Indian Brahmos missle crashes in Mian Channo

[manpk77]

I only quoted you after you barked at me. I have no interest in low life scum like you.

stop trolling then

 

[M.AsfandYar]

First - kudos to your posts in this thread. They are veritable knowledge cornucopia.

My question: Do you think there is any way India could have held back Haji Pir Pass? [I know that ,before boarding the flight to Tashkent, Sastri said that he will not give away Haji pir pass, but he gave it away (so much for the friendship of USSR)].

Many times, I thought about this question myself, and I am really convinced that there is no way India could have held back Haji pir pass.

My reasons are below [I am not a good writer, and it is 4:45 AM here. I have worked all night and then writing this. So, please take meaning of my sentences and not poke the actual words used]:
a) Self-denial and self-abnegation as a way of life in India, leading to feeling guilty of keeping war spoils.
b) Extremely pacifist populace and political leadership - how can they justify keeping war spoils?
c) Leftist "intelligensia" and eco-system would never have let Sastri or any other to survive long [when I was a kid, I read first page of a pamplet of a communist news-letter. I still shudder when I think about it. ].
d) General thinking that - Pakistan is a "good" nation. If we don't "provoke" them, they will leave us along. I think this line of thinking existed till Pak developed the bomb in 1988 or so, and then started doing hara-kiri.
e) Something is wrong with Hindus. They are too pacifist, even after enduring so many attrocities. Such kind of thinking would never have let us keep war spoils.

Please let me know your thoughts.

oh boy oh boy

 

[Joe Shearer]

oh boy oh boy

You can say 'oh boy oh boy' and get away with it. What about me?

 

[Joe Shearer]

In his book, Kuldip Nayar has written an event that happened the night he died, which made Shastri realise (with full force) the "treachery" [lack of better words] he had committed....and he died owing to that burden. I am intentionally not writing that event here.

Then why raise it in the first place?

 

[SIPRA]

In his book, Kuldip Nayar has written an event that happened the night he died, which made Shastri realise (with full force) the "treachery" [lack of better words] he had committed....and he died owing to that burden. I am intentionally not writing that event here.

There was a party in the evening. As for as, I can recall; it was hosted by Soviets. Lagta hae Shastri Jee nain daaru (vodka) zarrorat say ziyaada laga liya thi.

 

[SQ8]

To the people who are questioning the character of Pakistanis on this thread why don't you do little introspection.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1504056564457611278

@jk007 @Joe Shearer


@SQ8 i think this bakhtora is talking about you. Funny how educated people in his country are casually suggesting mass rape of Muslim women and if someone condemn them the usual "you don't know enough about us" is thrown at them

Basically the hypocrisy runs so deep that they will go “see no evil, hear no evil” on their end and simply continue like a broken tape record on their tirade against Pakistan

 

[Sayfullah]

LOL.

That would effectively amount to abdication of the judicial function to the interpretations of the Deoband scholar. If that had been an option, to hand over adjudication of any matter affecting a Muslim's practice of his faith to the ulema, the courts would be redundant.

So your saying, courts should decide about Muslims practices and not ulema who studied Islam for generations?

Unfortunately, the ulema of Deoband will not be considered; so far, no fatwa has been considered. It is unlikely that this will happen.

That is the way things are today. When the Supreme Court decided that the Triple Talaq was not regular, and went against the norms, they did not consult Deoband, they interpreted the evidence that they had.

Whether we like it or not, that is the way it is and that is the way it will stay.

THIS IS THE PROBLEM. Indian courts do not even consider consulting ulema of Deoband while many Indian Muslims are Deobandi.
So essentially Deobandi Muslims have 0 rights in India since their view isn’t even heard in court while others decide their fate.
You cannot “interpret” the evidence you have because Indian courts are not ulema of Islam and each school of fiqh and aqeedah have their own way to interpret things.

This is the exact reason why Muslims around the world are calling out Indian for its injustice against Muslims. Y’all only listen to views of a minority and “interpret” your false interpretations and impose it on the majority.

It isn't.

Only the five K's are mandatory for them.

See how easy it is to slip up?

How does this change what I said? It is easy to slip up but how does it make a difference or effect anything I said?

My point was to inform those who wanted to know how these issues were adjudicated in fact in today's jurisprudential regime. This is neither to approve nor to disapprove of this method; it is to tell you this is what is done, and how it is done.

And my point was to inform those who wanted to know why issues like these can’t be solved in courts and neither should be brought to courts especially when those courts are led by non Muslim and the panel discussing the issue doesn’t even include ulema of the leading aqeedahs of Muslims in India.

So if it is compulsory per Quran, then women who do not practice it are doing a sin....isn't it?..... why don't Islamic clerics issue fatwa on it?... I can see majority of Muslim women don't do it.

Read what I wrote properly. The answers to everything you asked are in what I said already.

 

[Sayfullah]

I am afraid Indian courts hold a different view. That is the reality.

