India killing Bangladeshi's randomly in border like as Kashmir. What's the difference?

[Joe Shearer]

Our military can start small skirmishes and financially and tactically support the militants as they carry out operations. Also, the Bangaldeshi insurgents can draw India into a war on Bangladeshi soil, and start an insurgency in the thick jungles of Bangladesh, similar to Vietnam. Kashmiri insurgents can do a similar thing, but in the mountains and urban towns of Kashmir. As for Indian Muslims themselves, they will start fighting if India causes massive civilian casualties, which they would.

Of course, this scenario will hopefully never happen, but I'm just putting things into perspective for you.

As you said, this scenario will never happen. Let me explain why, in detail.

First, your military risks massive retaliation if they start small skirmishes; wherever they are themselves, without the luxury of a nuclear shield. This is because they will themselves be present at the scene of hostilities.

Second, there are no Bangladeshi insurgents. That independent nation has its own dignity and self-respect, and will not be cowed or brow-beaten; if at certain times, the government of India is more indulgent, it is in some small measure due to the respect for an individual leader. If at times, the government of India is less so, it is because policies adopted at those times seem to be opposed to what will maintain peace.Within that, Bangladesh is peaceful, there are no insurgents; insurgents against whom? Their own government?

You talked of the thick jungles of Bangladesh. There are some small parts that are still thickly forested, mainly in the Sundarbans, but some on their eastern borders, bordering Tripura, and some more in the Chittagong Hills.India shares the Sundarbans; the Indian border guards are present there in sufficient numbers. The Chittagong Hill areas are next to the peaceful and pro-Indian Mizoram. Nothing will happen there. The Indian Army is strongly located in the Tripura area; no danger there. All these areas have strong para-military presence, as well as Army pretence.

The worst period of the Kashmir terrorism was during 1992 to 1995 or so; it has never reached similar disturbance. There is a tiny chance of it reaching such portions. For one thing, the supply of motivated Punjabi infiltrators has reduced significantly.

The last point is too bizarre to take seriously or to answer.

 

[dray]

No- We have commander , we have no need and indian commander. Our commander is enough for us. And for India.

Then when are you declaring the "Game over" war?

Yes i settled in britain. As i said b4- Learn diplomatic words. Then you will get the knowledge about my sentence quality. Otherwise again and again u will say - OHHO learn english. i know what i m drooping out. Do u know why i use the word drooping out ?

And this is diplomatic English!!!!!

 

[Hellfire]

In answer to the thread question the difference is that Bangladesh does not fire back. Bangladesh should fire back ....

Right now, Bangladesh is doing what any sensible nation will do, going after the religious zealots in the nation. The clear & present danger to Bangladesh is from within itself. Your PM, irrespective of what your fellow country citizens may claim - is pragmatic and sensible.

Before you tangent yourself off to our own home grown nuts in India please do remember there are thousands of "zealots" like @Joe Shearer, @MilSpec, @dadeechi, my self and a couple more who have no love lost for religion and have the nation first approach. We know what has to be done for our zealots and in case the cancer undergoes mutation to become malignant, the appropriate 'resection' will be done.

Cheers!

@Joe Shearer @dadeechi @MilSpec quoted you as examples to drive in a point. I like this guy, his posts are fun ....!

 

[Hamza913]

As you said, this scenario will never happen. Let me explain why, in detail.

First, your military risks massive retaliation if they start small skirmishes; wherever they are themselves, without the luxury of a nuclear shield. This is because they will themselves be present at the scene of hostilities.

Second, there are no Bangladeshi insurgents. That independent nation has its own dignity and self-respect, and will not be cowed or brow-beaten; if at certain times, the government of India is more indulgent, it is in some small measure due to the respect for an individual leader. If at times, the government of India is less so, it is because policies adopted at those times seem to be opposed to what will maintain peace.Within that, Bangladesh is peaceful, there are no insurgents; insurgents against whom? Their own government?

You talked of the thick jungles of Bangladesh. There are some small parts that are still thickly forested, mainly in the Sundarbans, but some on their eastern borders, bordering Tripura, and some more in the Chittagong Hills.India shares the Sundarbans; the Indian border guards are present there in sufficient numbers. The Chittagong Hill areas are next to the peaceful and pro-Indian Mizoram. Nothing will happen there. The Indian Army is strongly located in the Tripura area; no danger there. All these areas have strong para-military presence, as well as Army pretence.

The worst period of the Kashmir terrorism was during 1992 to 1995 or so; it has never reached similar disturbance. There is a tiny chance of it reaching such portions. For one thing, the supply of motivated Punjabi infiltrators has reduced significantly.

The last point is too bizarre to take seriously or to answer.

