In solidarity with the Hindu/Indian posters here on Defence.PK

[Indus Pakistan]

Churchill

Most great leaders are flawed. Human condition is imperfect. The only perfection you see is when immature societies a airbrushed image is pasted for the public. Over a lifetime most public figures will present a mixed account of highs and lows. It is the highs that define these indiviuduals in the public perception. However the reality is nuanced. That applies to Jinnah, Ataturk,Nehru, Gandhi etc

You can see how Churchill actually lost the elections after the war ...

Why was there no insurgency pre-1989?

That is like asking why the Blacks showed no collective conciousness to undow the racist order that existed in USA until the 1960s civil rights movement. Or why South Asia remained tame for 100 years before it began to push for British to leave. Let alone throwing stones such was the numerical advantage enjoyed by South Asians viz the British that spitting alone would have drowned them. It's often a point is reached where widespread political conciousness enables a movement to take off.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Why are leftist voices in both countries against the national narrative?Not only in India and Pakistan, it is happening all over the world. Do they not realise the way the wind is blowing?

I know that people (Pakistani leftists especially) tend to compare Imran Khan and the PTI with Trump & Modi, but that comparison isn't really accurate.

Imran Khan is probably more 'progressive' in many ways than the PPP has ever been (Benazir Bhutto's tragedy is that she got tied to the yoke of Zardari, otherwise she could have been a true progressive leader). The PPP still banks on regionalism & a feudal structure in Sindh to maintain its hold on power, rather than true progressive values. They throw the occasional bone out there to keep Pakistan's liberals interested ... and liberals support the PPP for lack of any other viable choice, rather than actual policy.

Pakistan's leftist voices also have a second cause to rally around, now that the 'cost of enmity with India' narrative has been weakened - they're channeling the Army's historical influence and interference in domestic politics as a rallying cry. Hence the extremist level opposition to Imran Khan, despite him being more aligned (in word and deed) with many progressive goals. And this too would have been a cause that they got buried in, were it not for the PMLN & PPP joining forces with them to amplify that rallying cry, given that they see the danger to their electoral fortunes from a successful PTI.

 

[Raghav_101]

I hope you realize that the BJP has no longer made it about just Kashmir in Pakistan.

Those leftist voices of dissent have turned into a whisper. Only the extreme outliers still even dare to say anything about it, and they are vilified, mocked and tormented, through use of the BJP and Indian military's own words and actions.

BJP will be out in next general elections hopefully. They already received setback in numerous state elections recently. Lost Maharashtra and Rajasthan, two biggies.
A change of gvt will hopefully tone down the narrative against Pakistan a bit, but no gvt will ever compromise with India's position on Kashmir.

Merely your wishes won't give it to you. It's a lost cause. May be like Aksai Chin is for us, Kashmir is for you.

 

[KhanBaba2]

The problem is this....

On the international stage, India says it is a bilateral problem.
With Pakistan, India says it is an internal issue.
With the Kashmiris, India says it is a law and order issue

I think it is safe to say, India does not want to "solve" the problem. It is happy to maintain the status quo, because at the end, it has endless soldiers to sacrifice (mostly poor anyway), and Kashmiris are suffering.

That is how it is unfortunately. And will remain with this government.

 

[IMARV]

Oh I know exactly how.

Lets see.

@IMARV asked @xeuss to explain why India should listen to the Kashmiris.

Partially true. You missed "now", that means I was not against listening to dissenting and secessionist voice but to the timing and environment. Below is the post

Why should we "now"? Lets hear you out.

@IMARV then, not liking the response, asked why Kashmiris should be listened to because of the violence against Indian forces there, a comment that made me lose my sh!t and the rest is what you have seen.

Show me what part of my post remotely say so. To oversimplify, my post refer to not hear out (separatist views) at this particular time where foreign elements have made them anti India by design. Why should India play in hands of those "others" (foreign elements). The gist is we will talk at right time to right people without being coerced by sinister plans. Below is my post.

I am still awaiting why you want India to hear out Kashmiris at time of peak insurgency triggered by foreign element when sentiments against India are down by design. Why should India play by "others" book?

@Joe Shearer

 

[Shantanu_Left]

It's how a normal democracy and civilized society operates. You would not understand.

