Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 28 Jul 2014 11:05

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2583 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 ... 65  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 18 Dec 2012 04:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Posts: 4344
Location: Blue dot in a red sea
Manish_Sharma wrote:
Here is the first link of Rohit's posts, its the first post in that series with maps you'll find many more after this one:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2145&start=1400#p1287330

Thanks! Bookmarked!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Dec 2012 17:08 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 3880
Location: Undisclosed
manjgu wrote:
Avalanche in siachen kills 6 and 1 is missing...!! i am awaiting for candlekissers coming out of the closet...

So a couple of posts in Facebook. Off course it was as a tribute to the brave jawans, but it also had a write up on how Siachen is a waste land and Pakistan and India debating on demilitarisation of the whole area. The tone was as if "poor soldiers are getting killed in a useless area, and by the inaction of India (and Pakistan) these people had to die". Where ever possible I have countered this negative propoganda.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jan 2013 08:59 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Posts: 8402
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar
X-post:
sum wrote:
Finally, the Ottawa council, which is "helping" TSP and India to make love esp in Siachen and of which Brig.Kanwal is a big fan, writes a Op-ed in Hindu. Look at the Cheeky title:

Non-state actors who bring nations closer

Quote:
Track Two encourages new thinking and develops cadres of credible people who advocate new ideas for governments to consider

A controversy erupted recently over Track Two discussions regarding the Siachen issue. “Track Two Diplomacy” is a term with which much mythology is associated. Some proponents believe that it can cut through the red tape of conventional diplomacy and resolve intractable problems. Critics argue that it is both a useless waste of time and a sinister plot to induce guileless Indians to sell out national interests — often the critics make these contradictory arguments in the same breath. { For you BRF internet hindus onlee}


Quote:
Track Two processes have been highly active, with mixed results, from the Oslo process in the Middle East, to the informal talks which helped break the impasse in Northern Ireland, to the first contacts between the African National Congress and the former government of South Africa. A scan of the literature reveals a number of terms including: “Controlled Communication;” “Inter-active Conflict Resolution;” “Circum-negotiation;” “Multi-track Diplomacy;” “Inter-active Problem Solving” and many others. Each has its subtle nuances.

These concepts, and others, tend to share characteristics which define Track Two in practice:

• they emphasise small, informal dialogues, which the literature refers to as “Problem Solving Workshops,” between people from the various sides of a conflict, which are often facilitated by an impartial “Third Party;”

• though the dialogues are unofficial, it is generally expected that the participants will be able to influence the development of thinking in their societies on the conflict;

• the dialogues are not meant to debate the current positions of the sides, but rather are workshops where the participants step back from official positions to explore the underlying causes of the dispute in the hope of jointly developing alternative ideas;

• the dialogues are ongoing processes, rather than “one-off” workshops; and

• while not exactly secret, the dialogues are conducted quietly and the “Chatham House Rule” is applied to create an atmosphere where “outside-the-box” thinking can flourish and participants are not afraid to propose and explore ideas that could not be entertained by an official process or one in which exchanges might be repeated in the press. Such processes, if successful, can lead to a number of results.



Quote:
Another critical issue is funding. Though the sums involved are small, support for airfares and other meeting costs is required. Traditionally, Track Two has been funded by major foundations and by some governments, such as the Scandinavians and the Americans. This sometimes leads to concerns that undue influence is being exerted. At the end of the day, the integrity of the Third Party depends on not accepting support if the funder demands conditions, and on being scrupulously open and honest about who is funding the exercise. It must be made clear to the funders by the Third Party that support will only be accepted if the process will be organised in ways which meet with the approval of the regional participants. Third Parties who act as agents of others quickly gain a reputation for untrustworthiness and are unable to continue. This is sometimes one of the most difficult things for critics of Track Two to grasp, but the process cannot work any other way.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jan 2013 15:48 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
This whole track two diplomacy stinks all the way to Shitisthan... Khaaa Thooo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jan 2013 23:44 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2012 13:02
Posts: 733
The Scandanavian countries are Christian fundamentalists in their foreign policy, and are taking too much interest in India and its neighbourhood for comfort. They are poodles of the US and generally act as its proxy. They are doing a lot of mischief against us, especially Denmark, Norway and Netherlands.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jan 2013 23:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19
Posts: 3342
Location: छिछला पानी में (In shallow waters)
These Scandinavian countries don't talk about terrorism, drug trade or even giving up a single item of interest from porkie side. But latch onto strategic interests such as Siachen like locusts and leeches. Have these countries warned even once about covert porkie support to cross border infiltration since 1947?

What kind of morons are those people who keep on prodding one side to give away concessions in bits while remaining completely silent on those who blackmail with terrorism. These individuals have no standards.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 11:03 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00
Posts: 6190
varunkumar wrote:
The Scandanavian countries are Christian fundamentalists in their foreign policy, and are taking too much interest in India and its neighbourhood for comfort. They are poodles of the US and generally act as its proxy. They are doing a lot of mischief against us, especially Denmark, Norway and Netherlands.