Most of what you said is pretty obvious, my post was made assuming that Bangladeshi militants start popping up from out of the blue. As for the Pakistani army not starting small skirmishes, we have been doing it in Kashmir for some time now, don't see why we would stop in a time like that.

As for you claiming Indian Muslims wouldn't start fighting, you clearly don't know Muslim's very well.

 

[kasper95]

As for you claiming Indian Muslims wouldn't start fighting, you clearly don't know Muslim's very well.

what's this nonsense, now non Indian will tell us about Indian Muslims.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Most of what you said is pretty obvious, my post was made assuming that Bangladeshi militants start popping up from out of the blue. As for the Pakistani army not starting small skirmishes, we have been doing it in Kashmir for some time now, don't see why we would stop in a time like that.

As for you claiming Indian Muslims wouldn't start fighting, you clearly don't know Muslim's very well.

I think I will let my Indian, including Kashmiri, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and British Muslim friends answer that last bit.

Bangladesh has a problem with Muslim fanatics, who pick on secular Muslims and on Hindus for a campaign of individual assassination. None of these murderous thugs, whom you have seen in plenty in Pakistan as well, doing identical things, running identical campaigns, can stand up to even the police, leave alone an armed force.

The Pakistan Army has actually very rarely started a skirmish in Kashmir. The only two occasions were at Siachen, later at Kargil. Other incidents all took place at various spots on the international border, wherever your special forces came across at an otherwise incident-free spot and caused some bloodshed. As a country, we have a policy of strategic restraint; if we were to change that policy, three to four times as many skirmishes would occur, and they would definitely not be initiated by Pakistan. Be careful what you wish for, you might get your wish.

Right now, Bangladesh is doing what any sensible nation will do, going after the religious zealots in the nation. The clear & present danger to Bangladesh is from within itself. Your PM, irrespective of what your fellow country citizens may claim - is pragmatic and sensible.

Before you tangent yourself off to our own home grown nuts in India please do remember there are thousands of "zealots" like @Joe Shearer, @MilSpec, @dadeechi, my self and a couple more who have no love lost for religion and have the nation first approach. We know what has to be done for our zealots and in case the cancer undergoes mutation to become malignant, the appropriate 'resection' will be done.

Cheers!

@Joe Shearer @dadeechi @MilSpec quoted you as examples to drive in a point. I like this guy, his posts are fun ....!

He himself is hilarious, but he has an even more apt chela. The difference is that Munshi's English is good, his chela's, not good.

 

[Major d1]

For you all -

ndia has an open border with Nepal because it benefits india in by-passing customs duty that Nepal might otherwise lay on indian goods. Nepal is landlocked and has to import goods from third party either through india or china. Open border with Nepal allows for indian goods to enter Nepal without competition with goods from other countries. A regulated border would mean goods from other countries would be same price as goods from india because of customs duty.
Open border also means ease in movement of citizens from one country to the other. Nepal borders some of the poorest states of india but having the highest number of people (UP 200 million, Bihar 110 million, West Bengal 100 whereas population of Nepal is just 26 million) thus the net migration rate is likely to be negative for india. And where adjoining states have better HDI, Nepalese cannot settle. Nepalese are not allowed to settle in Sikkim or adjoining areas of Siligure corridor aka the 'chicken's neck', because ofForeigners (Protected Areas) Order 1958 (India).
Rest, Nepalese are allowed to settle in big cities where they pose no demographic threat. Furthermore, indians are allowed to migrate to Nepal where they do pose demographic threat to Nepal but it is extremely advantageous (strategically and politically, because of Nepal's relatively smaller population) to india to have indians living in Nepal. if Nepal prevented poor indians from UP and bihar migrating to adjoining districts of Southern Nepal, india will immediately close its border like it did in 1989 and does before every election in UP or bihar or sometimes after formation of unfriendly governments in Nepal.

India has a regulated border with Bangladesh because despite having an area nearly equal with Nepal, Bangladesh has a population of 160 million. Compared to the states Bangladesh neighbors, this is huge and thus Bangladeshi immigrants do pose a great demographic threat to the neighboring states unlike in case of Nepal. Secondly, Bangladesh isn't landlocked by india and thus can import goods from other countries. Open border with india would mean Bangladesh can buy goods from 3rd countries and smuggle it to india thus bypassing india customs duty on 3rd country products altogether.

So, India has a not so open, rather 1-sided open border with Bhutan. India has an open border with Nepal because it is advantageous to india and India doesn't have an open border with Bangladesh because of the demographic threat Bangladesh poses to the adjoining NE states i.e. it is not beneficial for india.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Right now, Bangladesh is doing what any sensible nation will do, going after the religious zealots in the nation. The clear & present danger to Bangladesh is from within itself. Your PM, irrespective of what your fellow country citizens may claim - is pragmatic and sensible.

