Pakistan faces 26/11 everyday: Mani Shankar Aiyar

[Spring Onion]

What ever happened in 1947 Indians can live with that mate, Some Muslims of sub continent wanted a separate state for them selves and they got it and we parted and we have our own destinies.
Only thing most people on either side wish for is a friendly neighborhood,In 1971 the fault lies in the racist attitude of west Pakistanis.
These Jingoism of repaying with violence will only makes things worse.

Indeed Indians can live with terrorism against Pakistan that too sposnored by your Indian State in 71, But that does not mean you had the right to justify that terrorism on basis of "racist attitude" by Pakistanis. It was our internal affair.


as far your comment about violence, well so you do accept that you were doing violence but we should not repay you in the same.

we wish for peace with India but not at our cost

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Both forgot Khalistan .... Who supported it... where were the leaders put up???

Khalistan is a long but empty (Khali) story.

 

[nair]

Indeed Indians can live with terrorism against Pakistan that too sposnored by your Indian State in 71, But that does not mean you had the right to justify that terrorism on basis of "racist attitude" by Pakistanis. It was our internal affair.


as far your comment about violence, well so you do accept that you were doing violence but we should not repay you in the same.

we wish for peace with India but not at our cost

Good... Now what do we do?

 

[KS]

Do you want a dictatorship in India? I have many friends who will answer yes.

I will say no. Because the day a dictatorship comes, India unravels. This is true when absolute devolution of power happens too. Both ends of the spectrum are just as bad. We need to have something in the middle and personally something that leans to the right. A federal structure but under the overall embrace of a central structure. Just enough room for leeway inside a solid frame.

 

[arp2041]

Indeed Indians can live with terrorism against Pakistan that too sposnored by your Indian State in 71, But that does not mean you had the right to justify that terrorism on basis of "racist attitude" by Pakistanis. It was our internal affair.


as far your comment about violence, well so you do accept that you were doing violence but we should not repay you in the same.

we wish for peace with India but not at our cost

Ma'am, pls explain how 71 was only Pakistan's internal affair when crores of people crossed the international border to take refuge in India & lakhs of innocent people were dying in former east Pakistan??

 

[Hellraiser007]

Indeed Indians can live with terrorism against Pakistan that too sposnored by your Indian State in 71, But that does not mean you had the right to justify that terrorism on basis of "racist attitude" by Pakistanis. It was our internal affair.


as far your comment about violence, well so you do accept that you were doing violence but we should not repay you in the same.

we wish for peace with India but not at our cost

I am talking about the terror threat Jingoism from Pakistan not India. The highlighted part is what is called jingoism.

In 1971 it is your internal matter and you people messed it up with your racist attitude.

 

[acid rain]

Indeed Indians can live with terrorism against Pakistan that too sposnored by your Indian State in 71, But that does not mean you had the right to justify that terrorism on basis of "racist attitude" by Pakistanis. It was our internal affair.


as far your comment about violence, well so you do accept that you were doing violence but we should not repay you in the same.

we wish for peace with India but not at our cost

71' even if India had not intervened you wouldn't have been able to hold on to Bangladesh, what would have happened is the killing spree would have continued and millions more bangladeshis would have been tortured and killed and India would have received millions more of BD refugees, BD refugees were seriously overburdening India and a few millions more would have ruined us, but eventually you would have been forced to part with BD by the international community.

But the continous terrorism policy adapted by Pak has killed thousands of Indians, the Khalistan movement supported by ISI killed scores of Indians and a PM, the Kargil incursion, the number of wars have killed Indian civilians and soldiers - where is our pay back for that? Pakistan has a lot to pay for.

 

[Hellraiser007]

It's stupid of you to comment without reading the court judgement on the subject. But your shakha probably does not permit such banned material to be distributed.

What do you mean by that??

 

[nair]

Ma'am, pls explain how 71 was only Pakistan's internal affair when crores of people crossed the international border to take refuge in India & lakhs of innocent people were dying in former east Pakistan??

Thats because they use a special lens through which you can only see the acts of raw and convert it to terrorism.. and blurrs all the other emages....

 

[Spring Onion]

Ma'am, pls explain how 71 was only Pakistan's internal affair when crores of people crossed the international border to take refuge in India & lakhs of innocent people were dying in former east Pakistan??

Crores of people crossing over to India? dont you think the count is as over-estimated as all other accusations? anyway crossing over of refugees into any country does not give right to that country to involve in state terrorism against the other country.

It was INDEED internal matter of Pakistan and India only unleashed state terrorism against Pakistan.

if you give "death of innocent people" as you claimed, as areson for Indian state terrorism then dongt you think killing of innocent people in parts of India gives justification for same actions by other countries.

 

[Black Widow]

Mani shankar Iyer is Big Mouth, I will suggest all to look his earlier comments...

1. Aiyar sparks controversy by comparing MPs with animals
2. "Sir, my secular answer to the honourable member is that where it is in the hands of Allah, we turn to Allah, where it is in the hands of man, we turn to man.
3. t there was no difference between the radical right-wing revolutionary Veer Savarkar, a famous inmate of the prison, and Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, as they shared a 'divisive' philosophy
4. , Aiyar refused to apologise and rather ridiculed the institutions even further. Baffled by his remarks, Stephen's College and its students went on to apologise to Hansraj College and extended a hand of friendship.
5. Modi Lahu purush, paani purush, Ravan, Dawood, Asatya ka saudagar:Manishankar Aiyar in Gujarat


And so on..

I have heard rumor that he was earlier communist and abused Kongress Dynasty.. Further more he showed his patriotism for Mother land CHINA during chinese agression.. I am not sure whether it is rumor or truth.. some one please help me...

 

[KS]

Crores of people crossing over to India? dont you think the count is as over-estimated as all other accusations? anyway crossing over of refugees into any country does not give right to that country to involve in state terrorism against the other country.

It was INDEED internal matter of Pakistan and India only unleashed state terrorism against Pakistan.

if you give "death of innocent people" as you claimed, as areson for Indian state terrorism then dongt you think killing of innocent people in parts of India gives justification for same actions by other countries.

Then why did you interfere in the internal affairs of Afghanistan..what concern was it to you that Soviets or Martians invaded afghanistan ?

 

[third eye]

Crores of people crossing over to India? dont you think the count is as over-estimated as all other accusations? anyway crossing over of refugees into any country does not give right to that country to involve in state terrorism against the other country.

It was INDEED internal matter of Pakistan and India only unleashed state terrorism against Pakistan.

if you give "death of innocent people" as you claimed, as areson for Indian state terrorism then dongt you think killing of innocent people in parts of India gives justification for same actions by other countries.

This ' internal matter is applied selectively by Pak.

As I see it anything that happens in areas under Pak or Indian control are ' internal' to the respective countries.

Ayub launched his infiltrators into J&K back in 65 attempting to stoke an "Algerian Type' struggle and it was ok , yet when India tore a leaf from the same book five years later it was not.

Later, Mush tried the same thing in 99 at Kargil.

Its either all or nothing.

 

[Spring Onion]

Then why did you interfere in the internal affairs of Afghanistan..what concern was it to you that Soviets or Martians invaded afghanistan ?

We dint interfere due to Refugees. and by same yardtsick if you justify your action you dont have moral right to question ours. And by same yardstick if i justify my actions i cant question yours.

 

[arp2041]

Crores of people crossing over to India? dont you think the count is as over-estimated as all other accusations? anyway crossing over of refugees into any country does not give right to that country to involve in state terrorism against the other country.

It was INDEED internal matter of Pakistan and India only unleashed state terrorism against Pakistan.

if you give "death of innocent people" as you claimed, as areson for Indian state terrorism then dongt you think killing of innocent people in parts of India gives justification for same actions by other countries.

Fair enough, but Pakistani members here often forget that it was Pakistan itself that started the war on the first place, yes India was covertly involved just like Pakistan was involved in Punjab or Kashmir.