
I my self am i punjibi (the pakistani side), and i've seen many indian punjibis in canada. I've seen that i don't care if they're indian and they don't care if iam pakistani.

Our culture is the same and so is our langauge ( expect that the indian punjibis use a bit different punjibi) like hindi and urdu. So yea, people say punjibis are strong and all, well it's cause if the enemy attacks, we'll be the first line of defence. And i still have to see a reason for all this bloodshed
 
.
Thunder, it is interesting to note that being Pakistanis we both think quite differently (or thats just the feeling I'm getting from your last post). You seem to owe your allegiance to your ethnicity (Punjabi) while I owe my allegiance to Pakistan; my ethnicity comes after that. No offence intended but quite a few Punjabis I've met here in North America when asked about where they're from (whether Indian or Pakistani), the answer that comes is Punjab. I don't get the logic behind that. Punjab is not a country so when you're asked where you're from, you're either from Pakistan or India first of all.

Secondly, earlier comments about Hindus being inferior and so Pakistanis having advantage were clearly ridiculous (whoever made them). The military world does not function on self-inflicted notions of superiority and invincibility based on races, whether religious or ethnic. As pointed out by 'sword9' the Sikhs, the Gurkhas, etc are also Hindus but they are known for their bravery in military circles. So its does NOT in any way mean that if someone's Hindu or Muslim, he is coward or brave. It is up to an individual's training, state of mind, preparedness that speak for his personal traits of cowardice or bravery.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom