Kayani wants India’s Afghan mission closed

[r3alist]

other than that Pakistan can scream all it wants and send sueciders

i find this afghan attitude quite plucky, because this way they manage to absolve themselves of all blame about the taliban - no according to this afghan it was everyone else's fault apart from the afghans - except that they populated the taliban themselves, go figure....

 

[Vinod2070]

I want to bring up a point for discussion, because I need some help trying to understand the argument and would appreciate informed input

Afghanistan is a historical entity, hundreds of years old. Pakistan was created 60 years back based on certain factors and a specific situation

What's this mean? "India" as a modern nation state is 60 something years old as well - So, does the "age" mean something ?And "Palestine", is that a nation state or a label for a geographical area? So does "age mean something? if so, what? For instance, France is older as a nation state than the US, does that make the US illegitmate? China is the oldest nation state, does that mean it is more legitimate than others?

No, we don't agree with that. India is the inheritor of a 10,000 year old Indian civilization (rings a bell?). We don't see ourselves as a 60 year old nation but as a millienia old civilization that has come out of a long slumber.

The very idea of Pakistan is less than a century old at the max.

I am not saying that it makes Pakistan illegitimate. It does mean that others may have long memories predating Pakistan's birth. You can't wish that away even if you want to.

 

[banned]

No, we don't agree with that. India is the inheritor of a 10,000 year old Indian civilization (rings a bell?). We don't see ourselves as a 60 year old nation but as a millienia old civilization that has come out of a long slumber.

The very idea of Pakistan is less than a century old at the max.

I am not saying that it makes Pakistan illegitimate. It does mean that others may have long memories predating Pakistan's birth. You can't wish that away even if you want to.

99.5% Pakistan lived in the same post-partition land where they lived pre-partition. All the memories they might have are confined to their ancestral land where they continue to live anyway.

Even before the creation, the part today called Pakistan was visibly and culturaly different from mainstream india as well very hostile to. Think of all the central asian invaders. When people talk about memories of migration your serious have to search in Karachi with a microscope. Because the majority of Pakistan did not come by migration. Ohh and Pakistan also inheritied thousands of years old civilization. Heard of harrapa, mogen jo daro, Taxila, etc etc?

 

[muse]

I'm not sure the sun stops rising in the east just because you disagree with the fact that it does.


India an "inheritor" ? Sure, similarly Pakistan is an "inheritor" - how now?

I

t does mean that others may have long memories predating Pakistan's birth. You can't wish that away even if you want to.

That's reasonable, but what does longer memories have to do with anything? Chinese I would argue would have the longest memories as a nation state, but what does that have to do with anything?

What is the standing of "memories" ? What ought it be? Yes, it's a trick question, think before you attempt tackling the question.

 

[Vinod2070]

99.5% Pakistan lived in the same post-partition land where they lived pre-partition. All the memories they might have are confined to their ancestral land where they continue to live anyway.

OK. My understanding is that there are far to many who claim foreign descent, that there are more Quraishis (and Shekhs and other Arabs) in Pakistan than in Arabia. Same goes for claiming Persian and Turk and Mughal and sundry other parentage.

In fact it is considered a badge of honor to claim foreign descent (Ashraf) over the native Ajlaf. Most of your leaders claim to be Arabs. That includes Musharraf (Saudi) and Sharief (Saudi again!).

Even before the creation, the part today called Pakistan was visibly and culturaly different from mainstream india as well very hostile to. Think of all the central asian invaders. When people talk about memories of migration your serious have to search in Karachi with a microscope. Because the majority of Pakistan did not come by migration.

I am not sure what you mean here. What do you want to say when you refer to Central Asian invaders. They invaded you (and the Afghans) before they invaded further into India.

We consider them barbarians and their barbarity is well documented. What do you think of your own invaders?

Ohh and Pakistan also inheritied thousands of years old civilization. Heard of harrapa, mogen jo daro, Taxila, etc etc?

Yes! Wasn't it all jahiliyah before the Arab invader civilized you and took you out of darkness?

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

OK. My understanding is that there are far to many who claim foreign descent, that there are more Quraishis (and Shekhs and other Arabs) in Pakistan than in Arabia. Same goes for claiming Persian and Turk and Mughal and sundry other parentage.

Tht statement is according to pukin indian media and its moronic anchors.

Note= Islam came in sub continent centuries ago with sufis and saints who married here also.

There r 2 types of qureshis one r Syeds desendents of Prophet Muhammad PBUH.
2nd one is a caste who just use it.
Shiekhs dont claim to be arab rather its a caste!U will find shiekhs in punjab n KP as well as even in sindh.

People of Northern areas r of turk origin and can also be found in most parts of Pakistan.

In fact it is considered a badge of honor to claim foreign descent (Ashraf) over the native Ajlaf. Most of your leaders claim to be Arabs. That includes Musharraf (Saudi) and Sharief (Saudi again!).

Ashraf is a islamic name not honor or anything m...n
Nawaz never claims to be saudi but KASHMIRI.
Musharaf is a SYED a desendant of Prophet PBUH.

I am not sure what you mean here. What do you want to say when you refer to Central Asian invaders. They invaded you (and the Afghans) before they invaded further into India.

There r more Pushtuns in Pakistan then whole afghanistan!
Balouch again were Muslim.
Punjabis most conversions were coz of Sufis and saints...Most of the time its been a muslim state!
Wasnt it?

I just hope u dont claim Harappa,Mohenjo daro,ghandara,mehargarh and Indus civilisations coz they never spread to india!

We consider them barbarians and their barbarity is well documented. What do you think of your own invaders?

Well if somebdy is muslim and muslim government comes would tht muslim consider them invading barbarians?

Yes! Wasn't it all jahiliyah before the Arab invader civilized you and took you out of darkness?

Jahalia is a word used in some other context... Islam ENLIGHTENS U!

Islam came here before arabs n others saints like Baba Fareed,Shah Rukn e alam etc came here centuries ago... So get ur head out of ur well and talk sense!

 

[Vinod2070]

Well if somebdy is muslim and muslim government comes would tht muslim consider them invading barbarians?

Why did Iran fight with Iraq then?

What would you do if Afghanistan tries to annex your tribal areas now?

 

[Vinod2070]

LETTER FROM LONDON: Demons from the past —Irfan Husain

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens

In a tranquil place like St Andrews, there are not many distractions, so I have been reading lots of history and trying to reflect on its lessons. For some time now, I have been interested in the dynamics of Hindu-Muslim relations, and the impact of ancient enmities and grievances on current Indo-Pak relations.

We have forgotten much of our past, but it nonetheless affects our daily lives.

For instance, when we now think of the Afghan city of Kandahar, we equate it with the Taliban. But its original name was Gandhara, and it was a part of the ancient Buddhist civilisation with its capital city in Taxila. Swat, Peshawar and the Kabul Valley were all included in this thriving, peaceful community that had absorbed Mediterranean culture brought to the subcontinent by Alexander, and before him, by Greek mercenaries and traders.

While it was no utopia, it was a stable, prosperous civilisation that threatened none of its neighbours, and has bequeathed us a wealth of artefacts that attest to its high level of cultural development.

The reason I mention this period of history is to try and understand the bitterness that must exist in many Hindu minds over the Muslim conquest of their country. In his Story of Civilisation, Will Durant writes: “The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest in history”. While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enouh to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan.

The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Indeed, the presence of Muslim historians on their various campaigns has ensured that the memory of their deeds will live long after they were buried.

Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.

These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage. When these warriors settled in India, they ruled as absolute despots over a cowed Hindu populace. For generations, their descendants took their martial superiority over their subjects for granted. When the British exposed the decadence of the Moghuls and seized power, the Muslims — especially the aristocracy — tried to cut deals with the new rulers to ensure that they would be treated differently from the Hindus.

It has been argued by some historians that Pakistan was really created to ensure that the Muslim ruling class would not be subject to Hindu rule in an undivided India. But having created Pakistan, the ruling elites promptly started lording it over the Bengalis of East Pakistan. What, after all, is the point of being descendants of Tughlak, Aibak and Mahmud if there is no under-class to persecute and exploit?

This, then, is the Hindu perspective of the Muslim invasion of their country. After centuries of first Muslim and then British rule, they are finally in charge of their destiny. For the first time in modern history, Indians feel that they can play a role on the world stage in keeping with their numbers and the size of their country.

Pakistan, especially its establishment and military, is smarting from successive military defeats and the steady diminishing of its international image. Due to their long domination of much of India, the Muslim elite in Pakistan feels it has some kind of divine right to be treated on a par with India.

With this psychological and historical baggage, both sides are unable to engage constructively with each other. Many Hindus feel they have centuries of humiliation to avenge. And a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims are secretly convinced that they are inherently superior to the Hindus.

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

This reality makes the Hindu-Muslim divide all the more bitter, for it pits brother against brother. And as students of Moghul history are aware, this is perhaps the bloodiest kind of conflict. By ties of consanguinity, culture, geography, and history, there is far more that unites than divides Indian Hindus and Muslims. But the politics of self-interest, too often garbed in the banner of faith, has pushed them far apart.

Why resurrect these ghosts from history? Because until we have confronted the demons from our past, we cannot understand the dynamics of contemporary events. As India and Pakistan go through the intricate steps of peace talks, each side needs to know what makes the other tick.

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens.

A study and understanding of the past will promote better understanding between the two communities. It is important that Hindus grasp the central fact that their Muslim neighbours cannot now be held responsible for the persecution of their ancestors, and Muslims must face the fact that they are not the political heirs of the emperors Babar and Akbar.

Time is a great leveller; it is also a great healer.

 

[Vinod2070]

An article by a Pakistani writer. Sheds some light on the "memories".

Remember all those atrocities were perpetrated on the ancestors of the vast majority of Pakistanis as well.

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

An article by a Pakistani writer. Sheds some light on the "memories".

Remember all those atrocities were perpetrated on the ancestors of the vast majority of Pakistanis as well.

Vinod sir,i hope you realize you are derailing the thread,this doesn't reflect good on the fact that you are senior member.

 

[Vinod2070]

Will Durant in his epic "The story of civilization" considered the book that has had the most impact in history.

The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest in history”. While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enouh to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan.

This is directly from the book.

The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.

The bitter lesson that may be drawn from this tragedy is that eternal vigilance is the price of civilization. A nation must love peace, but keep its powder dry.

This is memory and it effects our actions and behavior as it does yours.

 

[Vinod2070]

Vinod sir,i hope you realize you are derailing the thread,this doesn't reflect good on the fact that you are senior member.

Well, I am just answering to some questions put to me.

 

[muse]

Not memory - it's ideology, because it's certainly "selective" memories.

You seem to have run our argument to ground. Too bad really.

 

[waraich66]

It was greatest mistake of US by involving India in Afghanistan infrastruture development .

PA could never afford enemy in their back yard.

 

[Vinod2070]

Not memory - it's ideology, because it's certainly "selective" memories.

You seem to have run our argument to ground. Too bad really.

I have quoted Pakistani or neutral sources!

If you wanted to discuss something different, you can be a bit more clear. It was a bit too cryptic perhaps.