India is “secular” right? Why is the state interfering with one’s religion? Why is the state saying what a Muslim woman can and cannot wear? How is india “secular” if courts interfere on the matter if Muslims?
If ways continue like this, the Quran and Hadith tells us Muslims what to do when outsiders interfere in our religion and try to change it and ban some stuff (P.S. when Muslims go for this option, it always ended bad for the opponent side).

 

[jk007]

You can say 'oh boy oh boy' and get away with it. What about me?

What are you implying when you say "what about me"?

 

[Vortex]

@waz @LeGenD @Slav Defence @WebMaster

Could you please put behind bars these off topickers ?

 

[Joe Shearer]

There was a party in the evening. As for as, I can recall; it was hosted by Soviets. Lagta hae Shastri Jee nain daaru (vodka) zarrorat say ziyaada laga liya thi.

I am glad to see that you too are human.

What are you implying when you say "what about me"?

I find myself responding to the uninformed among Pakistanis, I find myself responding to the uninformed among Indians.

 

[Sayfullah]

Not at all. That means you were listening with your ears - and your mind - shut tight.

It means that the courts have to decide if what has been brought to their attention is covered under Art. 25 or Art. 26 of the Indian Constitution.

I'll take this further, once you have grasped this.


That is because the ulema of Deoband cannot discuss what fits or doesn't fit into the cover of those two articles of the constitution.

I repeat again, get your mind off the religious aspect, and try to understand that the courts, and ONLY the courts, decide on constitutional matters.


That is because the ulema of Deoband cannot discuss what fits or doesn't fit into the cover of those two articles of the constitution.

I repeat again, get your mind off the religious aspect, and try to understand that the courts, and ONLY the courts, decide on constitutional matters.

They have every right in India that is guaranteed to them under the Indian constitution.

It is sad, but you have not even tried to understand the difference between deciding on a question of religion, and deciding on whether a particular observance deserves the protection of the constitution or not.


Again, I repeat, the interpretation is to the extent that the Indian constitution allows protection.


If you shut your eyes, stick your fingers into your ears, and decide to scream loudly, it won't change things around.

Simple.

The courts didn't decide what a Sikh can or cannot do. It decides what part of being a Sikh is protected.


If you are saying that constitutional matters can be decided outside our courts, that is wrong, as far as India is concerned.

If you didn't know earlier, you should know now, the law is radically different in Pakistan.


How will it be decided what is protected and what is not? By whom?


It will always be like this, as long as we have a constitution, particularly one that offers protection to the practice of religion, and one that refuses to take sides for one religion and against another.


NO Muslim will go for any 'option' because Muslims who think and read and discuss these understand what courts are deciding.

Your still not understanding what I said so I suggest you open your mind and eyes and try to understand what I say.
Indian courts decided what should be protected or what not.
To decide what should be protected, it had to be an essential part of the religion.
Therefore indian courts decided if hijab is essential part to Islam.
This is where the issue comes in. Indian courts hold no right to decide what’s essential part of Islam or not. Instead of doing their own “interpretations” and “investigations” they should have called leading ulema of all schools of fiqh on Islam and asked them if hijab isn’t essential part of Islam or not. Even if 1 ulema says it is, it should have been considered as such and be protected.
However like you said, many ulema like ulema of Deoband weren’t even consulted on this.
Indian courts made their own “interpretation” of the “evidence” but Indian courts hold no right to interpret any Islamic matter and as “evidence” they used Quran and Hadith whereas I posted the verses of Quran and a Hadith which interprets to why hijab is mandatory. So Indian courts came up with a wrong interpretation and based off that wrong interpretation decided hijab is not mandatory thus making it not protected and allowing it to be banned if places want to.
But in Islam hijab is an essential part of the religion it covers the woman’s awrah so places banning hijab like schools means Muslim woman have to expose their awrah which is something woman aren’t allowed to do in Islam.
So Indian courts tryna do their whole investigation on their own and decide if Hijab is essential part of Islam or not (while many scholars over generations already came up with the answer and have it), have cans up with a conclusion that would make woman expose their awrah which is against Islam.

How will it be decided what is protected and what is not? By whom?

You call leading scholars of all schools of fiqh in Islam in India. You decide based on consensus. If there even is one school if fiqh which says it’s essential part of Islam, then since india is a “secular” country, hijab must be protected due to at least 1 school of fiqh believing it is essential part of Islam.

Furthermore, had hijab not been banned, those who want to wear it and believe it’s essential to Islam will wear it while those who believe the opposite won’t wear it.

It will always be like this, as long as we have a constitution, particularly one that offers protection to the practice of religion, and one that refuses to take sides for one religion and against another.

Then let’s see this constitution work. All schools kf aqeedah such as Ahle Hadees, Deobandis, Barelvis, Ahle Sunnah, Salafis all believe hijab is essential part of Islam and mandatory. All schools of fiqh such as Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali and Malaki believe hijab is essential part of Islam and mandatory.

If the ulema Muslims follow believe hijab is mandatory and essential part of Islam, then who are Indian courts to do their own interpretations of the Quran and Hadith ti decide?

NO Muslim will go for any 'option' because Muslims who think and read and discuss these understand what courts are deciding.

