Afghanistan News & Discussion

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 26 Feb 2010 21:50

Kabul attack: 2 armymen among 6 Indians dead, special plane being to bring bodies

The deceased Indians were identified as Major Dr Laishram Jyotin Singh of Army Medical Corps, Major Deepak Yadav of Army Education Corps, engineer Bhola Ram, tabla player Nawab Khan, staffer of Kandahar Consulate Nitish Chibber and ITBP constable Roshan Lal, Indian embassy sources said.

Earlier, the government of India had put the number of those dead at nine, which highly placed sources said was incorrect as it was based on preliminary assessment of the Afghan Interior Ministry.

Jyotin Singh was in Afghanistan to train local doctors at the Indira Gandhi hospital while Deepak Yadav was teaching English at the Afghan Military Academy.

kshirin · Post by **kshirin** » 26 Feb 2010 22:34

The dates are chosen to convey a message. 26/11, same criminals did 26/2.

9/11 - New York, 3/11 -Madrid; there was one more bomb attack by terrorists in Bombay - 7/11.

7/7 in India and in London.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 26 Feb 2010 22:40

26/2 1993 World Trade Center bombing

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 26 Feb 2010 23:31

At least 4 Indians killed in latest Kabul attack and a few others injured.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqL1y0g5REY

The Manmohan Singh government is treating the Taliban problem with apathy while the Pakistanis and their automatons, the taliban are rampaging through Afghanistan.
Even after two attacks on its embassy and the continued systematic attacks on its citizens, New Delhi's response has been at best a flamboyant display of impotence (at least publicly!).

I am sure Indians will know in due course if Manmohan Singh's prostrating before the Pakistanis has helped make India safer.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 26 Feb 2010 23:52

Text beneath picture -

A man passes a vendor displaying Bollywood videos for sale in the old city February 1, 2010 in Kabul, Afghanistan. Despite years of foreign involvement and the money being committed to Afghanistan from both private and governmental donors, Afghanistan is still plagued by chronic unemployment and neglected public services. Unemployment in the country of some 25 million people is still 40 per cent with more than half the population living below the poverty line. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

A picture from the Boston Globe Big Picture

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 27 Feb 2010 00:11

Steve Hynd on twitter writes the following abt Indias involvement in Afpak

@pragmatic_d your welcome. I just call it as I see it, hope India doesn't make US' mistakes

@pragmatic_d on contrary, superpowers usually face greater risk to citizens. Gunboat diplomacy comes after the fact, normally

@pragmatic_d *shrug* It's up to Indians. They can bang hawkish drums or get on with being the next superpower, their choice.

Also drains in non-financial ways. Cycle of fear/domestic politics/unconsidered response not good for looking long-term

Border security and law enforcement req'd, not foreign coffer-draining adventures that become ball-n-chain in so many ways

Terror v India like terror v US. Ant bites, frankly. Embarassing to national pride, but more die of lack of medical help or in car accidents

Ant bites, frankly. Embarassing, but more Indians die in car accidents

Why should Indians let prideful urge to "do anything" now hamstring that with fiscal drain of Afg?

India can supass China in i to 2 decades, but only if it cultivates maritime economic power and needed infrastructure

There's not a lot India can do about that. Rather than embroil itself in continental quagmires, it should turn seaward and to infrastructure

India's main competitor is China. China pretty much owns Pakistan and will own Afg. within a decade

India wins if it turns away from Pak/Afghanistan. It gets breathing space to expand instead of a ball and chain designed by China and Pak

bhargava · Post by **bhargava** » 27 Feb 2010 00:31

kshirin wrote:Why are news channels not covering this? CNN IBN webpage does not even mention it. This is perhaps more shocking than the blast and the deaths of the brave Indians.

After all, for them, news of MF Hussain becoming a Qatari citizen is more important than news of brave Indians dying. Some standard that!

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 27 Feb 2010 00:33

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8538005.stm

Afghanistan capital Kabul hit by suicide attack

Friday's attack also represents the first major Taliban response to the capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Karachi in Pakistan.