I just login to read this guy's posts. Lets' rename him the King of comebacks.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Thank you for the recommendation!

Spent a fair degree of my childhood in a GCC country before moving back to Pakistan, and used to love eating at an Indian restaurant (South Indian I think - they had a thaali with a bunch of veggie curries etc on them and chapatis & rice). I was pretty young then but for some reason it's one of the memories that stuck with me.

You may be more than a little surprised if you do get the book and start experimenting with it, because Telugu/Andhra food is a little different.

One meal in the cookbook has a basic rice, white and fluffy, two additional rices, one a tomato rice, one a curds-rice; two or three podis, powders to mix with white rice, along with a blob of politically oh-so-incorrect ghee, two or three chutneys, again, to go with the white rice, then vegetables, as many as the cook can get out in the time available, finally fried crisps, very exotic, very tasty, and sweets. I suspect you got a standard Chennai style thali with chapatis and things.

Be aware that this style of home cooking is very rooted in local vegetables. You won't get some of them abroad; you won't even get them outside a region in India. Our palwal is unknown here; asked to cook without it occurring somewhere would make a Bengali cook look quite blank.

I've honestly had great fun with this, and with the two video channels recommended by jbgt90, Bong Eats and Spicy Eats. Personally you might be interested in the channel Cooking Shooking, and in chef Varun Inamdar's channel - forget what it's called. But tops for you might be Ranveer Brar's channel; he is a bit of a poseur, but that's him channeling Gordon Ramsay.

Most great leaders are flawed. Human condition is imperfect. The only perfection you see is when immature societies a airbrushed image is pasted for the public. Over a lifetime most public figures will present a mixed account of highs and lows. It is the highs that define these indiviuduals in the public perception. However the reality is nuanced. That applies to Jinnah, Ataturk,Nehru, Gandhi etc

You can see how Churchill actually lost the elections after the war ...

That is like asking why the Blacks showed no collective conciousness to undow the racist order that existed in USA until the 1960s civil rights movement. Or why South Asia remained tame for 100 years before it began to push for British to leave. Let alone throwing stones such was the numerical advantage enjoyed by South Asians viz the British that spitting alone would have drowned them. It's often a point is reached where widespread political conciousness enables a movement to take off.

C'mon, I was just pulling your leg.

Your point about the numbers being so disparate is an interesting one. There were three or four times as many 'boxwallahs' as pukka sahibs in the Raj. Also planters; forgot them.

I know that people (Pakistani leftists especially) tend to compare Imran Khan and the PTI with Trump & Modi, but that comparison isn't really accurate.

Imran Khan is probably more 'progressive' in many ways than the PPP has ever been (Benazir Bhutto's tragedy is that she got tied to the yoke of Zardari, otherwise she could have been a true progressive leader). The PPP still banks on regionalism & a feudal structure in Sindh to maintain its hold on power, rather than true progressive values. They throw the occasional bone out there to keep Pakistan's liberals interested ... and liberals support the PPP for lack of any other viable choice, rather than actual policy.

Pakistan's leftist voices also have a second cause to rally around, now that the 'cost of enmity with India' narrative has been weakened - they're channeling the Army's historical influence and interference in domestic politics as a rallying cry. Hence the extremist level opposition to Imran Khan, despite him being more aligned (in word and deed) with many progressive goals. And this too would have been a cause that they got buried in, were it not for the PMLN & PPP joining forces with them to amplify that rallying cry, given that they see the danger to their electoral fortunes from a successful PTI.

Quite clearly, what is happening today is entirely synthetic, but I wouldn't care to comment on it. Never have before, why should I start now?

BJP will be out in next general elections hopefully. They already received setback in numerous state elections recently. Lost Maharashtra and Rajasthan, two biggies.
A change of gvt will hopefully tone down the narrative against Pakistan a bit, but no gvt will ever compromise with India's position on Kashmir.

Merely your wishes won't give it to you. It's a lost cause. May be like Aksai Chin is for us, Kashmir is for you.

It's far more complicated than that.

Well, I'm off to sleep. Talk to you good folks in the morning.

 

[IMARV]

I don't know how this thread turned into a Kashmir thread while I was cooking and eating a simple dinner (Vangaya Vepudu with Besan Chilla).

