ManishH wrote:brihaspati wrote:
But the US army did go out in penalizing moves after such incidents and the retribution was almost always far greater
Won't directly name it (search engines), but you know there are acts to ensure no quarters are given.
No quarters given only to the apparent "aggressor". US army did much more. They wiped out entire settlements or "resettled" them far away under escort.
But the settlers were free to keep arms and use them freely.
There maybe tactical reasons for not employing VDCs right away; local goodwill etc should be used while it lasts. But there are sufficient precedents, so it'll have to be employed sooner than later.
You were comparing European settlers and tomahawks. The former had guns and used them quite freely right from the beginning - of expansion. They used it regardless of local goodwill or not.
But they did not have to face the recognized need to protect the tomahawk weilders for their ideological and religious superiority
Frankly, this is over-skepticism.
There is simply no comparison between the US gov/ruling regime attitudes towards native Americans and their culture/religion vis-a-vis ruling "ideology/religion" - and congrez led regime and associated instruments of a modern rashtra [including its media/judiciary]'s attitudes towards the dominant theology of the valley.
Of course. But courage without an Israeli state like backing to settlers, is tragic. Serves dhimmi political forces in legitimizing their political agenda in painting the Islamism of the valley as "tolerant".
B-ji, there's contradiction between the two worst cases you talk of above. If Hurriyat has to appear "tolerant", they have to ensure there is no tragedy that befalls the settlers. If a tragedy were to befall them, they are no longer tolerant. Note that ageing separatist ring-leaders, esp from a cultural background that doesen't look beyond one birth, are most susceptible to such gajar and danda that has gone behind the scenes.
Yes, but they need to pretend only temporarily - until the concessions about "joint sovereignty", "sovereignty", "autonomy", etc are obtained. Moreover, the congrez has many ways out of such a situation.
(1) it can discover a saffron conspiracy to destabilize the peace "process"
(2) it can discover provocation to peaceful sentiments of the valley
The aging separatist ring leaders are on their way out. A new breed is taking over.
I think the KP re-settlement is part of an insidious political calculation which is simply using them as pawns
I disagree. But I'm open to gaming this scenario. Assume there's a repeat of chhattisingpora. Who reaps the benefit ? Will a massacre of 100 KPs achieve the political aims of the congress (which are to hold on to power and mint money) ? Will it achieve the aims of separatist which are to gain world support for secession ?
My assessment is that such a massacre will result in wipeout of "congrez" govt in 2014. For hurriyat, they'll be recognized in the world for another bunch of ethnic cleansers.
After all, MMS is often alleged to be "weak and risk averse", why does he want to risk a blot on his legacy. Why does even "madam sonia" want to risk maintaining her rule (even if partial) ?
You are modelling the congrez and the hurryiat as "ethical". The congrez will smoothly say that,
(1) it was the continued presence of the saffron in Indian politics/rise of NaMo/that eroded Valley Islamist confidence
(2) "there is something called a popular aspiration" "no parliamentary wishful thinking...can deny the people's ultimate right to choose their form of governance..." "we must heed the legitimate aspirations of the youth" [these are logic already given many times - from illustrious congrez voices ]. Remember that this is the argument that was often given by old congrezmen that they "tried" but ultimately the "Muslims" under jinnah were so adamant - that "to save more lives" they had to "agree". It will be cast in the form of "inevitability" and a necessary step to prevent further "loss of life".
What makes you think that this will make the two individuals you mention have "blots"? Instead the spin machinery will make them visionary leaders who had the "strength" to "give in"! I don't think congrez will be wiped out just because it gave Kashmir away - virtually or really! Elections for the vast majority of Indians - are not about larger national items - they are about immediate survival against the possible retribution of entrenched local biz and criminal interests, if desired electoral outcomes from the networks do not take place.
As for separatists, they would have established that India has not done enough to earn Islamic confidence, and that terror is after all a direct result of deprivation - only if of course such terror is Islamic or Marxist. If any terror happens it is because of India, having failed to do enough for them.
a virtual jazyia to be paid back by those kaffir or their backers, for the privilege of being allowed into a ghetto.
Assuming the worst case again, that the govt has given all the money to Hurriyat as Jaziya for protection. Why should that prevent the aforesaid cultural NGOs from sending money or material help directly to the KP settlers ?
Yes, even that gets to circulate in the local economy. Okay one may say that it earns an incentive to protect the duck that lays golden eggs. Not that historically it seems to deter Islamists very much. But even if we accept - hypothetically speaking - that such direct resource transfer helps the KP reclamation project, you can obviously see that sooner or later that resource will come into the control of the Islamists. To have any effect on the internal presence of KP in the state -The KP need to invest those resources if liquid within the state - and fixed assets are of course even more problematic.
Any asset they accumulate can then be appropriated by the islamists, and the cycle can go on again.
This is one risk you have to take. Bhima has to enter Bakasura's den if he is to be slayed.
[/quote]
I don't believe in taking risks that have shown historical behaviour of turning out to be truely negative. Risky situations have to be prepared for - and in this case, the valley cannot be and should not be trusted - not in the unarmed ghetto concentration of returning KP's.
hulaku ji has commented on some valley Muslims expressing regret for the KP having left. Some of my older KM friends express similar sentiments, but also acknowledge that the current teen/youth generation has no such illusions. Moreover, some, over drinks, have given out their real feelings. They say that they realize that it was a political mistake. It would be easier for them to achieve what they really want, an independent Islamic state, if the dhimmis were available for publicity.
(Reviewed by Sajad Gani Lone 
)