Yes Beeb, Taliban respond by not attacking the country which captured him but by attacking citizens of a country which is not even part of ISAF.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 27 Feb 2010 00:57

Its obvious that Steve Hynd doesnt have a clue as to what the history of the subcontinent is or how superpowers are born. The argument about car accidents and lack of medical care is ridiculous! In American people die because they can't even have their cataract removed without begging and pleading for medicaid. In India government hospitals will do it for FREE within a day! No American can get FREE healthcare without ponying up cash in some form or the other so the BS argument about India not taking care of its poor is absolute Bull peddled by ignorant and condescending western dunces. People die in America of the most basic ailments everyday that even the most marginalized scheduled caste peasant in India can easily get medical care for! Did "traffic accidents" stop Europe from trying to colonizing the rest of the world or from America fighting World War 2 when the Nazis sunk their ships?? These kind of ridiculous arguments are there to obfuscate the issue and only serve as idle rhetoric.

Any great power needs to maintain regional hegemony to protect its interests and opportunities. Without peace there can be no prosperity! What Steve Hynd and his dimwitted logic amounts to forsaking the destiny (saftey and prosperity) of all Indians for the sake of western convenience and sanctimonious delusions. Any child in India will tell you that Afghanistan and India share a history that spans millenia and what happens in Afghanistan affects the security of ALL indians directly! India has every right to get involved in Afghanistan. Much more right than any Western nation ever had! It was the violence of Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation that invariably led to Pakistan gaining control of the Afghan Mujahideen. It was those very same Mujahideen and their ideological fanaticism that has led to tactic of insurgency employed by Pakistan! It is the very same tactic that has led to the deaths of thousands of Kashmiri Hindus and Indian soldiers and the hundreds of bombings across India!

The idea that India can just walk away from Afghanistan and concentrate only internally for its development is a naive and shortsighted to say the least! The reason, America is such a great power is because it has Canada and an impoverished Mexico! The reason the Soviet union was able to rise to power was because of the powerless Eastern Europe. The reason China is able to rise to power is because of Pacifist Japan and craven India! Asking India to walk away from being marginalized in Afghanistan is akin to what the English did by ignoring the Nazis and their militarism! The next time an Indian airlines aircraft is hijacked and forced to land in Kandhahar in exchange for all the terrorists who want to kill Indians by the dozen, you might ask him to think to reconsider your argument.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Feb 2010 02:32

Jarita wrote:Steve Hynd on twitter writes the following abt Indias involvement in Afpak

@pragmatic_d *shrug* It's up to Indians. They can bang hawkish drums or get on with being the next superpower, their choice.

Hindus are being killed for just being Hindus here and this guy talks as if India is waging war.

Ant bites, frankly. Embarassing, but more Indians die in car accidents
Why should Indians let prideful urge to "do anything" now hamstring that with fiscal drain of Afg?
India wins if it turns away from Pak/Afghanistan. It gets breathing space to expand instead of a ball and chain designed by China and Pak

Indians have been killed by the muslims now for more than 500 years and this guy talks as if it is ant bites

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 Feb 2010 03:12

The film Border is being displayed in that Afghani kiosk.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 27 Feb 2010 04:03

Rest assured the centuries and half centuries will soon start in porkistan.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 04:38

Was the presence of IA officers in Afghanistan public knowledge?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 27 Feb 2010 04:53

Jarita wrote: ...
India can supass China in i to 2 decades, but only if it cultivates maritime economic power and needed infrastructure

There's not a lot India can do about that. Rather than embroil itself in continental quagmires, it should turn seaward and to infrastructure

India's main competitor is China. China pretty much owns Pakistan and will own Afg. within a decade

India wins if it turns away from Pak/Afghanistan. It gets breathing space to expand instead of a ball and chain designed by China and Pak

And what will India do with its $786trillion economy in 2020? How it can be a Super Power, without having any influence in its own neighborhood forget about world-wide?

If India wants to become next PRC; then shouldn't it reclaim POK and make a vassal out of Afghanistan, Tibet and Taiwan?

How can Indian economy grow amidst continual terror attacks and travel advisories?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 27 Feb 2010 04:54

Sriman wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8538005.stm

Afghanistan capital Kabul hit by suicide attack

Friday's attack also represents the first major Taliban response to the capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Karachi in Pakistan.
Yes Beeb, Taliban respond by not attacking the country which captured him but by attacking citizens of a country which is not even part of ISAF.

