They are lies Sir they are not facts Fact is TTP is their no area is completely cleared they are still in those areas and few areas which were cleared now they are back Sir TTP is still their and growing Sir and do this operation if you want for few months you may have peace but than they would return and create more havoc than ever before
Sir facts are their Mr you haven't brought any fact Mr I know people of that area the most well educated ones the hatred they have now for Army is far more than what they feel about Taliban that is getting dangerously high Sir they are not even very religious people Sir and the number is growing because your blunder operations have killed several women and children and resulted in growth of Taliban Sir and if they have cleared the area Swat why Army is still their Sir because they know Taliban are still their Mr those who left they are starting to return same is the case in Bajur and other agencies
Their is no common opinion , Citizens like us try to avoid those circumstances but some region which were always lived under their influence speaks in a bit of their favor , Most of Tribals even not believe that Taliban are attacking Army , and same with the citizens . You could not find a single opinion in a same region.
Your Example of India does not fit well as India is not like Pakistan[/QUOTE}
The example of India fits well because we were nations birthed into the same age, by the same parent, faced the same issues and we came out differently. That is the essential feature of most sociology, political science and historic based studies of the nation-state. If you do not believe in the epistemology of the social sciences then that's another debate that I would welcome elsewhere where it is appropriate, not here.
Yes, I know, that is because of the trajectories we went into and in fact the point of much investigation by scholars all over the world.
Actually no, we have a diverse linguistic distribution, the Saraki, Hindko and other dialects that we clump with northern Punjabi assert their language's independence from the Punjabi we know today, which evolved from the belt of Lahore-Amratsar and got promoted due to the Sikh scriptures and the Sufi Saints, like BullehShah, using her as the vehicle of promotion. It was the British administration that clumbed us together. India as about 14 national languages and about 23 regional ones. Punjabi is recongnised in India as an official language and a medium of educational instruction it is not so in Pakistan. If we were intelligent enough to accept the different languages of the region that are spoken we will easily have 10 regional and 5-8 official languages of the nation. However, our attempts to stump out all other identies except what we want is the reason why we see ourselves as hegemonic, we are not so at least according to our political, social, psychological and even ancient history.
As I said this is because our own identities are not allowed to flourish. I mean as a Punjabi who is suppose to dominate the politics of Pakistan, I cannot write a single official document in my language neither can I have my children enrolled in a school where Punjabi is the medium of instruction. So what do you expect? It is becuase we have robbed people of their rightful dignity of their ancestory and culture for a perceived threat to our national self-esteem and identity.
As I suggested, sir, we need to think about it as a nation. My prespective based on the actual rather than the polluted history we read in our text books states that we were a nation-state created for the Muslims of India, that does not mean an Islamic State. Our original architects, if they are to be taken as a compass, did not name us an Islamic Republic rather as State. I mean the first generation of ML members who actually fought for Pakistan.
Actually that is a perspective, not the perspective. For example, there was no Hindu oppression in Lahore, none in NWFP, which was actually very pro-Congress. So what Hindu oppression? Secondly, nearly 8.6% of Sindh is Hindu, if Hindus are enemies, are they as well? Are we not, based on this tailored political leanings, doing the same things to them that we feared the Hindus would do to us? Let me give you an example, according to the State law: for any degree it is compulsory to have Islamiat passed if one is Muslim or Ethics if they are non-Muslim. Why cannot a Christian child have Bible studies? Why cannot a Hindu child have Hindu Studies in school or college? Maybe because we are treating them as the second class citizens doing to them what we thought the Hindus in India would do to us/
The Cabinet Mission plan had three denominations, the basic division of India was based on ethnic not political grounds. I would recommend you also read the Dr. Ambedikar career's in India, it would enlighten what I am talking about. Secondly, the British Raj was our true enemy, during WWI and afterwards they appeased the modernist class of Muslim India because they were to be the fodder of the British army against the Muslim Turks. Then in WWII when the Indian nationalist movements were very strong they appeased the pro-Separatists because that would successfully divide the political opposition. It would also be a point to note that the rise of the Japenese power against Western powers (defeating Russia and then challenging USA) was noted amongst Asians, they sentiments that Europeans were not infallible was being well catered. It is a tragedy that Indians see this as the Raj fooling the Muslims and the Muslims as the Raj giving them an oppertunity to their advantage. However, in truth perhaps it is that the Raj divided and maintained us divided, not in terms of nations but people: even now it is not written in stone that India-Pakistan-China must be enemies. Europe faced exactly the same dilemmas we do and their synthesis was the EU. They will not allow that model to come up in Asia ever because we are fooled over and over again.
Actually those same arguments are put on us, Sunni majority, Muslim majority, Punjabi majority and so on. This is politics, brother, nothing else. Religion has been interpreted differently so has been culture expressed differently and nation states who oppress that feature face problems.
By your own argument their unity was just as good as our unity which was rudimentry and political not actual.
That, sir, is a myth. I am surprised you are asserting that.
No, they were bad before and worse off later if any change has happened it's been in the wrong direction.
Actually, India, the USA, Lebnon have had 'minorities' hold high offices. India made a Muslim their president and it is not unbelievable to have a Muslim as India's PM/HM or something though it would take time. Yet, this is a possibility there, not here, sir. Secondly, the greatest political campaign on Barak Hussain Obama started during his two election bids yet, the USA elected him. There seems to be a misinterpretation that secularism means that political parties who promote religion based ideologies do not get representation. They do, such parties exist in every nation in the world. It is just that they need the people's mandate to direct the nation. Something like that has happened in Turkey, yet again, the mandate is promoted by the people not enforeced on them like we have been doing.
Actually social-liberalism that basically promotes that there is no such thing as minorities or second class citizen and everyone has a share of the social contract of the society bases itself on secularism, the closest egalitarian system exists in Norway, Finland, Sweden and Denmark. People there have the highest standards of living and these nations are secular. I'm not saying that that's what we want or should have just giving you empirical proof of secularism working out good.
Again, sir, this is a misconception, that's not what secularism entails that's what autocracy entails and that's what we have seen in the third world. Just as we ask people not to blame Islam on what Muslims do we should do the same for philosophies.
The problem of the Arab world is not that simple there are wide arrays of factors that center their condition today and I don't think this is the perfect thread to answer their conditions.
Actually culture has over 10,000 years of human history behind it as well, faith is just a part of it. A Pakistani Christian has just as much culture as we do and a right on it.
Future rests on our choices more that anything else.
Constitution depends on our state as a society we can have the best laws and be the worse country. It's not about making laws, it is about following them.
There were millions of 'martyrs' from the Hindu and Sikh community as well. They were killed in retaliation and our faith, humanity and every moral states that genocide is wrong no matter where it happens or who does it. Islam does not work on an eye for an eye. It did not matter to an unborn child in a mother's womb who was the bearer of the sword that killed them, Sikh, Hindu or Muslim. It was a human loss and every murderer and plunderer is guilty of it: Sikh, Hindu or Muslim.
That was our fault, the 'Muslims' of Pakistan oppressing the other 'Muslims' of Pakistan. A historical event, a great tragic loss of life but not just for us Pakistanis. It has nothing to do with Islam.
I would also see our generation survive but the man who is coming to kill us is wearing a turban and screaming 'AllahuAkbar' not 'Jai Mata di'. I have lost friends in this war, they were killed by so-called custodians of faith, sir, not a Hindu, not an American.
You are mistaking paternistic imperialism for moderation, moderation is of the mind. Moderate Musharaf and Mullah Zia were same creatures, so called fathers for our orphaned nation and they did exactly the same thing I have been telling you: imposing an ideology, not letting it synthesis. Whether that be in the name of Islam or moderation that is wrong, it is the tool not the philosophy that is flawed.
I elaborated this process above, imposition of ideologies, that is what I am talking about. Imposition of ideologies has lead to the '71 tragedy, the current loss of 50,000 we have suffered. It will continue to do the same once you and I are gone and our children our here. The Pakistan Army had to fill in the gaps left by various sources so the blame is not entirely on them.
Then brother, I have a choice not to be Pakistani to take immigration now in the zenith of my youth and serve a white man in Canada or UK or somewhere and have a comfortable house if I work for it. I choose to be here, with my people, who I want to live and die for (though more living) do I not represent the same thing you want in essence just in a different package?
Thanks Aero!
Thank you, MarshaI tried to write for papers but they said they don't publish the style I have
konsay waly?