Not to forget their rabid support for the LTTE and their two faced engagement with the srilankan government much to the detriment of the whole security scenario of the region.

They are currently meddling in the Kudankulam mess too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 11:07 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
Maybe I am being naive here, bu why do these itsy bitsy "scandinavian" countries even matter?

What clout are they carrying behind the scenes that allows them to meddle in "south asia" at all?

Surely they have little to no historical background here compared to the other big players?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 11:27 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2012 13:02
Posts: 733
^^^ The Scandanavian countries are pumping in money to NGOs in India (which then promote their agenda), they are organising protests in India against the Indian government, they are sending missionaries by plane loads to Indian tribal areas (most of these White missionaries have planted themselves in inaccessible Maoist areas such as the Andhra-Orissa border), they are appointing themselves as mediators in conflict resolution in the region (LTTE), and they are carrying propaganda against India in the UN through information that their NGO officials collect inside India).

What more do we need in terms of mischief? Physical size of countries has no bearing on their mischief-making capacity.

Quote:

India to curb visas for Scandinavians

Posted on 02 August 2012

Reports indicate that India will soon limit the number of visas awarded to Scandinavians unless those countries treat Indians the same as Western passport holders.

Indian newspaper The Telegraph reported this week that the move comes as Indian immigration authorities are becoming frustrated with how Indian citizens are being treated different to Westerners by immigration officials Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

The Telegraph cites high-up sources in the South Asian nation, claiming that, “One immediate provocation has been Denmark’s continued refusal to step up efforts to extradite Purulia arms-drop accused Kim Davy, the sources said. But the larger issue is the failure of the Scandinavians and some other EU countries to treat Indian requests “on a par” with those from developed nations.”

The report adds that, “The visa curbs, yet to be announced officially, have come into effect at the Indian embassies in Copenhagen, Oslo and Stockholm. Officials have been asked to refuse or delay visa applications from tourists, business people, NGO workers and officials —that is, nearly everybody who wants to visit India.”

The paper also said that India may soon ask Scandinavians working with NGOs that are deemed to be against national interests to leave the country.

The report comes amid rising tensions between Denmark and India. Earlier in the year, Danish officials refused to allow the children of an Indian couple residing in Denmark to leave foster care and return to their home country.



Quote:
[url=[googlevideo]http://www.telegraphindia.com/1120722/jsp/nation/story_15757809.jsp#.UOkZ03eAEa8[/googlevideo]]Scan on foreign NGOs over rights data[/url]NISHIT DHOLABHAI

New Delhi, July 21: India is watching three Dutch and Danish non-government organisations that have allegedly “cultivated” voluntary organisations in the Northeast to gather data for anti-India reports to be presented to the United Nations.

Officials of these foreign agencies may face visa restrictions too.

Reports prepared by voluntary organisations on human rights violations by the security forces in India’s northeastern states, particularly Manipur, have become “base material” for reports to the UN that are damaging to India, sources said.

The Danish Institute of Human Rights (DIHR) and Dutch Catholic Organisation for Relief and Development (Cordaid) are the two major organisations put under watch.

The Danish International Development Agency (Danida) has been on the Union home ministry’s watch-list since December 29 last year. Danida is known to be the primary donor to the DIHR.

New Delhi’s prime concern is the UN General Assembly, where reports from Special Rapporteurs may show the Indian government in a poor light over its human rights record.

Special Rapporteurs are people working on behalf of the UN with a mandate to “examine, monitor, advise and publicly report” on human rights problems.

“Reports presented by these activists were used as base material for reports of the UN Special Rapporteurs on Extra-Judicial Executions (EJE) and Human Rights Defenders (HRD) to the OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) and would be the basis for reports to the UN General Assembly in March 2013,” says a government document accessed by The Telegraph.

Senior officials of Cordaid — Ben Hayes, Rick van der Woud and Stephanie Joubert — may find it difficult to get a visa to India again. These officials have not only regularly visited India but are also known to have accompanied Indian activists to New York and Bangkok, sources said.

India’s move is part of a larger policy of visa curbs on the three Scandinavian countries — Denmark, Norway and Sweden — besides nations seen to be fomenting trouble here.

Denmark recently rejected India’s request for the extradition of Purulia arms-drop accused Kim Peter Davy citing poor jail conditions in India. Nor do Danish NGOs mince words in describing the Indian state.

The DIHR is understood to be funding NGOs not registered under the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act, through some registered groups. Some five agencies in the Northeast are said to receive funds from European NGOs.

Babloo Loitongbam of Human Rights Alert in Manipur felt that more restrictions on foreign donors would severely affect the cash-strapped regional NGOs and hit humanitarian efforts in the Northeast. “There is little help from Indian donors,” he said.


Last edited by varunkumar on 06 Jan 2013 12:02, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 11:49 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Sep 2011 07:22
Posts: 386
Shrinivasan wrote:
This whole track two diplomacy stinks all the way to Shitisthan... Khaaa Thooo.