To be honest, this is a weak argument!

Afghanistan views US/NATO as occupying force, and India as a role-model. So who is the bigger enemy to Taliban?

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 27 Feb 2010 05:17

Indians have been killed by the muslims now for more than 500 years and this guy talks as if it is ant bites

Why pick on Muslims? The Christians never killed any Indians? But how could they? They came to gift freedom, democracy and the superior western culture to the Indians...

Indians have been looted and killed by the marauding invaders, because we have always been divided. Muslims happened to be our next door neighbors, and got to invade us early and often. Once the European found the sea route, they had their share of the fun. If the Himalayas had not been there, be sure that India would have been invaded by the Chinese as well. And btw, the first invaders (Muslims) came a thousand years ago, not 500.

In the current context, to say that Indians are being killed by Muslims is just false. Indians (which include Muslims too, in case you have forgotten) are being killed by the Pakis and their dogs, who happen to be Muslims.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 05:26

We would probably also been invaded by Zoroastrians had Iran not been converted. Not to mention non-Muslim Mongols. If we hadn't been under British rule, perhaps Japan would not have seen us as a friendly.

We also have not gotten to the violence that Indians have been inflicting upon each other before the Muslims...Unless violence and brutality is the invention of Muslims...

We are now at the stage of nation-states so perhaps we need to move out of tribalistic thinking.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 27 Feb 2010 05:42

Carl_T wrote:
We also have not gotten to the violence that Indians have been inflicting upon each other before the Muslims...Unless violence and brutality is the invention of Muslims...

We are now at the stage of nation-states so perhaps we need to move out of tribalistic thinking.

Were Hindus killing each other in the name of only God ?

Why is tribalistic thinking bad ?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 27 Feb 2010 06:02

peer alert - we are going OT

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 06:05

shravan wrote:
Were Hindus killing each other in the name of only God ?

Why is tribalistic thinking bad ?

How do you know Muslims are killing in the name of "only God". When they kill other Muslims is it in the name of "God" considering the people they kill worship the same "God"? There are plenty of reasons to kill people.

Tribalistic thinking is bad because it goes against the primacy of the nation over the tribal. My loyalty lies with the nation.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 27 Feb 2010 06:07

Brando wrote:At least 4 Indians killed in latest Kabul attack and a few others injured.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqL1y0g5REY

We need revenge. Covert bombing of Paki embassy in Riyadh or bomb a paki oil tanker in Arabian sea blaming pirate attack. Let the bloody game begin. If pakis want to play blood sport let them see what the sons of Ma bharati are capable of. Need to donate few Mig-21 to Afghan Air Force and pump them up with Air-Defense equipments, perhaps donate a few Brahmos. If us can donate paki's f-16's to fight sitting duck talibs...why cant we donate a few Mig's to Afghans..Afghans hate Paki's more than we do and the sons of Sher Shah Suri will not think twice before blowing a paki up. India needs to dismember Pakistan, sooner the better there is no way out. A single minded persistant effort like Indira Gandhi will reap the result.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 06:08

Why Paki tankers or embassies? Strike into the heart of Islamabad instead.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Feb 2010 06:48

ManuJ wrote
Indians have been looted and killed by the marauding invaders, because we have always been divided.

"Indians" have been looted and killed by maruding invaders overland whenever most of the northern part of the subcontinent was not united under a single rashtra. When naval invasions became feasible, India fell whenever most of the southern part of the subcontinent was not simlarly united under a single rashtra. Need to make the definition of "divided" precise. In the politically correct terms "division" happens only when anything and everything is not blindly accepted - especially Islamism and EJism is not allowed everything they demand.

Muslims happened to be our next door neighbors, and got to invade us early and often. Once the European found the sea route, they had their share of the fun. If the Himalayas had not been there, be sure that India would have been invaded by the Chinese as well. And btw, the first invaders (Muslims) came a thousand years ago, not 500.

