Search results

Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction which are used when conventional means alone are not enough to counter the enemy efforts. Politico-military and diplomatic measures with improved conventional response capability should be resorted to counter such violations. One does not need to...

As I said earlier, Pakistan's nuclear weapons are India centric.

Pakistan threatening Iran with a nuclear strike is the most frivolous and most unlikely scenario ever. Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is India centric and Pakistan has already openly threatened India with a nuclear strike if India crosses its nuclear thresholds. I do not see anyone sanctioning...

It is indeed surprising that whenever warfare is being discussed in the South Asian ambiance, conventional balance is the only factor discussed. South Asia crossed the Nuclear Rubicon a long time ago and the environment which was tilted earlier in favour of conventional superiority has been...

In my opinion it is India that would benefit the most from breaking up of Pakistan. Though the Americans would want a Pakistan which would not go against her interests and would want it under its tight leash, they would not want a disintegrated Pakistan. They are likely to lose much more...

This is a very surprising and indeed an alarming debate. I think Nathuram Godse is going to kill Gandhi again during the 2014 elections in India.

There is no East or West Punjab. I would tend to call it Indian Punjab rather than East Punjab.

Ah the legacy. The leaders who are worried about the legacy they leave behind, in my opinion may not be as selfless as compared to those who work selflessly for their people without bothering about the legacy they leave behind. Legacy for a leader is a personal self aggrandizement and should not...

There are some amongst the crowd who lead either because of circumstances or by virtue of their qualities. In my opinion the ills bestowed through vagaries of time may not be bestowed on the leader alone unless he or she is a despot or a dictator.

It does surprise me when Indians speak against some of the great leaders produced during the pre and post British India. I consider Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah amongst the great leaders of their era. They helped to create two great nations that emerged on the world map in 47. This was no mean feat...

It is very interesting to read comments about Nehru. If you read "Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru," you find a very sharp and shrewd leader, who would find no shame in stating one thing here and another there for the sake of India according to his perception. He was arrogant as well - he told...

Worthy for one is unworthy for the other till some one gets more votes. And who elects these leaders - the people. Therefore, while you may blame the leadership for their wrongs and ills, aren't the people who elected them should also share the blame. But then, many who elected them may also be...

I agree with you that wrongs committed by one set of leaders are felt by the coming generations. But shouldn't the coming generations correct themselves and set the right course for the future. These guys died a long long time ago and the leadership that followed them or those thereafter, should...

Why all of a sudden this hoopla about Jawahar Lal and Patel. These were great leaders of India. You guys also killed Gandhi - another great leader of India. Why so much hatred for them after such a long time.

The fact is that the words "Hindu" and "India" have a foreign origin. The word "Hindu" is neither a Sanskrit word nor is this word found in any of the native dialects and languages of India. It should be noted that "Hindu" is not a religious word at all. There is no reference of the word "Hindu"...

Mehrgarh (7000 BC-2500 BC) in Balochistan, Rehman Dheri (4000 BC) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Harappa (3300 BC-1300 BC) in Punjab, Mohenjodaro (2600 BC-1900 BC) in Sindh, and many other similar sites in Gilgit Baltistan are testimony to the fact that the Indus Valley Civilization has archeological...

You can not compare a Prime Minister's work with that of a Home Minister. Particularly when the Home Minister is advising the Prime Minister on country's foreign policy instead of internal affairs. Either the Home minister was not doing his own work or he wanted to become the Foreign Minister.

Two Nation Theory that we are discussing is only specific to the division of British India.

That is an idiotic comment.

Sorry for the typo. Corrected. Thanks.