It does ... just look at the really scary part from the above link.

Quote:
A key to successful Track Two is that the participants be able transfer the ideas developed in such meetings into the official sphere. This is harder than it seems. Officials are instinctively wary of ideas coming from outside the bureaucracy, sometimes with good reason (Track Two can complicate the lives of officials), and sometimes because they fear the loss of control over an issue more than they are prepared to accept ideas that come from outside.

Thus, Track Two often enlists as participants people who have connections to the official world (often retired senior officials). The objective is to have people at the table who have credibility in the official world and are familiar with how things are done there, but who have also the luxury of being able to think “outside the box” as they are no longer officials themselves.


So - the Track two culminates in lobbying the Govt to make changes to the policy because these strategists are of course know more about Siachen than the Army or the Govt. Smacks of intellectual arrogance and the "civilized" western world trying to teach the Asian heathens how to be peaceful !

I'm shocked that there are all these ex-military people in the Siachen Track Two, but they have never even brought in the China factor anywhere there :shock:

We guess we should call these as Tr-Aack-Thoo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 11:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06
Posts: 242
varunkumar wrote:
The Scandanavian countries are Christian fundamentalists in their foreign policy, and are taking too much interest in India and its neighbourhood for comfort. They are poodles of the US and generally act as its proxy. They are doing a lot of mischief against us, especially Denmark, Norway and Netherlands.


Umm, Scandanavian countries are hardly Christian any more.

Quote:
However, only 20% of Norwegians say that religion occupies an important place in their life (according to a Gallup poll in 2009), the fourth-lowest such percentage in the world (only Estonia, Sweden and Denmark are lower).[123] In the early 1990s, it was estimated that between 4.7% – 5.3% of Norwegians attended church on a weekly basis.[124] This figure has dropped to about 2% – the lowest such percentage in Europe – according to 2009 and 2010 data[125][126]. (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Religion>)


Typically, when Christianity dies in a certain region, some distorted form of its ethical vision remains. What typically remains is a "compassion" which lacks prudence (practical wisdom) and humility. That is not Christianity. (At the very least, it's not Orthodox Christianity, which is quite "realist" in its analysis of human nature.) This is Western secular liberalism.

Anyway, this is off-topic. Please do some simple research before you post. Thanks.

Vivek, the reason why small, relatively wealthy countries are getting involved in Track-II diplomacy is because that's all they can do. They lack the military or economic strength to do anything significant on the ground, so they encourage retired officials to get together and talk. In the context of India and Pakistan, they do far more harm than good (in that they assume that both countries are good-faith actors, which is obviously not true with Pakistan). However, if the Indian government is foolish enough to budge on Siachen, shame on it. It's yet another area where India's lack of decisiveness encourages outside meddling. I have yet to hear of Track-II diplomacy between Taiwan and Communist China, for instance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 12:07 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2012 13:02
Posts: 733
Quote:
Umm, Scandanavian countries are hardly Christian any more.


This is a common mistake people make. For this, you have understand the Western concept of secularism which means the state will not interfere in the religious affairs of its own citizens and not take sides among them based on religion. The roots of this lie in the sect warfare that was rampant in Europe till 200 years ago, with governments taking sides in favor of one sect or other. This led to a blood bath and the princes finally got tired of it and said "what our citizens believe in is none of our concern and we will no more provide our soldiers for one sect to fight the other. We will not take any interest in which sect citizens believe in." This is the basis of Western secularism and this is strictly limited to their own Christian citizens. It doesn't apply to their policy about the whole world. It doesn't mean that the European princes (now the governments) will not provide their support and soldiers when Christians are in conflict with non-Christians or when the Xianity has to be spread among the heathens.

So in their relation to other pagan or infidel states, the Scandanavian countries are as Christian fundamentalist as they come. Just because they are secular with respect to their own citizens does not mean that these governments have a obligation to be secular in their dealings with the rest of the world. In fact, the Western elites perfectly understand that the spread of Western civilization and influence across the world is directly related to spread of the church and christianity. So when these countries finance track II diplomacy and seminar circuits in pagan countries, your antennas should be up.

Why do you think these countries and their agencies keep giving money to Christian NGOs to operate in other countries, if they are "hardly Christian any more?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 13:06 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06
Posts: 242
Varun, this will be my last post on this, as this subject is off-topic for this thread.

varunkumar wrote:
It doesn't mean that the European princes (now the governments) will not provide their support and soldiers when Christians are in conflict with non-Christians or when the Xianity has to be spread among the heathens.

So in their relation to other pagan or infidel states, the Scandanavian countries are as Christian fundamentalist as they come.


In the wars between Christian Serbs and Muslim Bosnians in the 1990s, which side were the Scandanavian countries on? Contrast their behavior with that of Russia, which has traditionally understood itself as a Christian state.

Regarding the funding of NGO's, do the governments of Scandanavian countries fund explicitly Christian NGO's? I'd like to see some evidence regarding that. More importantly, please re-read what I wrote about the relationship between Western secular liberalism and Orthodox Christianity.