Kindly provide the confirmed instances of when the historical residents of current region of AFG, KSA, Iraq, Iran (hope you mean them as neighbours) invaded us early and often before the advent of Islam! The Persians under Cyrus's dynasty invaded the western most parts of India according to Greek claims and provided the excuse for Alexander to apparently invade "India". But strangely he gets the stiffest possible resistance from this alleged Satrapy, when the rest of the Persian empire gave up without almost any resistance. The other known invaders came from western China, and the steppes of CA. Not the ME. Moreover they inevitably adopted pre-existing Indic religions.

China was never in a position tp invade India, as they never really had control over the Tibetan plateau. In fact they tried to enlist Chola and "Hindu Kashmir" support in their struggles against the Islamists and Tibetans. Himalaya was not the obstacle - since the Bhutanese invaded Bengal and Assam. By the way the first Muslim attacks came way before 1000. It was in the second half of 600's.

In the current context, to say that Indians are being killed by Muslims is just false. Indians (which include Muslims too, in case you have forgotten) are being killed by the Pakis and their dogs, who happen to be Muslims.

Yes and who reasonably (because their texts support their reasoning) justify that killing in the name of their faith. Unfortunately their victims appear to be infinitely more enthusiastic in disconnecting their religion from their acts compared to Islamists themselves - who take pride in such connections.

Carl_T wrote
We would probably also been invaded by Zoroastrians had Iran not been converted. Not to mention non-Muslim Mongols. If we hadn't been under British rule, perhaps Japan would not have seen us as a friendly.

Thats a wonder! The latest estimates given by "professional historians" for Zoroastrianism to take hold in Iran is at least 1200-1300 years before the conquest of Persians by Islamic Arabs. From the supposed invasion by Cyrus and descendants to the Islamic conquest of Persia is almost a 1000 years! The Zoroastrians waited a thousand years to mount their invasion of India only to be thwarted at the very last moment by Islamics! Must add this as one more mark of how Islamism benefited Indians.

We also have not gotten to the violence that Indians have been inflicting upon each other before the Muslims...Unless violence and brutality is the invention of Muslims...

Ah, can we have some evidence please? Especially on a massive genocidal scale formally justified by religious injunction?

We are now at the stage of nation-states so perhaps we need to move out of tribalistic thinking.

Any nation which does not recognize some kind of ethnicity as a foundation of nation-hood? It can adopt "outsiders" but they are expected to conform to the practices of the dominant ethnicity. Ethnic dominance is the modern name for "tribalism".

People forget that the ancestors of modern Afghans resisted Islamists from Arab, Turkic and Iranian origins, for almost 300 years - in the two principalities of Kabul (Kapisha) and Zabul. Moreover these two were known centres of Hindu and Buddhist culture. They are not known to have been involved in attacks on Indian heartland before the Islamists took the region over. After passing through Islamic hands, Afghan adventurers played a crucial role in the subjugation, genocide and sack of northern India.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 27 Feb 2010 06:59

To anyone who thinks that India will react in any meaningful way to the latest attack, I will like to remind them of a recent news report in The Hindu which quoted a top-most Indian diplomat or politician (I forgot exactly who) as saying that one reason for restarting the peace talks with Pakistan was that the next time there is a bomb attack, India would have more 'space' to deal with the issue. Meaning that, if there are ongoing talks, India can always suspend them when there is a bomb attack and claim to have taken an action. But if the talks were already suspended, then it would be forced to do something else, something less convenient that just suspending talks.

With that type of thinking pervading the top-most government decision making authorities, anybody hoping that they would react with force to an attack which took place in Afghanistan and 'only' killed govt. officers and no domestic elite/foreign tourists, with almost no media coverage (and hence no public pressure), is really day-dreaming. We have 'realistic' decision-makers, just like that average middle-class Indian who turns a blind eye to goondas teasing the neighborhood girl because c'mon, realistically speaking, what can he hope to achieve even if he did interfere?

The most shameful part is that the govt. tends to twist reality when it claims that attacks on terrorist training camps will not achieve anything since the camps are just mud huts and empty training grounds. The truth is, such at open attack would have such symbolic force and would be so shameful for the Pakistani rulers, since it would expose them as the eunuchs that they really are, that they would think ten times before striking again, once they became convinced that each time there was a terrorist attack, India would strike back.

