Search results

Ms Roy is good, but not good enough. When Mr Nehru had made those comments, Kashmir was still not constitutionally part of India. Kashmir became so on 26 January, 1957. Earlier, on 15 February, 1954, the constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had vetted the accession of Kashmir with India. So...

Aparna Sen and Brinda Karat probably wouldn't have sided with Mirwaiz. Brinda wouldn't have because, given the soup that her party is in, she really wouldn't want to upset the vote bank.

Thank you.. ;)

The problem, which you can't see for obvious reason, is with the maximalist position that Mirwaiz and his ilk have taken. So long as they represent that separatist sentiment, majority of Indians, except a few ultra-liberal leftists, wouldn't want to be seen siding with him. It means, many...

'Right to free speech' is limited by the law of land, e.g you can't libel in the name of free speech or deliver hate speech. If what she has said does indeed fall under the definition of sedition, then she has broken the law of land. The Court is very much entitled to examine her case.

More accurate would be one novel wonder. She has written several books, if you can call printing of newspaper columns in a book form as 'writing' a book.

That doesn't really answer my question. Can these 70% Indo-Aryan ancestors claim IVC as part of their heritage?

That is a legitimate grouse you have. I have no bones to pick. Genetics can’t refute, neither can it confirm with utmost certainty, any ‘claims of mass population shifts’. What it can do is point in a general direction i.e. give an indication, of the origin of a group of people or may be the...

If we do consider that IVC residents were direct ancestors of the Dravidians, then where does it leave all other Indians, forget Pakistanis. Perhaps history is not that linear.

IVC is a shared history of South Asia. Indians, Pakistanis, Nepalis, Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans all have claims to it. No body has exclusive claim to IVC.

What has 'modern political reality' got to do with identity of man/community/culture/region etc. that is more than a couple of thousand years old. Isn't it what we are arguing for (and you are arguing against) - that past can't be identified in terms of modern political identity. At a more...

Asko Parpola, Gregory L. Possehl, Michael Witzel, Steve Farmar, Frits Staal , G.F.Dales, just to name a few, are probably not Indians.

Just a minor correction. It was Pakistan that was _created_ through partition. The Republic of India inherited the British India. That is why Pakistan had to apply afresh for its UN membership while India got the seat that British India held and accordingly continues to be considered as the...

It appears that in your mind educating a kid of 6 year old about the 'strict punishment for those who steal and pillage' and teaching the same 6 year old how to go about enforcing that punishment by chopping off the thiefs' or pillagers' hand, are same. I do not know how many parents teach...

You do realize, don't you, that Mr Churchill was referring to an India that included Pakistan and Bangladesh as well.

The argument of 'capability' is basically a huge red herring. If capability is not matched by intention, then it is not a threat. Case in point China vis-à-vis Pakistan. China, I believe, is far more capable than India to snap Pakistan like a match stick. But does Pakistan pile up its armaments...

If I am scared of Santa Clause, because he has long white beard, thats not Santa Clause's fault. They say, perception is reality. You can have your reality. No problem. Just don't shift the blame to India by citing silly excuses.

That would be a shift in goal post - a logical fallacy. You are now not arguing if the threat perception is dependent on cold war doctrine but merely trying argue on the degree i.e. the qualitative nature of threat perception (which of course presupposes the pre-existence of this threat...

So which strike corp was it that led to 1948 or 1965?:pop:

1948, 1965, 1971, 1984, 1989, 1999, 2001, 2008....and counting.