Regarding the supposed affinity of Indian Christians for Western culture, I would recommend that you study the Coonan Cross Oath of 1653 (Malayalam: Koonan Kurishu Satyam). The Indian Orthodox Church celebrated the 360th anniversary of it a few days ago. It was perhaps the first Indian freedom struggle against Western imperialism (in terms of the Indian Orthodox Church vs. Portuguese Roman Catholicism).

http://www.malankaraorthodox.tv/Coonan_ ... index.html

http://www.malankaraorthodox.tv/Coonan_ ... istory.pdf

As a final note, there are many Christians who serve valiantly in the Indian military who dislike the insinuation that Christianity is somehow anti-Indian, when there is ample evidence to the contrary. Please read those links about the Coonan Cross Oath.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 15:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2012 13:02
Posts: 733
^^ Indian traditional culture is polytheistic and all monothesitic faiths are incompatible with it because they don't recognize the right of polytheism to exist. So there is inbuilt hostility towards India in the shape it exists today, particularly when all the high priests and sacred structures of monotheists are situated outside the borders of India. There has been a talk of Indian Chrisitians indigenizing the church by having its own Pope (like the British have done) but there has not been any progress on this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 16:00 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 05 Feb 2010 21:13
Posts: 43
++1 varun


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 16:13 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00
Posts: 6190
Avarachan wrote:
Varun, this will be my last post on this, as this subject is off-topic for this thread.

varunkumar wrote:
It doesn't mean that the European princes (now the governments) will not provide their support and soldiers when Christians are in conflict with non-Christians or when the Xianity has to be spread among the heathens.

So in their relation to other pagan or infidel states, the Scandanavian countries are as Christian fundamentalist as they come.


In the wars between Christian Serbs and Muslim Bosnians in the 1990s, which side were the Scandanavian countries on? Contrast their behavior with that of Russia, which has traditionally understood itself as a Christian state.

Regarding the funding of NGO's, do the governments of Scandanavian countries fund explicitly Christian NGO's? I'd like to see some evidence regarding that. More importantly, please re-read what I wrote about the relationship between Western secular liberalism and Orthodox Christianity.

Regarding the supposed affinity of Indian Christians for Western culture, I would recommend that you study the Coonan Cross Oath of 1653 (Malayalam: Koonan Kurishu Satyam). The Indian Orthodox Church celebrated the 360th anniversary of it a few days ago. It was perhaps the first Indian freedom struggle against Western imperialism (in terms of the Indian Orthodox Church vs. Portuguese Roman Catholicism).

http://www.malankaraorthodox.tv/Coonan_ ... index.html

http://www.malankaraorthodox.tv/Coonan_ ... istory.pdf

As a final note, there are many Christians who serve valiantly in the Indian military who dislike the insinuation that Christianity is somehow anti-Indian, when there is ample evidence to the contrary. Please read those links about the Coonan Cross Oath.



I have come across many who also preach actively while in uniform. Always thought that it was inappropriate behavior.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2013 19:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22
Posts: 435
Rohitvats:
Thank you very much for your posts. You are a patriot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jan 2013 19:43 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Posts: 2263
Location: जो हिंदू हित की बात करेगा वही देश पर राज करेगा !!!
Congratulations to ShauryaT and team, yes we have to trust Suaristan take their word and vacate Siachin:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pakistan-army-violates-ceasefire-again-kills-two-indian-soldiers-along-loc-in-poonch/articleshow/17941551.cms

Quote:
JAMMU: In a gruesome attack, Pakistani troops on Tuesday crossed into Indian territory and ambushed an Army patrol party killing two soldiers whose heads were reportedly chopped off.

The attack took place along the Line of Control in Poonch district when Pakistanis came about 100 metres into Indian territory and assaulted the patrol party. Besides killing two Lance Naiks, Hemraj and Sudhakar Singh, they also injured two other soldiers.

During the brutal assault on the patrol party, the Pakistanis are said to have chopped off their heads, one of which they carried with them, informed sources said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 00:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
RIP to these two brave men...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 02:13 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10
Posts: 2787
Manish_Sharma wrote:
Congratulations to ShauryaT and team, yes we have to trust Suaristan take their word and vacate Siachin:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pakistan-army-violates-ceasefire-again-kills-two-indian-soldiers-along-loc-in-poonch/articleshow/17941551.cms

Quote:
JAMMU: In a gruesome attack, Pakistani troops on Tuesday crossed into Indian territory and ambushed an Army patrol party killing two soldiers whose heads were reportedly chopped off.

The attack took place along the Line of Control in Poonch district when Pakistanis came about 100 metres into Indian territory and assaulted the patrol party. Besides killing two Lance Naiks, Hemraj and Sudhakar Singh, they also injured two other soldiers.

During the brutal assault on the patrol party, the Pakistanis are said to have chopped off their heads, one of which they carried with them, informed sources said.