As far as increasing India's presence in Afghanistan is concerned, I haven't seen any evidence of increased military/intelligence presence, whatever the statements may have been after the last attack. India wants to keep the assistance at humanitarian/infrastructure level. Which means that Indians in Afghanistan will continue to be a soft target.

So as matters stand today, India keeps hoping that the same action by it time after time would somehow elicit a different reaction from the same Paki army. That's India's grand strategy. It's pitiful, but it's the truth.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Feb 2010 07:02

Covert action against POGWI or Talebs is worth trying out. And I say this because I feel that an important lesson will be learnt in the process. The lesson is that overwhelming propaganda to disconnect religion from the actions undertaken by the religionists can cost us dearly. The effectiveness of terror acts comes from three factors coinciding - (1) money from drug trafficking (2) Islamic brainwashing towards Jihad (3) US and western protection of drug trafficking networks in exchange of intelligence inputs and readiness to be used against common geopolitical targets.

We will not be able to use the same methods as effectively because we are blinded by the self-delusion of erasing any hint of the role of the religion in terror. (1)+(3) can perhaps be managed by Indian secret services but no possibility of (2). Trying to mount such operation could be the eye-opener, and maybe, just maybe - GOI does not walk this way because it is aware of the real obstacle.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 27 Feb 2010 07:15

brihaspati, India has always invited invasions over its north-west land frontier. What you are trying to claim is that India was attacked only by Muslims. That's wrong, although Muslim invasions were the most persistent and some of the most barbaric.

There is historical proof that the Achaemenid empire (Persians) extended till north-west India. Before that of course, there was Alexander. And even earlier, there were a host of central asian tribes that invaded India. Where do you think Aryans came from?! Or you don't think of Aryans as having 'invaded' India?

More later, as I have to go home - it's Friday evening after all!

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 27 Feb 2010 07:57

ManuJ wrote:
There is historical proof that the Achaemenid empire (Persians) extended till north-west India. Before that of course, there was Alexander. And even earlier, there were a host of central asian tribes that invaded India. Where do you think Aryans came from?! Or you don't think of Aryans as having 'invaded' India?

Manuj, while i do agree that there were raids on India by barbarians from preislamic times, you completely lost me by bringing 'Aryans' into this.Do remember that the Aryan invasion theory (not fact) was debunked long time back.It is suprising that people STILL clung on to colonial myths.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Feb 2010 08:09

The post Alexandrian "Persian" expansion into India is rather doubtful. Moreover, I think we were discussing "Muslims" - so I looked at the Islamic heartland - the current Arabian peninsula, Iraq and Iran. Very difficult to prove "invasions" from here. Moreover, "all" who came in prior to Islamics adopted Indian religions and cultural superstructure and are not known to have destroyed Indian cultural icons. Which supports to a certain extent that they were merely out there for "loot". Only the Islamics never adopted the local religions or made any compromises with the indigenous culture - they consistently sought to erase it instead.

The main question was about AFG - and for the previous 1000 odd years - almost no evidence for the AFG guys to have invaded India with the added zeal of genocidic religious expansionism. It appears only after Islamism takes hold there.

Less said about the AIT the better.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 27 Feb 2010 09:57

Rony wrote:Do remember that the Aryan invasion theory (not fact) was debunked long time back.It is suprising that people STILL clung on to colonial myths.

You are right, it's a theory. Almost nothing that happened that long ago can be proven to be a fact. But it's far from being debunked, although organizations like RSS would desperately like it to be. It's still the most widely accepted theory.

On a different note, while driving home today, I heard the Afghanistan attack described on NPR news. It went something like this - "There was an attack on Afghanistan capital Kabul today in which about 16 people died. Among the dead was one Italian...." No mention that the attack was directed at Indians and the majority of the dead were Indians. After all, one Italian is so much more precious than six(?) Indians...Gives you a clue of where India and Indians are in American consciousness.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 27 Feb 2010 11:14

ManuJ wrote:
Rony wrote:Do remember that the Aryan invasion theory (not fact) was debunked long time back.It is suprising that people STILL clung on to colonial myths.
You are right, it's a theory. Almost nothing that happened that long ago can be proven to be a fact. But it's far from being debunked, although organizations like RSS would desperately like it to be. It's still the most widely accepted theory.

