Open Letter: A Sikh Leader Begs Clinton To Intervene In India

[Dilli]

For someone who wasn't born at the time, you are very knowledgable to know the one single person responsible.

Zia-ul-Haq, Courtesy: The Duel, written by Tariq Ali, a VERY REPUTED PAKISTANI. The only one I respect I guess.

Have you ever spoken with a khalsa fauji?

Yes I have. Even had a skirmish.

Ever read DES Pardes?

Not intersted in khalistani novels.

As for the FATA situation, are you naive enough to believe your govt. has no involvement in it at all?

Just like pakistan had involvement in khalistan movement.

You seem to have forgotten teh events of 84 pretty quickly, yet at no point in time do Bharatias slack in whinging about the 'Julm' of AurungZeb and Ghaznavi.

Are we killing muslims for what aurangzeb did??

No, we are not.

 

[Dilli]

Is this Indian common practice again from school years just say "atleast its not as bad as what you are doing"... not the right approach a pity India sounds like an overgrown baby with your type of views.

Yes it is our common practice to tell other school kids that if u have got your own problems then take care of them,and don't interfere in our matters.

 

[DarkStar]

There is no contradiction. One is a historical conquest, the other is riots.

I hope you can see the difference.

This is exactly what I am talking about. You simply refuse to let it go.

Burning oneself in hatred and animosity, over perceived wrongs done centuries earlier can only hold Bharat and its residents back.

 

[srijeesh]

This is exactly what I am talking about. You simply refuse to let it go.

Burning oneself in hatred and animosity, over perceived wrongs done centuries earlier can only hold Bharat and its residents back.

apparantly they are not holding us back, if anything they can teach us a lesson as to how a nation will be treated if it fails to be united or doesnt stand for itself.

 

[Vinod2070]

DarkStar, all ancient civilizations don't let go easily!

As Paksitanis, you had nothing to do with crusades but as Muslims can you let go of it!

They are not "perceived wrongs" by any means! They are part of history and very well documented.

 

[DarkStar]

also while the riots lasted for a very short time and ppl did it in a rush of hot blood.
the conquest was cold blooded and was aimed at the extermination of entire race or their collective conversion.

That is grossly unfair.

Conquest is always about money, power, land. No one entered Bharat with the aim of exterminating the Indian race.

If this is what you believe, we cannot have an intelligent discussion.

 

[Bane Blade]

Yes it is our common practice to tell other school kids that if u have got your own problems then take care of them,and don't interfere in our matters.

Your problems what a wise idea to discuss them on PAK defence.

specially in the Pakistan-India crisis section

 

[Flintlock]

I agree with you. If people could forget and move on, it would be the best thing on earth.

Unfortunately civilizational wounds don't heal so easily, which is why there are so many conflicts in this world. The lessons of history are inculcated into ones culture in legends, myths and history.

If you go to China today, try to fathom the manic hatred of the Japanese. They haven't forgotten the atrocities of WWII.

This is exactly what I am talking about. You simply refuse to let it go.

Burning oneself in hatred and animosity, over perceived wrongs done centuries earlier can only hold Bharat and its residents back.

 

[srijeesh]

That is grossly unfair.

Conquest is always about money, power, land. No one entered Bharat with the aim of exterminating the Indian race.

If this is what you believe, we cannot have an intelligent discussion.

conquest is not only about money,power, land but also about thrusting ones believes on the others. 'white man's burden' was the motivation for imperialism.
similarly, conquests of muslim conquerors were to spread islam.
otherwise, why would they target temples, destroy them completely and build a mosque in their place?

 

[rubyjackass]

This is exactly what I am talking about. You simply refuse to let it go.

Burning oneself in hatred and animosity, over perceived wrongs done centuries earlier can only hold Bharat and its residents back.

Nobody remembers it dude!!
Atleast not as a reason to hate muslims.
Thats history...

 

[DarkStar]

DarkStar, all ancient civilizations don't let go easily!

As Paksitanis, you had nothing to do with crusades but as Muslims can you let go of it!

They are not "perceived wrongs" by any means! They are part of history and very well documented.

The dynamics of nationhood were not what they are today. Farmers, merchants, labourers didn't care who their overlord or king was, as long as they didn't have to pay exorbitant taxes.

They didn't care which dynasty came and went.

 

[Vinod2070]

The dynamics of nationhood were not what they are today. Farmers, merchants, labourers didn't care who their overlord or king was, as long as they didn't have to pay exorbitant taxes.

They didn't care which dynasty came and went.

The concept of nationhood may not have been there but there was surely the awareness that the rulers were foreign invaders and a strong sense of resentment against them and their ... actions.

What else would explain the constant struggle against them for all the 600 odd years of the Muslim rule in India? The Marathas, Jats, Sikhs etc. had already recovered most of the land from the Muslims by the time the British came.

 

[DarkStar]

I agree with you. If people could forget and move on, it would be the best thing on earth.

Unfortunately civilizational wounds don't heal so easily, which is why there are so many conflicts in this world. The lessons of history are inculcated into ones culture in legends, myths and history.

If you go to China today, try to fathom the manic hatred of the Japanese. They haven't forgotten the atrocities of WWII.

We can go on, Flint. As a lahorite, I have the baggage of what Ranjit Singh, and before him the Ghakkars did to us. Even Nadir Shah and Abdali.

As the grandson of a Jallandar migrant (grandmother), I have hear eye witness accounts of 5 siblings being butchered to death.

I have accounts of my great great great grandmother talkign about muslim women jumping in wells when the sikh rule in PUnjab and AFghania started.

We have issues with the Maratha horse riders who terrorised the settled populations of India and Deccan.

So does that mean, I should let these histories consume me? Should I let the crusades consume me? I think not.

Don't forget the past, but let it not have an effect upon you. Thats what i believe.

 

[Flintlock]

The dynamics of nationhood were not what they are today. Farmers, merchants, labourers didn't care who their overlord or king was, as long as they didn't have to pay exorbitant taxes.

They didn't care which dynasty came and went.

That's not entirely true. There might not have been nationalism, but loyalties towards ones community, culture, religion have always been there.

If you go to Rajasthan and listen to the folk songs, they still talk about the conquests from the West and the destruction of the temple of Somnath etc. etc., and how their warrior kings defended the lands.

Such traumatic events have become part of the expression of many communities in India.

 

[DarkStar]

conquest is not only about money,power, land but also about thrusting ones believes on the others. 'white man's burden' was the motivation for imperialism.
similarly, conquests of muslim conquerors were to spread islam.
otherwise, why would they target temples, destroy them completely and build a mosque in their place?

The temples that were targeted during early muslim attacks, were not just temples, but centers of power, prestige and above all..Finance.

Temples in Bharat held vast treasures of foreign exchange (gold) , and were closely embedded into the different state apparatus. They also lent money, even to Rajas to finance their dig vijayas and conquests.

Like today's National reserves.

There are even accounts of Hindu Raja's attacking each others temples, and sometimes their own when in need of hard cash.