No no piss process must be carried forward. The jihadis next door are a reformed lot onlee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 03:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
RoyG wrote:
No no piss process must be carried forward. The jihadis next door are a reformed lot onlee.
Maybe Shitistan is trying to replicate their extortion model perfected with uncle on Desh... maybe they don't know that our WKKs are ready to offer them anything even without asking... RIP to the brave men, condolences to the families... what will micky-mouse singh do next... Kiss Zardari... Kaa Thooo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 04:25 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30
Posts: 2877
Manish_Sharma wrote:
Congratulations to ShauryaT and team, yes we have to trust Suaristan take their word and vacate Siachin:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pakistan-army-violates-ceasefire-again-kills-two-indian-soldiers-along-loc-in-poonch/articleshow/17941551.cms

Quote:
JAMMU: In a gruesome attack, Pakistani troops on Tuesday crossed into Indian territory and ambushed an Army patrol party killing two soldiers whose heads were reportedly chopped off.

The attack took place along the Line of Control in Poonch district when Pakistanis came about 100 metres into Indian territory and assaulted the patrol party. Besides killing two Lance Naiks, Hemraj and Sudhakar Singh, they also injured two other soldiers.

During the brutal assault on the patrol party, the Pakistanis are said to have chopped off their heads, one of which they carried with them, informed sources said.


You are a Hindu RSS war-monger not to trust Pakistan. Its Indian propoganda, Pakistan has till date not broken any cease-fire, all wars till date have all been initiated by India.For Siachen and in the interest of Aman/Bhaichara and ever increasing sales of candles at border shops Pakistan can and should be trusted.If India doubts Paksitani intent on Siachen then it is because you are not "intellectual enough to see the big-picture".

A Big Ack-Thoo to those who are willing jaichands and propogate India vacating Siachen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 11:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Posts: 340
Manish_Sharma wrote:


Manish bhai, you can't wake up those who are pretending to sleep:P
Such people will wake up only when the terrorists kill their loved ones(although I wish it does not happen with any indian)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 13:49 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Posts: 5870
Location: Sergeant Major-No.1 Training Battalion, BR Rifles
Guddu wrote:
Rohitvats: Thank you very much for your posts. You are a patriot.


That is what I like to think of myself. But what did I do to deserve the above sobriquet? :P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 19:18 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Posts: 2263
Location: जो हिंदू हित की बात करेगा वही देश पर राज करेगा !!!
rohitvats wrote:
Guddu wrote:
Rohitvats: Thank you very much for your posts. You are a patriot.


That is what I like to think of myself. But what did I do to deserve the above sobriquet? :P


Rohit I think he has read all your posts with maps about Siachin issues few pages back:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2145&start=2360#p1377906


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jan 2013 19:28 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Posts: 8402
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar
^^ Waiting to hear the super-herrow of Track2, Brig Kanwal to hold forth on the latest incident and why vacating Siachen will avoid such incidents in future by building more trust with poor TSPA.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Jan 2013 04:24 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 01 Dec 2007 01:21
Posts: 93
Location: U.SA/India.
No question of vacating siachen. Indian forces have adapted, acclimatized. No question of listening to ill-informed people on this matter. Wonder if Mr. MMS is well-informed on this subject. If acts like another Nehru , people will dispise him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Jan 2013 05:09 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31
Posts: 2052
Since we hold the higher ground in the Siachen area and the pakis are below, hopefully we can encourage an accidental avalanche or three?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2013 05:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06
Posts: 3350
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
sum wrote:
^^ Waiting to hear the super-herrow of Track2, Brig Kanwal to hold forth on the latest incident and why vacating Siachen will avoid such incidents in future by building more trust with poor TSPA.
Why do you not actually read, what the retd Brigadier has said on the matter, before you resort to slander, innuendo and false propoganda.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2013 10:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Apr 2008 17:29
Posts: 618
Location: Skardu
ShauryaT, are you a fan of Manish Tiwari ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2013 10:18 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58
Posts: 5066
Its a disgrace that ShauryaT continues to peddle the same vacuous BS and supporting the usual suspects whose agenda he was peddling, without an iota of shame or introspection after what happened to the two soldiers, crocodile tears about their sacrifice and service apart.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2013 20:41 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30
Posts: 2877
Just to say its a disgrace would be putting it mildly.

Would like to see the DNA of such self haters and apologists of India (Thats is assuming they are Indians) such as Praveen Swami, Arundhoty Roy, Mani Shankar Iyer, Mahesh Bhatt, Rajdeep Sardesai, Kuldip Nayar, Barkha Dutt, and others.

Actually there is a mentality of people who propound BS under the banner of Peace, Bhaichara etc. That is taking a contrarion view brings you instant recognition and visibility.

Such Anti-Nationals have made a career out of their low self-esteem, which brings them direct and indirect gratification from their trans-border masters.

Of Course there have to be someone belonging to the lineage of Jaichand. The Pathetic followers have a role model to live upto.

India has had many unworthy people living on its bhoomi, a few addition of these Kaputra's and Kaputri's is something that we have to live with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2013 23:28 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Posts: 1849
Location: On board Coobsat. Fanatically chasing MOM.
ShauryaT wrote:
sum wrote:
^^ Waiting to hear the super-herrow of Track2, Brig Kanwal to hold forth on the latest incident and why vacating Siachen will avoid such incidents in future by building more trust with poor TSPA.
Why do you not actually read, what the retd Brigadier has said on the matter, before you resort to slander, innuendo and false propoganda.

Consistency of opinions in the matters of national security is a demonstration of moral and principle of the person. If not then it could indicates malice and deceit, creates doubts in the mind of readers of the real intent of the person. May be Kanwal is trying to take pakis on a ride, but then may be he is not, may be he is sold out and deceiving us, who knows? So to be on the safer side and for the sake of the national interest better to assume latter and be cautious of this person, unless proven otherwise factually. Same is applicable to every other person who advocates demilitarizing Siachen, J&K etc. Got it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 08:43 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30
Posts: 2877
Lt Gen Katoch nails the lies of Track II Jaichands - Track II Unexplained.

A recent article in a prominent Indian daily last week talked of non-state actors who bring nations closer and the Ottawa Dialogue; the now well known issue of ‘Demilitarization of Siachen’. This has been promptly put on a blog by participants of Track II saying “Track II Explained”. But this can hardly be end of the story. There is plenty that is ‘unexplained’ about this particular Track II.

There is no doubt that Track II processes have their relevance and they do have government level interaction, briefings and debriefings.
Much has happened since the India-Pakistan Track II agreed to a proposal to ‘Demilitarize Siachen’ in September 2012 and the press release by the Atlantic Council of Ottawa hit the web on 02 October 2012. Acquiescence by the Indian members of the Track II to withdraw from Siachen was naturally met with amazement and shock in India. Prior to this agreement of the Track II at Lahore in September last, articles and TV discussions came up portraying that Siachen was strategically irrelevant. The government chose to remain tight lipped and continues with that stance albeit in the aftermath of furore post the Atlantic Council of Ottawa press release, a panel consisting of two members of the Track II Team under a former Ambassador and Secretary MEA (who had nothing to do with the Track II Team but is known to be close to the political hierarchy) made efforts to justify withdrawal from Siachen at India International Centre but were shocked at the unanimous opposition from the audience including from a former Army Chief and journalists. Why this former Ambassador and Secretary MEA tried to justify the proposed withdrawal from Siachen and on whose instructions remains a mystery.

There is no doubt that Track II processes have their relevance and they do have government level interaction, briefings and debriefings. To this end, they do provide significant inputs that facilitate the Track I dialogue while not being binding on the latter. This is an accepted norm. Track II dialogues can also be at multiple levels, even simultaneously. However, this particular Track II agreement raises several questions that require clarifications and transparency.

Interaction with the participants reveals that none of them is aware as to how they were selected, who sponsored them and who the Indian coordinator was. The Co-Chair described the status of the Track II Team as a “Private Body”, later changed to “Group of Private Individuals” over whom he had no control. Significantly, Indian members of the Track II Team comprised eight former Indian Military officers out of the total eleven members. While the meetings were held over a period of months, one member stated in an article that for once the bureaucrat members were in the backseat and the former military members in the forefront. Surprisingly, not one of the former eight military officers had served in Siachen and the team made no effort to visit the area under discussion despite months of parleys. This raises a question mark on the motive of the Indian coordinator who gave these names to Atlantic Council of Ottawa. Was it by design?

Surprisingly, not one of the former eight military officers had served in Siachen and the team made no effort to visit the area under discussion despite months of parleys.
The Indian Co-Chair of the Track II Team maintains that the MEA briefing made no mention of Siachen and no questions were asked by any members with regard to Siachen. The logic being given is that the Track II Team took upon themselves to work out “HOW” Siachen can be demilitarized without going into “WHY” and “WHEN”, which is laughable. Forget net assessment, every young military officers know how a military appreciation is done, what its nuances are and what factors need to be considered to arrive at the logical course of action.

The logic, therefore, can hardly be bought; a body of “Private Individuals” working out without any higher direction whatsoever ‘HOW” Siachen should be demilitarized. Who was the driving force in this body of private individuals on which the Co-Chair admits he had no control and what was the motivation? What are the participants hiding? Why has the Indian Co-Chair clammed up and refusing to take any questions? Additionally, if only “HOW” was being looked at then vital issues like Pakistan sponsored terrorism and the China factor were obviously not discussed or discussed in most perfunctory manner.

The press release by Atlantic Council of Ottawa is totally silent on China. Terrorism is supposedly discussed but was it discussed in relation to Demilitarization of Siachen (Thereby Acquiescing and legitmizing Pakistani Terrorism) – that this will facilitate Pakistan launch Kashmir Valley like proxy war in Ladakh with dire consequences to our national security? It is not without reason that Musharraf had declared “There will be many more Kargils”.

The vehemence with which the participants were articulating that Siachen has no worthwhile strategic significance has blown off with the wind especially after the anger faced during the hurriedly organized panel discussion at the India International Centre in early October 2012. Participants now admit individually that Siachen (read Saltoro Ridge) indeed has great strategic significance, admitting this even in interactions with military wings of political parties post the public furore. What then was the motivation for our Track II Team to ignore the strategic significance of the Saltoro Ridge particularly with China sitting in our territory in Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin and Pakistani and US media indicating Pakistan is leasing out Gilgit-Baltistan region to China for 50 years, plus the fact that withdrawal from Saltoro would open the floodgates of infiltration into Ladakh by Pakistan’s state sponsored non-state actors.

Why was the Track II Team ignoring the reality of the strategic significance of Siachen? Why was the advice of every former Army Chief and the present one that India should not withdraw from Siachen ignored?
A former military officer cum journalist participant even as late as 12 April 2012 was passionately vindicating India’s right to hold on to Siachen on national TV; that India should never withdraw from Siachen because of its strategic significance. What happened in just five months to make him do a 180 degrees turn. Why was the Track II Team ignoring the reality of the strategic significance of Siachen? Why was the advice of every former Army Chief and the present one that India should not withdraw from Siachen ignored? What was the role of the Indian coordinator and his mentors in making the Track II Team adopt such stance? What are the participants hiding?

Musharraf admits in his autobiography that India pre-empted the occupation of Saltoro Ridge by Pakistan – Pakistan’s planned move was obviously for strategic reasons and not to establish a winter retreat. The fact that Pakistan launched the Kargil intrusions to cut off and grab Siachen has been pooh-poohed by many in India. Now Lieutenant General, Shahid Aziz, former Corps Commander of Lahore recently wrote about Kargil in his blog saying, “The whole truth about Kargil is yet to be known….. It was a total disaster….. We didn’t pre-empt anything; nothing was on the cards. I was then heading the Analysis Wing of Inter Services Intelligence ……Our clearly expressed intent was to cut the supply line to Siachen and force the Indians to pull out…… There were no mujahideen, only taped wireless messages, which fooled no one. Our soldiers ……… the boys were comforted by their commander’s assessment that no serious response would come…. Cut off and forsaken, our posts started collapsing one after the other, though the General (Musharraf) publicly denied it.”

Here, the fact that the Track II agreement is only a proposal and not binding on Track I is not the issue. That Pakistan considers its high powered Track II Team as good as Track I is also not the issue. The issue is that for eternity, Pakistan will quote this military heavy Indian Track II having agreed to withdraw from Siachen. More significantly, this can also be exploited by the politician-bureaucrat mafia within India that is working at cross purposes to India’s national interests. Why are we calling slimy Musharraf time and again for leadership summits when he is a fugitive in his own country and has been stabbing us repeatedly? Why are the anti-India Hurriyat members given access to the Pakistani Embassy including every time some Pakistani official comes to Delhi? Why is the this bunch given visas to go and meet the mullah-terrorist Hafiz Saeed when India has been exhorting Pakistan to indict him as the mastermind of 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack of 2008? Why is the IB funding the Hurriyat, with what purpose and why without reference to the Army?

It may be recalled that the FBI caught on to Ghulam Mohammed Fai only in 2011 after he had already pumped in some $350 millions funded by the ISI into US over several years for moulding perceptions in Pakistan’s favour with regard to Kashmir.
Why is the Centre mute to anti-India activities in states, one example being total inaction on non-bailable warrants issued against Akbaruddin Owaisi way back in 2009? Why has the government been fooling the public since 2010 saying the Maoist insurgency will be over in two-three years? Coming back to Siachen, why such a decision was taken by the Indian members of the Track II Team and with what motivation remains a question mark.

As per the Atlantic Council of press note, militaries of both India and Pakistan held several rounds to boost confidence building measures, these meetings having been held in Dubai (20-21 November 2011), Bangkok (23-25 February 2012) and Lahore (23-25 September 2012) and that additionally, working group meetings took place in Chiang Mai (21 April 2012) and Palo Alto (30-31 July 2012). These were followed by the meeting in question in Lahore on 23-25 September 2012. Given the five star culture of such meetings, the expenditure involved would have been enormous. Were the decisions of the participants influenced advertently or inadvertently?

It may be recalled that the FBI caught on to Ghulam Mohammed Fai only in 2011 after he had already pumped in some $350 millions funded by the ISI into US over several years for moulding perceptions in Pakistan’s favour with regard to Kashmir. Obviously, ISI would have transferred such funds through several fronts and not directly. In the instant case of the Track II, an agreement to withdraw from Siachen without any governmental direction to the effect (as maintained by participants) and in direct contrast to military advice not to demilitarize raises serious questions. Silence and lack of transparency only reinforce apprehensions.