Muslims think and read and discuss and understand BUT when doing all this fails to convince the issue to be solved peacefully, there’s only one option left. The Islamic conditions outlined in Quran and Hadith that need to be met for that option to be used are basically almost met in india. From every Muslim, understanding the Quran, reading the Quran and discussing with ulema on Quranic matters is above all.
Therefore, well educated Muslims will be the first ones to exercise that option because they see and understand the Islamic conditions outlined and see it be met.

Simple.

The courts didn't decide what a Sikh can or cannot do. It decides what part of being a Sikh is protected.

So turbans which according to you are NOT ESSENTIAL to Sikhs but after long battle in courts, Indian courts allowed Sikhs to wear turbans instead of helmets for motorcycles and turbans aren’t banned anywhere in India.

BUT

Hijab which IS ESSENTIAL to Islam gets banned by many places and india and courts cannot protect it?

 

[V. Makarov]

You, pakistanis, are bought up in an environment where the only things that give pride are - 1992 world cup win and Nuclear weapons. Hence, at the drop of a hat, you folks keep talking about nuclear response.

Thank God, at least we did not prematurely e*aculate like you did with that short range missile. It's calming to know that we have limited ourselves to rhetoric only, and not making mistakes of nuclear proportions. (no pun intended)

Survival of Pakistan, specially after the missile incident, revolves around a well-integrated nuclear machinery that can respond to any threats. If India thinks that it can carry out decapitation strikes on airbases, and strategic locations, let it live in that delusion. The Strategic Tactical Weapon Command destroyed the Indian wishes to carry out shallow penetrations of Pakistan borders. Additionally, let me clearly tell you, Pakistan is also immune to decapitation strikes of any intensity India can throw at it. Pakistan is up against an enemy that is 7 times bigger. And when they bring up their central weapon for defence, it should not come as surprising.

 

[Talon]

(and it WAS shot down),

It wasn't, how the wreckage fell is enough to clear that khushfehmi of yours .. Those who know, know..

rather, their aim was to attack the Rafique Airbase (formerly known as the sargodha Airbase)

Rafiqui is Shorkot Air Base located near Jhung.

Sargodha is a different airbase and it's official name is MUSHAF Air Base .. please stop stating incorrect information.

after shooting down two jets and bombing you on 6 different bases...Pakistan escalated, india chose not to escalate in spite of loosing two jets and 7 or 8 lives to Pakistan.

Not bases .. sites and they were 4 in total not 6 .

I think we need to take a policy of permanently disallowing all flights to any air traffic coming from the indian side. they will loose money and so will other airlines across the world. they all will blame india and its brahmos debacle.

Every country charges fee from flights using it's airspace and providing ATC services. Considering number of aircrafts that fly to India through Pakistan, we will also lose a lot of money so not a very good idea.

negative. there aim was actually not to bomb 3 trees, they actually aimed to bomb the madrassa in Balakot. but their pilots panicked and ran away after dropping their payload to loose weight. so that's not an accurate example.

The load was not JETTISONED . The bombs were DROPPED on the target and fell pretty close to the building. They failed to hit because of stupidity and incorrect information/intel provided to the IAF plus the bad weather. If it was not cloudy, story would have been different.

it's not a question of how fast the airliners were going but a question of how fast brahmos past them all came into an area where the airliners wouldn't be under any threat by the intercepting missile(s). hence why the position of the airliners is so important in knowing the true picture of what happened. all we know is that there were two intl airliners (ksA and Qatari) and 3 domestic airliners on the route. where were they, how far apart were they, how far were they from mian channu are all important but unanswered questions.

I can share positions of all flights if you have flight numbers.. but all the information you have posted so far is either incorrect or unconfirmed so yeah..

 

[jk007]

Thank God, at least we did not prematurely e*aculate like you did with that short range missile. It's calming to know that we have limited ourselves to rhetoric only, and not making mistakes of nuclear proportions. (no pun intended)

Survival of Pakistan, specially after the missile incident, revolves around a well-integrated nuclear machinery that can respond to any threats. If India thinks that it can carry out decapitation strikes on airbases, and strategic locations, let it live in that delusion. The Strategic Tactical Weapon Command destroyed the Indian wishes to carry out shallow penetrations of Pakistan borders. Additionally, let me clearly tell you, Pakistan is also immune to decapitation strikes of any intensity India can throw at it. Pakistan is up against an enemy that is 7 times bigger. And when they bring up their central weapon for defence, it should not come as surprising.

Sir - Your post is disgusting (nuclear nonsense).

I am not a policy maker in Indian system. So, it does not matter if I know / do not know what Pakistan does or does not do.
Despite all the confidence in your writing about what Pakistan does or does not, I am sure you know that you are not a policy / decision maker in your country either.

I am pretty sure the decision makers in both India & Pak are well aware of possible reactions of each country.

So, what psychological need of yourself are you fulfilling by writing such stuff?? why write such boring bombastic stuff, as if you are privy to such critical information??
You want to imagine yourself as Bajwa or other important decision maker, and feel happy about it?

PS: Please don't respond. I also did not want to respond. But I wanted to know why you wrote all this to me.