Rite, somewhere in the horses behind was a stuck a request to "buttress your argument". Honestly speaking, if you say to someone, (paraphrasing) "despite your sanctimoniousness and your verbosity and your aggression, your argument stinks like a horses rear end, and your argument is based on BS, and oh btw. you are forgetting our recent experiences with Pakistan".
Do you expect me to address your argument or get distracted by the adjectives? I am having a fairly decent, and at least to me, fruitful conversation with Ashutosh, Rohit and others, but what do you expect when you start of the bat with a bouncer like that?
Sorry, you're not at all being decent or to the point (other than some googled-babble, what with your statement about someone having drunk too much bhaang.
But Marten ji, look at the provocation, the threat, that when "we" come to power, "we" will prosecute people who disagree with a particular opinion, with the rider, that past service record will not be considered.. In my books this was pompous, totally loony and frankly, very disrespectful of people who have dedicated their lives to the nation..
Point is your opinion is what you have, and everything else is based on pure fartology. How you deal with adjectives are your problem, as it is, you're the one creating the suitability for these.
Thats your opinion and you are entitled to it.. But if you start off a conversation saying, your opinion is fartology, how do you expect to carry it forward in a civil way?
Have you considered the entire deception of Kargil at all or are there too many adjectives here affecting your comprehension?
Simply because I havent posted about the Kargil incursion, does not mean that I have no opinion about it! Yes, Kargil and then 26/11 have caused Pakistanis to look very untrustworthy. Its fragmented polity, with each stakeholder untrustworthy in his/her own way. Its an Islamist society, with a large number holding on to unreal world views. Itll have to jump through hoops, perhaps give over "Indian" mujahedin assets or the NE rebels (or something else, insert your own favorite concession), to make the stakeholders in the GoI trust them enough to disengage from a militarily strong/well near unassailable position like the Saltoro ridge.
*But* none of this impacts on
1. A discussion on how Saltoro positions are strategic in nature/Or the strategic prominence of Siachen is an invention.
2. A larger framework in which to decide, which territorial wars/limited engagements are worth fighting, and which are not.