What exactly has Pakistan done to deserve this largesse – killing and threatening Panchayat members in J&K, failing to punish perpetrators of 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack, continuing its proxy war to destabilize India, arming Indian Maoists through the LeT, blatantly denying ISI and LeT links despite solid evidence given by David Headley in 2011, what? Hopefully, the recent barbarianism by Pakistan at least should open the eyes of the blind men. Yet, participants of the Track II have been harping that Demilitarization from Siachen is “doable”. Well, so are whole of Jammu and Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh and much more – all doable if one is prepared to pack up one’s bags, move back and vacate our own territory.

Silence and lack of transparency only reinforce apprehensions.
Coming back to the Track II, a much wider debate on the above issue is definitely warranted. To this end, the United Services Institution of India offered its premises to the sponsors of the Track II for holding a discussion on the issue along with the Track II Team, giving them opportunity to also interact with a wide cross section of scholars, diplomats, military personnel etc. However, this has been declined by the sponsors saying “the process is well established and it would be disruptive to change it now” (The contours of hand-over has already been decided). Strangely, all meeting of this Track II have been held abroad including at Lahore in Pakistan. Was this by design to not let the Indian public get the whiff of what was cooking?

The Indian public deserves answers including whether we have moles in the establishment working for foreign intelligence agencies, which is not new. An open public debate including with the sponsors and the Indian members of the Track II Team is certainly warranted, not on a pliable TV channel but at an autonomous Think Tank like the United Services Institution of India. While the sponsors may shy off the suggestion, what about a wider debate within the county minus the sponsors? Will the government at least speak up now with Pakistan having bared her fangs?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 08:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00
Posts: 6190
Victor wrote:
Since we hold the higher ground in the Siachen area and the pakis are below, hopefully we can encourage an accidental avalanche or three?


We seem to be missing the avalanches the pakis are causing (and will continue to cause) in the Indian DDM and paid media. Can we not see the woods for the trees?? Their PR is nimble and fleet footed unlike our own lumbering and stupefied ways.

Why is our electronic media compelled to host these fakers at prime time TV and give them the free and golden opportunity to spew venom on India?? Are we not tired of self goals??

does our DDM have a deathwish??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 09:15 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Posts: 14655
Location: Chennai
Essentially, TSP has demonstrated yet again, if we needed further proof at all, that it does not care for bilateral agreements. This behaviour of TSP goes all the way back to Partition time. This incident also demonstrates that it has no compunctions in violating international conventions that it is party to. It has also proved yet again that it is completely reckless and that it operates in a close nexus with the so called non-state jihadi terrorists. It has also proved that it does not learn from its past mistakes, that it is obsessed with India and is wooly-headed. It also confirms that there is either absolutely no civilian oversight of the PA or the civilian leadership allows jihadi tactics by its Army or both. It proves in no uncertain terms, for the thousandth time, that TSP is utterly untrustworthy and inimical with enduring hostility for us.

So, Brig (R) Gurmeet Kanwal et al have to show to us how India can be assured that TSP would scrupulously implement the agreement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 09:37 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2012 13:02
Posts: 733
Quote:
TSP has demonstrated yet again, if we needed further proof at all, that it does not care for bilateral agreements.


Their poobah did not care for bilateral agreements either. Read his biography. Pakis are just following in his footsteps and are proud of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 11:18 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Posts: 14655
Location: Chennai
varunkumar wrote:
Their poobah did not care for bilateral agreements either. Read his biography. Pakis are just following in his footsteps and are proud of it.

Obviously. What else can an Army whose motto includes 'Jihad fi sabilillah' do ? Not even the Saudi Land Forces have such a motto.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 15:38 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Sep 2011 07:22
Posts: 386
Vipul wrote:
Lt Gen Katoch nails the lies of Track II Jaichands - Track II Unexplained.
What then was the motivation for our Track II Team to ignore the strategic significance of the Saltoro Ridge particularly with China sitting in our territory in Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin and Pakistani and US media indicating Pakistan is leasing out Gilgit-Baltistan region to China for 50 years, plus the fact that withdrawal from Saltoro would open the floodgates of infiltration into Ladakh by Pakistan’s state sponsored non-state actors.


Beautiful read - he has really hammered in his points. Just to emphasize one point - It is a wonder why Siachen is reduced to India-Pak dispute while ignoring the elephant in the room - China ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013 21:29 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1446
Location: GSLV++
ToI: Political crisis grips Pakistan as SC orders arrest of PM

HT: There can't be business as usual with Pak after barbaric killings at LoC, says PM

Given that there are several flies in the Track II ointment as shown above, one wonders which of the following institutions our esteemed traitors were preparing to sell Siachen to for personal benefit from Haseena Atim Bum:

  • Prime Minister under trial, Gilani
  • Firebrand cleric, Tahir-ul-Qadri and associated Pakiban
  • Pakistan Army and ISI
  • Other "non-state actors", i.e. the same ones responsible for Mumbai 26/11

A glorious list. The traitors are understandably proud of these associations.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2583 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 ... 65  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nits, pravula and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group