@AgNoStiC MuSliM @ChennaiDude @IMARV

Some of the friction is beginning to show, but this has still been by far one of the best discussions (that limited part) on Kashmir that I've seen.

@AgNoStiC MuSliM

If you could transfer the relevant posts to a different thread, we could avoid becoming accessories after the act. There are certain things more that need to be said but I am hesitant to drag a senior person into the mire in any haste to make a point.

I swear, I never intended to. Its just I could not resist to peep into thought process of an educated Indian Muslim on a Pakistan Forum about Kashmir. Looking at polarization of our society, I was intrigued to see if PDF provide some kind of freedom and a platform for people like him to be more free in their opinions. Its good to hear out.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

Look I already said that many Kashmiris will not like to be a part of India.

But I also told you the reality of the world "Might is Right"

Do you know the origin of this expression? BTW it's might makes right. Homer of Iliad fame coined that phrase and it became the guiding philosophy of the Ancient Greeks. Their Greek city-states always fought each other, which led to the eventual decline of these states, and then a complete obliteration. First Athens, then Sparta, then Thebes (it was completely razed to the ground), finally, Macedonia under Alexander, they all believed in that philosophy to the letter. Today these once great Kingdoms have been resigned to history books.

It should be the other way around, it's the right things that makes someone might. Abraham Lincoln had accordingly modified the phrase: ""Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it."

Cut to the 20th century, three countries strongly believed in the might makes right adage. These were the Axis Powers led by Germany, Japan, and Italy. They were all run by dictators and hyper-nationalistic fools. Eventually all the three countries were humbled by the Allied Powers. Today, as per the Potsdam Agreement and the Paris Treaties, these three countries were forced to be completely demilitarized, they are not even allowed to have proper standing armies.

In the 1970's, a mighty America was humbled by unorganized, untrained guerrilla fighters in Cuba and Vietnam.

In the 1980's, a mighty Soviet Union was humbled by the mujahiddens in Afghanistan.

In the 1990's, a mighty Saddam Hussain was the commander of one of the most powerful armies in not just the Middle-East, but the entire world. Their armed forces were at least 500,000 strong, well-trained, and had excellent equipment. During the first Gulf War, it took them just 24 hours to occupy the entire Kuwait. They were able to fight the Americans tooth and nail, and Saddam Hussain forced them to a peace treaty. However, look at Iraq today, it has become the weakest country in the world militarily.

More recently, a mighty Russia under Putin could not fight the separatists in Chechnya and South Ossetia. It has practically resigned itself to allowing them to live autonomous lives, and these countries are completely independent except in name. Russia is not going to interfere in their internal matters for many hundred years now.


All these countries have learnt the importance of peace the hard way. Fascism does not pay in the long run, your descendants will suffer because of your blind support for Fuhrer Modi.

Fortunately, for the Indians, your RSS leaders and top brass are all illiterate, cowardly buffoons. Like your ideologue Veer Savarkar who practically begged the British to spare his life.

I am not really worried about India descending into a might makes right madness any time soon under present government. This is because BJP just doesn't have the balls for a fight.

 

[xeuss]

I swear, I never intended to. Its just I could not resist to peep into thought process of an educated Indian Muslim on a Pakistan Forum about Kashmir. Looking at polarization of our society, I was intrigued to see if PDF provide some kind of freedom and a platform for people like him to be more free in their opinions. Its good to hear out.

You are not alone. Every time I meet a new hindu in the US, his sole effort in the conversation is to pry inside of me to find out just one thing:

--> What I think of Pakistan? Any view that is not comprised of outright hate immediately is held as evidence of the mythical fifth column that exists in India.

In previous posts, I have aired the views of what (most) Indian Muslims think of the Kashmir situation. Our preference is that we would like them to stay in India. The reasons are rather simplistic. We would prefer not to get divided into another country. However, we cannot support the numerous atrocities and extra-judicial methods of the Indian forces in Kashmir. At the end of the day, if they want freedom from India, we won't be the ones holding them back.

I have visited Kashmir a couple of times. Lovely place and genuinely warm people who love to meet Indian Muslims and are delighted to speak to us, as they consider us sympathetic to their plight. Most of our conversations always end up with them telling us what the Indian forces did to them. Sometimes, just listening to someone's sufferings offers some sort of peace to them.

In all my travels around the world, two places stand out where you can feel an "occupation" as you walk through. West Bank and Kashmir.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I swear, I never intended to. Its just I could not resist to peep into thought process of an educated Indian Muslim on a Pakistan Forum about Kashmir. Looking at polarization of our society, I was intrigued to see if PDF provide some kind of freedom and a platform for people like him to be more free in their opinions. Its good to hear out.

It is a good thread.

Do you know the origin of this expression? BTW it's might makes right. Homer of Iliad fame coined that phrase and it became the guiding philosophy of the Ancient Greeks. Their Greek city-states always fought each other, which led to the eventual decline of these states, and then a complete obliteration. First Athens, then Sparta, then Thebes (it was completely razed to the ground), finally, Macedonia under Alexander, they all believed in that philosophy to the letter. Today these once great Kingdoms have been resigned to history books.

It should be the other way around, it's the right things that makes someone might. Abraham Lincoln had accordingly modified the phrase: ""Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it."

Cut to the 20th century, three countries strongly believed in the might makes right adage. These were the Axis Powers led by Germany, Japan, and Italy. They were all run by dictators and hyper-nationalistic fools. Eventually all the three countries were humbled by the Allied Powers. Today, as per the Potsdam Agreement and the Paris Treaties, these three countries were forced to be completely demilitarized, they are not even allowed to have proper standing armies.

In the 1970's, a mighty America was humbled by unorganized, untrained guerrilla fighters in Cuba and Vietnam.

In the 1980's, a mighty Soviet Union was humbled by the mujahiddens in Afghanistan.

In the 1990's, a mighty Saddam Hussain was the commander of one of the most powerful armies in not just the Middle-East, but the entire world. Their armed forces were at least 500,000 strong, well-trained, and had excellent equipment. During the first Gulf War, it took them just 24 hours to occupy the entire Kuwait. They were able to fight the Americans tooth and nail, and Saddam Hussain forced them to a peace treaty. However, look at Iraq today, it has become the weakest country in the world militarily.

More recently, a mighty Russia under Putin could not fight the separatists in Chechnya and South Ossetia. It has practically resigned itself to allowing them to live autonomous lives, and these countries are completely independent except in name. Russia is not going to interfere in their internal matters for many hundred years now.


All these countries have learnt the importance of peace the hard way. Fascism does not pay in the long run, your descendants will suffer because of your blind support for Fuhrer Modi.

Fortunately, for the Indians, your RSS leaders and top brass are all illiterate, cowardly buffoons. Like your ideologue Veer Savarkar who practically begged the British to spare his life.

I am not really worried about India descending into a might makes right madness any time soon under present government. This is because BJP just doesn't have the balls for a fight.

Aapke muh mein ghee shakkar.

You are not alone. Every time I meet a new hindu in the US, his sole effort in the conversation is to pry inside of me to find out just one thing:

--> What I think of Pakistan? Any view that is not comprised of outright hate immediately is held as evidence of the mythical fifth column that exists in India.

In previous posts, I have aired the views of what (most) Indian Muslims think of the Kashmir situation. Our preference is that we would like them to stay in India. The reasons are rather simplistic. We would prefer not to get divided into another country. However, we cannot support the numerous atrocities and extra-judicial methods of the Indian forces in Kashmir. At the end of the day, if they want freedom from India, we won't be the ones holding them back.

I have visited Kashmir a couple of times. Lovely place and genuinely warm people who love to meet Indian Muslims and are delighted to speak to us, as they consider us sympathetic to their plight. Most of our conversations always end up with them telling us what the Indian forces did to them. Sometimes, just listening to someone's sufferings offers some sort of peace to them.

In all my travels around the world, two places stand out where you can feel an "occupation" as you walk through. West Bank and Kashmir.

You have been meeting a very low class of Indian. I cannot imagine anyone having the shocking bad manners to enquire of another his or her views on politics and religion in a social conversation. Someone turned into a very good friend, during a very serious exchange of views, PERHAPS; otherwise, not. Never.