Before you tangent yourself off to our own home grown nuts in India please do remember there are thousands of "zealots" like @Joe Shearer, @MilSpec, @dadeechi, my self and a couple more who have no love lost for religion and have the nation first approach. We know what has to be done for our zealots and in case the cancer undergoes mutation to become malignant, the appropriate 'resection' will be done.

Cheers!

@Joe Shearer @dadeechi @MilSpec quoted you as examples to drive in a point. I like this guy, his posts are fun ....!

Interesting to have an Indian think he knows more about my country than I do ... Actually the zealots are on the increase because of the fascist undemocratic tendencies of the AL government and the interference and exploitation by India. Both of these together is creating resentment in the country.

 

[Hellfire]

As for the Pakistani army not starting small skirmishes, we have been doing it in Kashmir for some time now, don't see why we would stop in a time like that.

I like your post for the fact that you have the guts to admit you do irritate us along IB (not LC).

When I say IB, I, of course, refer to that bit of land of J&K princely state that you recognised as an international boundary opposite Jammu, Kathua and Sambha by the Karachi Agreement of 1948 between India and Pakistan and which you have been desperately trying to undo (the political and diplomatic gaffe you made) by labelling it as 'working boundary'. If you see, that is the only place you actually do report to firing on our troops as there are BSF troops there and not regular army!!

For the rest of the LC, as @Joe Shearer has aptly pointed out, are you really sure you initiate firefights? Your troops along LC would strongly like to disagree on that aspect.

 

[SrNair]

How many Indians illegally staying in bd. do u know that ? So why BGB doesn't shoot them? As i said before - It;s all about foreign policy and indian front foot aggression.




who M i i dn't want to expose. I have knowledge about military purpose , i have no need to prove it to you . If you can't understand my diplomatic words, i have nothing to do. I have been working for military issues more then 10 years. However- Your comments is proving your manner .



The difference is Kashmir border and bd border is in the same condition.

Actually what those imaginary Indians can achieve if the stay illegelly in BD ,a nation where their own people trying to attempt dangerous journey to South East Asia and India for better life ?

Again do whatever you want .

But is someone tries to enter illegally in to India BSF would shoot them ,they should shoot them and will repeat time and again .
Our land ,our laws

 

[Hellfire]

Interesting to have an Indian think he knows more about my country than I do ... Actually the zealots are on the increase because of the fascist undemocratic tendencies of the AL government and the interference and exploitation by India. Both of these together is creating resentment in the country.

Yikes!!!!!

An actually sensible post from you!!! Are you alright? Three years ago I would have got a reply that would have had me on the floor in laughter!!!

Interesting to know that an Indian thinks he knows more than you for you? Well, maybe because we 'interfere' with your country and hence know it more?

Or maybe because common sense dictates that religion + poverty + unemployment is a dangerous combination resulting in impressionable minds ripe for manipulation and we see the handiwork of the finance of Wahab Inc which spares no funds in order to impress the people with distorted version of Koran?

As for the interference and exploitation by India, get a life. Your country folks come to India in search of jobs which you clearly fail to provide and then accuse us of interfering when we try to take steps to protect our interests?

Seen the movie 'The Angry Birds'? King Mudbeard aka Leonard and his folks remind me of someone's acts .... take a guess!

Cheers

For you all -

Add who want to remain ignorant as your whole post depicts it - eloquently!!!

India has an open border with Nepal because it benefits india in by-passing customs duty that Nepal might otherwise lay on indian goods.

WTF?? Seriously?? Ok, Nepal introduces customs and we pay the tax, now my dear Major Delta, please do explain what shall be the cost of Indian goods in Nepali market after tax? Will it be cheaper than before tax? And if not who pays the additional costs? Indians? Or the Nepali consumer?

Nepal is landlocked and has to import goods from third party either through india or china. Open border with Nepal allows for indian goods to enter Nepal without competition with goods from other countries. A regulated border would mean goods from other countries would be same price as goods from india because of customs duty.

The duty is imposed by concerned state Professor!!!! Not by the client state!! By all means ask the Nepalis to introduce tax on food which goes from India!! I am sure it shall cost same as foreign food, being imported from say US!!!

border also means ease in movement of citizens from one country to the other. Nepal borders some of the poorest states of india but having the highest number of people (UP 200 million, Bihar 110 million, West Bengal 100 whereas population of Nepal is just 26 million) thus the net migration rate is likely to be negative for india. And where adjoining states have better HDI, Nepalese cannot settle. Nepalese are not allowed to settle in Sikkim or adjoining areas of Siligure corridor aka the 'chicken's neck', because ofForeigners (Protected Areas) Order 1958 (India)
Rest, Nepalese are allowed to settle in big cities where they pose no demographic threat. Furthermore, indians are allowed to migrate to Nepal where they do pose demographic threat to Nepal but it is extremely advantageous (strategically and politically, because of Nepal's relatively smaller population) to india to have indians living in Nepal. if Nepal prevented poor indians from UP and bihar migrating to adjoining districts of Southern Nepal, india will immediately close its border like it did in 1989 and does before every election in UP or bihar or sometimes after formation of unfriendly governments in Nepal.

