What's new

Why pellet guns not used to control Dera violence, asks Omar Abdullah

Or it could have been today's China with a democratically elected leader. That's not the point of debate here, let's give it a rest.


Yes, it could have been. But it seems the "democracy" is not taking India anywhere, so I doubt it could have fare better in China.
 
.
Yes, it could have been. But it seems the "democracy" is not taking India anywhere, so I doubt it could have fare better in China.
You are rejecting a democratic system without even trying it. Whatever suits you better.
 
. .
I don't recall any recent army brutality in kashmir where 36 person died in a single day. Pellet guns are much less severe form of mob control measure as compared to live bullets.
 
.
I am living in a democratic country, and I know how it works.
Democracy is indeed very frustrating but it's the best we have got. You live in a democratic country and that too a highly captalist one, you have an free access to almost every service commodity you want and the state doesn't decides for you. The only advantage a dictorial autocracy is that they get the job done no matter how steep the cost maybe.
 
.
Democracy is indeed very frustrating but it's the best we have got. You live in a democratic country and that too a highly captalist one, you have an free access to almost every service commodity you want and the state doesn't decides for you. The only advantage a dictorial autocracy is that they get the job done no matter how steep the cost maybe.


The end result is they get job done and you don't.

I have seen a stretch of street not more than half a mile that has been in construction for 2 years, and that the same time my home city in China built about 30 km of high rise freeway. It is hard to digest but it is true. Democracy system is not the end itself, it is just a form of governance which in my eye did not work very well.
 
Last edited:
.
Indians are misleading here by saying policemen shot dead 36 people.

LOl
 
.
The end result is they get job done and you don't.

I have seen a stretch of street not more than half a mile that has been in construction for 2 years, and that the same time my home city in China built about 30 km of high rise freeway. It is hard to digest but it is true. Democracy system is not the end itself, it is just a form of governance which in my eye did not work very well.
Comparing time taken on the construction of a road is the not the best way to judge a political system. Democracy betters autocracy on so many fronts while the only thing you've got is getting the job done which in itself has got many hidden evils.
 
.
Indians are misleading here by saying policemen shot dead 36 people.

LOl

It was by Indian Army, or the thugs kill each other?

Comparing time taken on the construction of a road is the not the best way to judge a political system. Democracy betters autocracy on so many fronts while the only thing you've got is getting the job done which in itself has got many hidden evils.

It is true in theory, but in reality it comes down to "yes or no" decision by the individual who is in charge. Would you trust your life with professional doctors or voting public when you are in need of surgery to save life?

The problem with democratic system is, the general public often vote for some one is not a doctor to make decision about the life or death of you. Because general public are often just too stupid to find the best person for the job.
 
Last edited:
.
It was by Indian Army, or the thugs kill each other?

Several died of arson, violence & accidents and other riot related deaths.
Very few people died due to bullet penetration.

Indians (Indians means PDF Modians) are making it up.
 
.
Instead of 1-2 people that die in Kashmir due to pellet guns here security forces pumped real bullets and 35 people died. Does this moron want Army to use real bullets in Kashmir too?
 
. .
It is true in theory, but in reality it comes down to "yes or no" decision by the individual who is in charge. Would you trust your life with professional doctors or voting public when you are in need of surgery to save life?

The problem with democratic system is, the general public often vote for some one is not a doctor to make decision about the life or death of you.
Again, the argument you are presenting is void and unsuitable. Why would someone opt for voting when all you need is to visit a good doctor?
The public doesn't make decisions on critical issues they elect their representative who they think is qualified to make such decisions. Make no mistake, when all sections of public votes for their choice they will more or less choose the most suitable candidate to be their leader.
 
.
Comparing time taken on the construction of a road is the not the best way to judge a political system. Democracy betters autocracy on so many fronts while the only thing you've got is getting the job done which in itself has got many hidden evils.


The system in China is to find the best doctor over the years, the system in India is to have every John and Joe to vote for a doctor who performs the best during campaign and with the most financial backup.
 
.
The system in China is to find the best doctor over the years, the system in India is to have every John and Joe to vote for a doctor who performs the best during campaign and with the most financial backup.
No, the system in China is to choose the best doctor in every ten years by a group of people behind close doors. We do the same in India but it is done by the normal public after every five years.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom