Marathaman
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2007
- Messages
- 567
- Reaction score
- 0
* irrelevant post(in the face of bhangra's pwning) deleted.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Right but it does not work in the case of Pakistan and India.
You can be generous to a rival or enemy when you know that the enemy recognises that you are being magnanimous. You are stressing on the point that the higher rival has to be such and such but implicitly you are assuming that the lesser enemy will not take advantage of the magnanimity and try to bite back again.
During the 1971 war for bangladesh independence, did we gain even one inch of real estate? Did we gain any rupee? We had to spend billions for the war and for the refugees. We had approximately 4000 soldiers dead. Did we take any inch of land from the area of bangladesh which we had conquered? No. Was this not magnanimity of the highest order where we sent our soldiers for someone else? But in return what do we get? The vile and hatred from people like Akanda and Munshi. Looking back I just get a feeling we should let these people *** and force the refugees arriving, back into BD and let them face the music from the PA.
Yet you gloss over the things which they did. They forced Japan to have a pacifist constitution with complete security under US nuclear umbrella. Without this thing, I can bet that not a single dollar would have gone. France and West Germany were made part of NATO, sir, then they were given dollars. US gave money to west germany not to east germany,
When did france and Germany become friends? When they had the scourge of USSR on them which had half of germany with them. When half of the country is already lost, what is the point in bickering over 1% of lands. Also both france and germany were completely destroyed by WW2. Both of them did not have any energy to fight more. Wait for more 20 years, the EU is already showing signs of weakness. I am not sure about their friendship for future, unless something profound and scary threat to both of them happens.
Do you see this talk about being magnanimous and other crap from US? Did they look after Pakistan in 90s when it had no use to US. Again see, the talk about "more equal" or anything like that. If you are "more equal", you are more than him, what the heck is "more equal". This "more equals" are useful for philosophies, not for real life and politik.
In the telephone call, what did they say? They said "bloody idiot, if you dont agree to us, you will be bombed back to stone age". Only under the threat did Pakistan agree. Actually this suits it, might is right- f*ck all magnanimity.
Nice quote, it is without firing a single shot, not without giving a single threat.
The young generation of India has come to this thinking only because we are tired of our one-sided magnanimity, which took us no where. We have here, on this forum, people talking about bangladesh and pakistan joining against India. Pakistan is a different case. After all we have done to Bangladesh, is it too much to expect from them, just plain goodwill? Nothing more. We could have got all the territory from them in 1971, we dont want it even now. When we give our hands of friend ship to china in 1956 and allowed them to occupy tibet(when we had a treaty to protect tibet), we got 1962. We were the leaders initially of the NAM movement, did it take us anywhere? The moment we were defeated in 1962, all our NAM respect went into the air. When we give lahore bus, the return is kargil. We go into srilanka, which was not our battle in anyway and have more than 1000 killed and what did we get in return? When this is the case, how long do you think this 1-sided MAGNANIMITY to continue. We went and returned Maldives completely back to the government without even staying there for 1 day required. How much more magnanimity can one show to our smaller neighbours? We never ask for bases there. we dont have security agreements with any of them(except bhutan). Yet!! Yet!!
The young generation simply thought this yet is enough.
If you think India can bully other countries into accepting India as a world power, you are doing it any way, are you any way near realizing your ambition ??
India is not a world power its china. As for india it needs to get settle with pakistan to become a wold power coz unless the bileteral issues are resoveled, pakistan can never accept indian dominace in the region and for that if we have too we are willing to fight.
India is not a world power its china. As for india it needs to get settle with pakistan to become a wold power coz unless the bileteral issues are resoveled, pakistan can never accept indian dominace in the region and for that if we have too we are willing to fight.
A superpower is a state with a leading position in the international system and the ability to influence events and project power on a worldwide scale; it is considered a higher level of power than a great power. Lyman Miller (Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School), defines a superpower as "a country that has the capacity to project dominating power and influence anywhere in the world, and sometimes, in more than one region of the globe at a time, and so may plausibly attain the status of global hegemon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower
Funny how the US doesn't use "x POWER" status symbolization with any other country?Sour Grapes Asim...lol...really.our growth is as of now unstopable.
Indians dont need American rubber stamp, when it comes to american bones Pakistan would know better. Nuclear Deal, who threw the bone?