India has a regulated border with Bangladesh because despite having an area nearly equal with Nepal, Bangladesh has a population of 160 million. Compared to the states Bangladesh neighbors, this is huge and thus Bangladeshi immigrants do pose a great demographic threat to the neighboring states unlike in case of Nepal. Secondly, Bangladesh isn't landlocked by india and thus can import goods from other countries. Open border with india would mean Bangladesh can buy goods from 3rd countries and smuggle it to india thus bypassing india customs duty on 3rd country products altogether.

So, India has a not so open, rather 1-sided open border with Bhutan. India has an open border with Nepal because it is advantageous to india and India doesn't have an open border with Bangladesh because of the demographic threat Bangladesh poses to the adjoining NE states i.e. it is not beneficial for india.

Too much nonsense for me to rebut.

Will just say - an Indian citizen can not buy land in Sikkim either, nor in Uttarakhand, nor HP nor North Eastern States, nor J&K due to legal state laws.

Now go and read up about Indian Constitutions Schedule over it (won't tell you which so that you keep yourself busy looking and stop posting nonsense; you have your English formulae to derive too).

 

[Joe Shearer]

how did you manage in UK with your English skills??? I wonder.....

He doesn't.

He is a complete bluff. His residence in England is as much in lala land as the rest of his posts.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Yikes!!!!!

An actually sensible post from you!!! Are you alright? Three years ago I would have got a reply that would have had me on the floor in laughter!!!

Interesting to know that an Indian thinks he knows more than you for you? Well, maybe because we 'interfere' with your country and hence know it more?

Or maybe because common sense dictates that religion + poverty + unemployment is a dangerous combination resulting in impressionable minds ripe for manipulation and we see the handiwork of the finance of Wahab Inc which spares no funds in order to impress the people with distorted version of Koran?

As for the interference and exploitation by India, get a life. Your country folks come to India in search of jobs which you clearly fail to provide and then accuse us of interfering when we try to take steps to protect our interests?

Seen the movie 'The Angry Birds'? King Mudbeard aka Leonard and his folks remind me of someone's acts .... take a guess!

Cheers

religion + poverty + unemployment has always been there. What has not always been there is the AL + India at this level of interference and aggression. Only on one previous occasion has the AL and India appeared at the same time on this level described and that was pre-1975 and the results were clear.

 

[Major d1]

Is it the solution ?

how did you manage in UK with your English skills??? I wonder.....

yah 8th types of stranger for you.

Yikes!!!!!

An actually sensible post from you!!! Are you alright? Three years ago I would have got a reply that would have had me on the floor in laughter!!!

Interesting to know that an Indian thinks he knows more than you for you? Well, maybe because we 'interfere' with your country and hence know it more?

Or maybe because common sense dictates that religion + poverty + unemployment is a dangerous combination resulting in impressionable minds ripe for manipulation and we see the handiwork of the finance of Wahab Inc which spares no funds in order to impress the people with distorted version of Koran?

As for the interference and exploitation by India, get a life. Your country folks come to India in search of jobs which you clearly fail to provide and then accuse us of interfering when we try to take steps to protect our interests?

Seen the movie 'The Angry Birds'? King Mudbeard aka Leonard and his folks remind me of someone's acts .... take a guess!

Cheers



Add who want to remain ignorant as your whole post depicts it - eloquently!!!




WTF?? Seriously?? Ok, Nepal introduces customs and we pay the tax, now my dear Major Delta, please do explain what shall be the cost of Indian goods in Nepali market after tax? Will it be cheaper than before tax? And if not who pays the additional costs? Indians? Or the Nepali consumer?



The duty is imposed by concerned state Professor!!!! Not by the client state!! By all means ask the Nepalis to introduce tax on food which goes from India!! I am sure it shall cost same as foreign food, being imported from say US!!!



Too much nonsense for me to rebut.

Will just say - an Indian citizen can not buy land in Sikkim either, nor in Uttarakhand, nor HP nor North Eastern States, nor J&K due to legal state laws.

Now go and read up about Indian Constitutions Schedule over it (won't tell you which so that you keep yourself busy looking and stop posting nonsense; you have your English formulae to derive too).

You didn't understand what point i made. Just replying and making argue doesn't make any sense.

 

[Hellfire]

You didn't understand what point i made. Just replying and making argue doesn't make any sense.

No one understands you mate, other than you. Carry on in your schizotypal world!! I am bailing .....

Cheers.