The passages in red summarise my own views very closely; there are differences, very, very minor ones, but I would say these are 99% of my views. If I were able to bring myself to share my experiences in Kashmir itself, you would understand, I think, that anything is better for those warm, lovely people than this daily loss of self-respect. I do not talk of atrocities, only of the humiliation that faces them at every check-point, at the hands of some frightened kids from the plains who don't know what they are doing there, and why.

One last request: it's not Indian Muslim; it's Muslim Indian. I think the difference is vital.

I swear, I never intended to. Its just I could not resist to peep into thought process of an educated Indian Muslim on a Pakistan Forum about Kashmir. Looking at polarization of our society, I was intrigued to see if PDF provide some kind of freedom and a platform for people like him to be more free in their opinions. Its good to hear out.

If S****F** were such a forum, where @xeuss and one or two others could be confident of being heard without insult or impediment, I'd be there every day. It's up to you and your team of colleagues.

 

[Soumitra]

You may be more than a little surprised if you do get the book and start experimenting with it, because Telugu/Andhra food is a little different.

One meal in the cookbook has a basic rice, white and fluffy, two additional rices, one a tomato rice, one a curds-rice; two or three podis, powders to mix with white rice, along with a blob of politically oh-so-incorrect ghee, two or three chutneys, again, to go with the white rice, then vegetables, as many as the cook can get out in the time available, finally fried crisps, very exotic, very tasty, and sweets. I suspect you got a standard Chennai style thali with chapatis and things.

Be aware that this style of home cooking is very rooted in local vegetables. You won't get some of them abroad; you won't even get them outside a region in India. Our palwal is unknown here; asked to cook without it occurring somewhere would make a Bengali cook look quite blank.

I've honestly had great fun with this, and with the two video channels recommended by jbgt90, Bong Eats and Spicy Eats. Personally you might be interested in the channel Cooking Shooking, and in chef Varun Inamdar's channel - forget what it's called. But tops for you might be Ranveer Brar's channel; he is a bit of a poseur, but that's him channeling Gordon Ramsay.



C'mon, I was just pulling your leg.

Your point about the numbers being so disparate is an interesting one. There were three or four times as many 'boxwallahs' as pukka sahibs in the Raj. Also planters; forgot them.



Quite clearly, what is happening today is entirely synthetic, but I wouldn't care to comment on it. Never have before, why should I start now?



It's far more complicated than that.

Well, I'm off to sleep. Talk to you good folks in the morning.

I swear, I never intended to. Its just I could not resist to peep into thought process of an educated Indian Muslim on a Pakistan Forum about Kashmir. Looking at polarization of our society, I was intrigued to see if PDF provide some kind of freedom and a platform for people like him to be more free in their opinions. Its good to hear out.

Do you know the origin of this expression? BTW it's might makes right. Homer of Iliad fame coined that phrase and it became the guiding philosophy of the Ancient Greeks. Their Greek city-states always fought each other, which led to the eventual decline of these states, and then a complete obliteration. First Athens, then Sparta, then Thebes (it was completely razed to the ground), finally, Macedonia under Alexander, they all believed in that philosophy to the letter. Today these once great Kingdoms have been resigned to history books.

It should be the other way around, it's the right things that makes someone might. Abraham Lincoln had accordingly modified the phrase: ""Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it."

Cut to the 20th century, three countries strongly believed in the might makes right adage. These were the Axis Powers led by Germany, Japan, and Italy. They were all run by dictators and hyper-nationalistic fools. Eventually all the three countries were humbled by the Allied Powers. Today, as per the Potsdam Agreement and the Paris Treaties, these three countries were forced to be completely demilitarized, they are not even allowed to have proper standing armies.

In the 1970's, a mighty America was humbled by unorganized, untrained guerrilla fighters in Cuba and Vietnam.

In the 1980's, a mighty Soviet Union was humbled by the mujahiddens in Afghanistan.

In the 1990's, a mighty Saddam Hussain was the commander of one of the most powerful armies in not just the Middle-East, but the entire world. Their armed forces were at least 500,000 strong, well-trained, and had excellent equipment. During the first Gulf War, it took them just 24 hours to occupy the entire Kuwait. They were able to fight the Americans tooth and nail, and Saddam Hussain forced them to a peace treaty. However, look at Iraq today, it has become the weakest country in the world militarily.