On a different note, while driving home today, I heard the Afghanistan attack described on NPR news. It went something like this - "There was an attack on Afghanistan capital Kabul today in which about 16 people died. Among the dead was one Italian...." No mention that the attack was directed at Indians and the majority of the dead were Indians. After all, one Italian is so much more precious than six(?) Indians...Gives you a clue of where India and Indians are in American consciousness.

Yes, widely accepted theory for gora folks, doesn't mean it is valid. And please don't muddle the discussion by bringing in RSS, it will quickly degenerate......

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 27 Feb 2010 11:25

Suicide bombing strikes in Kabul, Al Jazeera.

kshirin · Post by **kshirin** » 27 Feb 2010 11:29

bhargava wrote:
kshirin wrote:Why are news channels not covering this? CNN IBN webpage does not even mention it. This is perhaps more shocking than the blast and the deaths of the brave Indians.
After all, for them, news of MF Hussain becoming a Qatari citizen is more important than news of brave Indians dying. Some standard that!

There is zero coverage in this morning's papers. It is true that we only care for the elite, not for those people who are protecting our strategic flanks. BRF is the only Forum that cares for our shaheed.

The fact that this attack was perpetrated on a 26 rather than before the talks indicates they want us to know who did it. We have been saying the terrorists want to derail the talks but this attack came after the talks.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 27 Feb 2010 11:29

ManuJ wrote: On a different note, while driving home today, I heard the Afghanistan attack described on NPR news. It went something like this - "There was an attack on Afghanistan capital Kabul today in which about 16 people died. Among the dead was one Italian...." No mention that the attack was directed at Indians and the majority of the dead were Indians. After all, one Italian is so much more precious than six(?) Indians...Gives you a clue of where India and Indians are in American consciousness.

OT but had to reply:
The reason for that is simple. If Indians were involved in day to day American life and Americans had a conscious feeling that Indians were "allies", Indians would have had a mention. If there was a Korean dead man, we would have heard him being included too. NPR or any radio station cares about what their viewers want to hear, and the fact that Indians were dead is not an important news worthy item. Also I do not think its a conscious attempt made to look like 1 Italian == 6 Indians. Its just that Indians are not considered to be allies. Things are changing though, 26/11 was a major news item here for a change.

As an example of how Indians "seep" into the national consciousness, see the recent sitcoms (Big Bang Theory for example) or some new Hollywood movies which describes life in US schools (Indian kids are always portrayed to be the nerdy kind). If we were proactive in "getting" into the American heads, we would have achieved it long ago.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 11:31

brihaspati wrote:The post Alexandrian "Persian" expansion into India is rather doubtful. Moreover, I think we were discussing "Muslims" - so I looked at the Islamic heartland - the

In some cases they did not need to invade India after Darius due to their vassals, in others they did. However, since you do not see their control as "invasive" perhaps you can explain how the Sassanids established control to the Indus after Greek and Kushan rule.

If you do not see warfare in the pre-Islamic era in India characterized by brutality and violence towards non-combatants, it would be great if you can characterize it. I will retract my statements!

The problem you get into "nations are the modern manifestations of ethnic identities" you're interpreting history through a modern conception of ethnic identity. Considering you've railed against using "modern conceptions to interpret history!" continuously, I find this quite interesting!

The argument that nations are modern versions of ethnic identities is an assumption more than anything else because that ethnic identity has to be imagined. (I think you know exactly what I'm talking about)

But we are OT.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Feb 2010 11:39

milindc wrote: Do remember that the Aryan invasion theory (not fact) was debunked long time back.It is suprising that people STILL clung on to colonial myths.[
You are right, it's a theory. Almost nothing that happened that long ago can be proven to be a fact.
Yes, widely accepted theory for gora folks, doesn't mean it is valid.

Please dont bring mythical history into discussion.
The point is the Muslims - irrespective of what ethnicity are killing Indians/Hindus for the last 500 years.
Till 1700 it was Mughal regime which had a state policy on Jaziya.
After that the many smaller kingdoms did kill non muslims - Large scale Hindu killing even upto 1971.

After that the killing started again in 1989 in KASHMIR and the Hindus are refugees in their own land. That too after the freedom. Muslims in other region of India do not have any control over this killing of non muslims since in the sub continent the Islam is interpreted in each region in their own way and they have the same policy over the non muslims.

