Every donkey and its grandmother seems to advice India on how to make peace with pakistan -- what is of concern is that the likes of Vikram Sood actually find this piece reasonable.http://brownpundits.blogspot.in/2015/08/pakistan-and-indiathe-long-view.html
The peacenik case:
And finally, the security establishment and it's fear of irrelevancy and demotion: no such luck. This is not a valid fear at all. Guess who will get all the Amul franchises when peace breaks out? Yes, cousin Jimmy and retired Brigadier uncle! Money can be made in many ways. You can make it in peace rather than war. Collect tolls. Distribute movies. Arrange concerts. Set up businesses.You know you can do it. And security? it will be an even bigger headache after we betray the two-nation theory and try to hold Pakistan together for Chinese transit companies and Qingchi makers. Endless Islamist, Baloch and Mohajir insurgencies loom on the horizon. Maybe even a Maoist one will break out if poor people get shafted extra-hard. Your jobs are safe.
Question is, Omar Ali, what are the priorities of the paki army ya think? Your assumption seems to be that they will be in a position to enrich themselves and that is a good thing for India. Seriously, a bunch of guys who have run their entire country into debt to destroy India are now going to step back and let peace reign for a few bucks? Also, once they get rich, what is their incentive to continue enriching themselves instead of nursing delusions of screwing India...what are the litmus tests here to demonstrate that these pakis have indeed not being the usual lying scum and have actually changed (short of telepathy that is)?
This is the case for peace. What is the hardline case?
Note that the two sides do not have symmetrical aims. Pakistan's aim is to force India to make concessions using the threat of renewed support for Jihadis, Khalistanis, Maoists, NE Separatists etc, to force India to make concessions. India's aim is to prevent Pakistan from making such an attempt. In order to see decisive change in this respect, India also wants clear and decisive action against the Mumbai attackers. Such action is not just desirable because a heinous terrorist crime was committed and its perpetrators have not yet been punished (though I personally think that is a good aim in itself) but because such action would be the best evidence that Pakistan is no longer committed to the Jihadist option against India. If Pakistan does this, India will almost certainly be willing to make at least a cold peace. Thus, when I speak of an Indian hardline case, I do not mean the extreme Hindutvadi case of wishing to reabsorb Pakistan "with extreme prejudice".
So now it is not the pakistani army, but "Pakistan's aim to force India to make concessions"? your slip is showing. As for justice for mumbai, too little, too late, so don't bother -- India can do without another series of charades of paki "justice system" making a show of conducting a trial just for publicity, with no intention of convicting any one. So really, you paki mofos need to burn down to the ground -- that is the only way out of this, and you all seem to be quite capable of doing that yourself.
As for India making concessions, why should India do so at peace time when it did not do so during war? And no, "Indians" like Praveen Swami and KC Singh do not speak for the Indian public or the Indian govt. when they "advice" India to do exactly that.
But we all know, once a two-faced paki, always a two-faced paki. Omar Ali reveals his actual pakistaniyat in the last couple of paragraphs after a lot of reasonable sounding bullshyte.
1. There is another sense in which the Kashmir situation is asymmetrical, though you do allude to this indirectly. There is a real separatist movement in Indian Kashmir with real buy-in from a significant (possibly growing) segment of the population. There is no such separatist challenge on the Pakistani side. Thus, in real terms, Kashmir is a much more "actual" problem for India than for Pakistan. It is true that Pakistan has failed to change the status quo of the borders, but the price of that "failure" has been paid more by India than Pakistan - if we do not count the jihadi menace afflicting Pakistan now as part of that cost. As long as this calculus obtains, I don't see the true decision-makers on the Pakistani side budging. India may think it can counter this by supporting separatism elsewhere in Pakistan, but it just isn't the same.
So Omar Ali thinks pakis overrun by jihadis is not that much of a problem -- it is nice to see paki intellekchils of Omar Ali's go around making plans with this mindset. But I agree with omar ali, more jihadis and more islam is only going to pakistan better and destroy India once and for all.
2. The hysteria created by the Indian TV news media is truly a phenomenon in its own right. There is a corresponding process in Pakistan, but it pales in comparison. This may have gone into overdrive post-Mumbai, but is not caused by that horrific event.
I have been watching the evolution of this ultra-hyper-super-duper-nationalist media in India with considerable horror for many years since long before Mumbai. Unlike the jingoism in the Pakistani media which is: a) mostly incompetent; and b) leavened by a fair amount of serious punditry, a lot (not all) of the TV news media on the Indian side is superficial and "Fox-y". The print media, in contrast, is much better - better than Pakistan's - but we all know that print is dead
Isn't it nice to see this paki pretend that Indians have suffered no other "horrific events" outside of 26/11, and it is all "nationalism" that is causing Indians to look at pakistan with a jaundiced eye..the same sentiment as the paki RAPE scum of Hussain Haqqani, Mosharraf Zaidi, and Ejaz Haider's ilk....but as we know, pakis are all duplicitous lying scumbags, and Omar Ali is no exception.
And then finally, we get to the "India must be a responsible country even if pakis are a bunch of rabid violent scumbags" but certainly a new fresh spin on it.
The world can barely survive a dysfunctional Pakistan; it cannot survive a dysfunctional India. As such, India has a greater responsibility to remain serious, gracious and sagacious even in the face of provocation. When it too turns to provocation, I think it is time for everyone to get very nervous.