More recently, a mighty Russia under Putin could not fight the separatists in Chechnya and South Ossetia. It has practically resigned itself to allowing them to live autonomous lives, and these countries are completely independent except in name. Russia is not going to interfere in their internal matters for many hundred years now.


All these countries have learnt the importance of peace the hard way. Fascism does not pay in the long run, your descendants will suffer because of your blind support for Fuhrer Modi.

Fortunately, for the Indians, your RSS leaders and top brass are all illiterate, cowardly buffoons. Like your ideologue Veer Savarkar who practically begged the British to spare his life.

I am not really worried about India descending into a might makes right madness any time soon under present government. This is because BJP just doesn't have the balls for a fight.

You are not alone. Every time I meet a new hindu in the US, his sole effort in the conversation is to pry inside of me to find out just one thing:

--> What I think of Pakistan? Any view that is not comprised of outright hate immediately is held as evidence of the mythical fifth column that exists in India.

In previous posts, I have aired the views of what (most) Indian Muslims think of the Kashmir situation. Our preference is that we would like them to stay in India. The reasons are rather simplistic. We would prefer not to get divided into another country. However, we cannot support the numerous atrocities and extra-judicial methods of the Indian forces in Kashmir. At the end of the day, if they want freedom from India, we won't be the ones holding them back.

I have visited Kashmir a couple of times. Lovely place and genuinely warm people who love to meet Indian Muslims and are delighted to speak to us, as they consider us sympathetic to their plight. Most of our conversations always end up with them telling us what the Indian forces did to them. Sometimes, just listening to someone's sufferings offers some sort of peace to them.

In all my travels around the world, two places stand out where you can feel an "occupation" as you walk through. West Bank and Kashmir.

It is a good thread.


Aapke muh mein ghee shakkar.



You have been meeting a very low class of Indian. I cannot imagine anyone having the shocking bad manners to enquire of another his or her views on politics and religion in a social conversation. Someone turned into a very good friend, during a very serious exchange of views, PERHAPS; otherwise, not. Never.

The passages in red summarise my own views very closely; there are differences, very, very minor ones, but I would say these are 99% of my views. If I were able to bring myself to share my experiences in Kashmir itself, you would understand, I think, that anything is better for those warm, lovely people than this daily loss of self-respect. I do not talk of atrocities, only of the humiliation that faces them at every check-point, at the hands of some frightened kids from the plains who don't know what they are doing there, and why.

One last request: it's not Indian Muslim; it's Muslim Indian. I think the difference is vital.



If S****F** were such a forum, where @xeuss and one or two others could be confident of being heard without insult or impediment, I'd be there every day. It's up to you and your team of colleagues.

Wow did PDF suddenly turn into JNU Sabarmati Dhaba? Leftist circle j**k

 

[xeuss]

Wow did PDF suddenly turn into JNU Sabarmati Dhaba? Leftist circle j**k

Because SanghiNazis have taken over the country

One last request: it's not Indian Muslim; it's Muslim Indian. I think the difference is vital.

It's all the same to me. I grew up learning I am an Indian Muslim, and that stayed. What's the difference?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Because SanghiNazis have taken over the country



It's all the same to me. I grew up learning I am an Indian Muslim, and that stayed. What's the difference?

I am a nominalist. Names matter. The noun is the important part, the adjective merely describes the noun.

An Indian Muslim is primarily a Muslim who simply happens to be in India.
A Muslim Indian is an Indian citizen, who happens to be a Muslim by religion.

 

[Nilgiri]

I am a nominalist. Names matter. The noun is the important part, the adjective merely describes the noun.

An Indian Muslim is primarily a Muslim who simply happens to be in India.
A Muslim Indian is an Indian citizen, who happens to be a Muslim by religion.

I agree, buts its kind of splitting hairs....to me whats important is both identities are simply recognised as positive ones by individual rather than the particular priority they prefer.

In French (given the noun/adjective crossover in case of nationality)...both are pretty much (even more than english) equivalent:

Un Musulman Indien....Une Musulmane Indienne (f)

vs

Un Indien Musulman...Une Indienne Musulmane (f)

...though adjectives generally go after the noun it must be said...and this is the the default for translation to say English (which would cause switch in order).