This Muslims view of the non muslims of the sub continent can be changed and it may take 30-50 years to reverse it and create a non killing islamic world view for the sub continent muslims,

==the Nizams of Hyderabad claim their independence (1724): Asaf Jah Nizam al-Mulk, a Mughal governor of the Deccan, quietly implements the independence of Hyderabad. The seven Nizams of Hyderabad rule India's largest princely state, covering most of the Deccan, until 1948; though over time they are increasingly under British tutelage. A full (and fascinating) list of the Nizams: *uq*. More on Hyderabad: *Imperial Gazetteer*. (*Routes*)

==Nadir Shah sacks Delhi (1739): The Iranian ruler Nadir Shah (*encyclopedia*; *wiki*) invades India and sacks Delhi, taking back with him the Peacock Throne (*wiki*), the *Koh-i Nur* diamond, and 300 artisans. The weakness of the Mughals is by now clear to everybody.

==Ghulam Qadir sacks Delhi (1787-88): The Afghan chieftain invades Delhi and is driven out, then returns the next year with more success; among many other cruelties, he blinds the hapless Mughal emperor Shah Alam II. The Marathas hunt him down and kill him, and then find it expedient to restore the blinded Shah Alam II to the throne.

==Deoband is founded (1866), and its theology becomes increasingly influential in South Asian Islam. Discussion: *Barbara Metcalf*; *William Dalrymple*. The Dar ul-'Ulum's own website: *dar ul-uloom*. Its instructors include Maulana Ashraf 'Ali Thanavi (1864-1943), author of "Bihishti Zevar," or "Heavenly Jewels" (c.1900), an enduringly popular advice manual for women (*one site*; *another site*).

==Independence and Partition, 1947: A great rip across the fabric of time, space, and community which creates, at the cost of millions of lives, two new independent nations, India and Pakistan. Discussion: *sacweb*; *Manas*; *BBC*; *Legacy Project* (especially for paintings); filmclips from *Harappa*; the experience of Dr. Zakir Husain: *Outlook* or *CU*. (*Routes*)

==Bangladesh is born (1971-72): To make a single nation out of two widely-separated (and very different) halves was perhaps a hopeless project from the start. Political conflicts finally result in West Pakistan's invasion of East Pakistan, India's military intervention, and the rebirth of East Pakistan as the new nation of Bangladesh. Discussion: *subcontinent*; *Naeem Mohaiemen*; *Virtual Bangladesh*; see also *Bangladesh Virtual Library*.

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/prit ... icles.html

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/20927
A Critical Exposition of the Popular 'Jihád'
Showing that all the Wars of Mohammad Were Defensive; and
that Aggressive War, or Compulsory Conversion, is not
Allowed in The Koran - 1885

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/prit ... books.html

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/prit ... index.html
Muslim Civilization in India
by S. M. Ikram edited by Ainslie T. Embree

ManuJ wrote: Muslims happened to be our next door neighbors, and got to invade us early and often. Once the European found the sea route, they had their share of the fun. If the Himalayas had not been there, be sure that India would have been invaded by the Chinese as well. And btw, the first invaders (Muslims) came a thousand years ago, not 500.

In the current context, to say that Indians are being killed by Muslims is just false. Indians (which include Muslims too, in case you have forgotten) are being killed by the Pakis and their dogs, who happen to be Muslims.

Modern state of India has made atleast the Indian muslims to abide by the constitution but the subcontinent Muslims have not changed from what they were doing 500 years ago.

Crossing the Threshold: Understanding Religious Identities in South Asia
Dr Dominique-Sila Khan
http://www.iis.ac.uk/view_article.asp?ContentID=105578

Compelled due to persecution to adopt religious dissimulation (taqiyya), the Nizari Ismaili communities of India, like other such persecuted minorities, illustrate an example where “liminal” identities continued over time and where individuals became custodians of the “threshold” between communities. While this has been possible in the past, when sharply demarcated identities had not yet emerged, the privileged position of these communities was endangered by the gradual formation of orthodoxies. This phenomenon is linked with the formation and consolidation of states during the later part of Mughal rule.

Later on, the categorizing activities organised by the colonial powers, as well as the reformist and revivalist movements that appeared in the nineteenth century, eventually resulted in the creation of clear-cut identities and antagonistic blocs, which in turn led to increasing conflicts. The formation of two separate states, India and Pakistan, accelerated this process. Most people were compelled to join one of the main “blocs”, thus crossing the threshold that had, for centuries, ensured the continuity of exchanges and the fluidity of identities. The peaceful coexistence and tolerance that mainly resulted from that fluidity, as well as from the diversity of religious traditions, was replaced by increasing conflicts.

Turning to the contemporary period, the author argues that the persistence of shared or liminal religious practices in South Asia tend to contradict the current idea of ‘Islam’ and ‘Hinduism’ as fundamentally opposed traditions. Open resistance to the challenges of communalism and new forms of precautionary dissimulation pave the way for further transformations.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 27 Feb 2010 12:54

ManuJ wrote: You are right, it's a theory. Almost nothing that happened that long ago can be proven to be a fact. But it's far from being debunked, although organizations like RSS would desperately like it to be. It's still the most widely accepted theory.

From where does RSS suddenly came in between ? Most of the historians who refute AIT have nothing to do with RSS.Even if RSS is involved in this, that still does not make any difference with respect to the AIT myth because the evidence does not support it, irrespective of what the RSS says .The AIT is a 19th century colonial theory.It is only there in the public domain because of the support it receives from western "Indologists". Do remember that the AIT does NOT have ANY archeological or genetic evidence to support the theory.Even the linguistic evidence also is on a weak ticket.The only reason it is STILL taught is because it has been there since 100 years with no one challenging it and blindly following what "Indologists" told them.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 27 Feb 2010 13:21

Aha ! it seems that the Ghilzai could be turki people assimilated into afghan/pashtunhood over time.
Hmm, the links with east turkestan may be deeper than what we can imagine.

Weegur resistance movement Etim has in any case found a safe haven in Ghlizai and Karlanri areas.

If I were the PRC I would be very worried. very worried indeed.

Dear PLA lurkers,

Please inform your superiors that supporting the fully debauched and ab-whored

state of Pukistan is not just counterproductive but downright stupid.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 27 Feb 2010 17:38

tsriram wrote:http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/afghan_02_26_10/a12_21979307.jpg[/img]
Text beneath picture -
A man passes a vendor displaying Bollywood videos for sale in the old city February 1, 2010 in Kabul, Afghanistan. Despite years of foreign involvement and the money being committed to Afghanistan from both private and governmental donors, Afghanistan is still plagued by chronic unemployment and neglected public services. Unemployment in the country of some 25 million people is still 40 per cent with more than half the population living below the poverty line. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

A picture from the [url=http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/02/afghanistan_february_2010.html]Boston Globe Big Picture

notice the theme of the set of images. americans in action, americans in mourning, delicate afghan kids, solemn afghan elders.
afghans also have been at the receiving end of this war and have faced the ire of talibans in greater proportion. i wonder where are the pics of afghans in pain? where are the pics of afghans crying mourning the loss of their dear ones?

it may well be that the photographer has limited access and cannot go to the places where afghans live and observe them. these may be the only type of pics they could take. but it also tells the story how bias is made. these pics will go in archives and the next generation ken burns will pan across these images and tug at the hearts of unsuspecting viewers without mentioning the pain that ordinary afghans also went through as "leaders" and their unncles went about their geopolitics. american kids did not have to die if the us lawmakers had showed more spine and stopped supporting the strategic depth of a terrorist state known as pakistan as it engineered this 4 decade long crisis.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 27 Feb 2010 17:45

ManuJ wrote:
On a different note, while driving home today, I heard the Afghanistan attack described on NPR news. It went something like this - "There was an attack on Afghanistan capital Kabul today in which about 16 people died. Among the dead was one Italian...." No mention that the attack was directed at Indians and the majority of the dead were Indians. After all, one Italian is so much more precious than six(?) Indians...Gives you a clue of where India and Indians are in American consciousness.

i too was listening to this and was very upset at their apathy.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 27 Feb 2010 17:46

so which taliban was involved? the haqqanis?