Anujan wrote:
Modi should give Imran Khan some advice too.
Imran Khan! I give you free suggestion. Pakistan people have not given you a mandate. You should first get one
Unfortunately for the Bakis, Modi seems to be actually trying to resolve Kashmir. And if Bakis are not careful, Modi might just resolve Bakiland also.
pankajs wrote:Its all Modi's fault
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/ ... 3H20141012
Modi's bravado ups the ante in India-Pakistan fighting
(Reuters) - To judge from the shrill outrage of India's TV news channels, the past week's bloody clashes along the border dividing Kashmir are all Pakistan's fault: one network has been plugging the Twitter hashtag #PakBorderDare.
However, military officers in both countries and officials in New Delhi say the violence that has killed nearly 20 civilians escalated because of a more assertive Indian posture under the new government of nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
"The message we have been given from the prime minister's office is very clear and precise," said a senior Indian Home Ministry official. "The prime minister's office has instructed us to ensure that Pakistan suffers deep and heavy losses."
In his first extensive comments on the violence, Modi told a political rally on Thursday - when 1,000 Indian mortars rained across into Pakistan - that "it is the enemy that is screaming".
"The enemy has realized that times have changed and their old habits will not be tolerated," he said.
The exchange of mortar and gunfire across a populated border area of Jammu, in the lowlands of Kashmir, has been India's most serious brush with Pakistan in a decade.
Almost 20,000 Indian civilians have fled their homes to escape the fighting, taking refuge in schools and relief camps.
The guns fell quiet on Friday, hours before the Nobel committee named an Indian child rights crusader and Pakistan's teenage education activist Malala Yousafzai as this year's Peace Prize winners. But heavy firing resumed on Saturday And continued into the early hours of Sunday.
Modi's robust approach towards Pakistan, supporters say, is aimed at emphasizing India's superior strength and making Pakistan's military think twice before firing across the border.
It is a strategy he also used to stand up to India's larger neighbor, China, during a border standoff between several hundred Indian and Chinese troops on the Tibetan plateau that coincided with President Xi Jinping's visit to New Delhi last month.
But the new stance risks more violence in the Himalayan region of Kashmir, already one of the world's most volatile fault lines, and has eroded a border truce that has largely held between India and Pakistan since 2003.
The nuclear-armed rivals have fought two of their three wars since independence in 1947 over Kashmir, which is divided between them and claimed in full by both.
Since Modi's election victory in May, military commanders have been encouraged to step up border patrols and retaliate with more force if they come under attack. New Delhi has insisted there can be no talks with Pakistan unless it ends shootings and pushing militants into the Indian side of Kashmir.
"This is what we feared would happen if Modi came to power," said Ikram Sehgal, a former Pakistani military officer and chairman of one of the country's largest security companies.
"This could easily escalate into something that won't be good for Pakistan or India."
RISKY GAMBLE
India may be gambling that Pakistan can ill afford to inflame hostilities in Kashmir while its army is engaged in a full-blown offensive against jihadi militants close to Afghanistan.
But the stakes are also high for India.
An editorial in the Indian Express on Friday called for cooler heads, saying further escalation would damage India's reputation as a responsible nation and attractive investment destination, and could rekindle a separatist insurgency on its side of Kashmir.
Officials say India's new policy is being orchestrated by Ajit Doval, the country's national security adviser, a decorated former intelligence official renowned for his role in dangerous counter-insurgency missions. He has long advocated tough action against Pakistan-based militant groups.
In conversations with Reuters as head of a right-wing think tank in New Delhi before he joined the new government, Doval said India must lay down core security policies, one of which was "zero tolerance" for acts of violence.
In August, after days of cross-border firing between India and Pakistan, Doval attended a meeting at the Home Ministry along with the head of the para-military Border Security Force (BSF) and a decision was taken to give a free hand to the ground commanders in Jammu, a top security official in the region told Reuters.
Until then, the BSF, which guards the Jammu section of the border with Pakistan, had complained that instructions on how to respond to provocations were unclear.
"It is a very tough stand that our top bosses want us to take against Pakistan and the tone is very different from the previous government," said the Home Ministry official.
"The previous government indulged in lip service. Publicly the former home and defense minister would showcase an assertive stand against Pakistan but actually neither BSF nor the army was given a free hand."
A spokesman for India's defense ministry did not respond to requests for comments.Pakistani military leaders say they have been taken aback by the level of aggression of Indian forces over the last week.
At a time when the Pakistan army is combating militants in the tribal areas in its northwest they do not want the distraction of battling India on its eastern flank, they said.
"India is deliberately putting pressure on Pakistani security forces by opening this new front," said a senior Pakistani military official posted on the border. "The message from India is clear: 'We will teach you a lesson.'"
Indians in the border areas of Kashmir, who have lived through decades of cross-border firing, said they themselves had noticed a change in tactics by the Indian forces.
"Pakistan fires one, our boys fire six back," said Atma Ram, 71, who was standing about 300 meters (yards) from the electrified fence that separates the two countries in the Suchetgarh area near Jammu. "They are giving a response we should have given before."
Yep, Modi is a rabid Hindhuthva guy looking to establish Akhand Bhaarath. Bakis should be the rational ones. Otherwise, Modi might go bombastic.
----
johneeG wrote:To me the strange thing is: whenever there is tension on Bhaarath-baki border, there are wails of new-clear flash point from western outlets. This time, there have not been such wails till now. Why?
Link to post
LokeshC wrote:Here are some random thoughts on why nucular phlashpoint has not been used yet:
1) Could be because Bakis have lost credibility in the eyes of average wersten man (and woman).
2) could be that reality of the situation (i.e. where India stands and where Bakis stand) has sunk in to a large number of media folks.
3) Could be that everyone started going "yaaaawnnn, we know, whats news..., hey there is a new child rapist in brishitstain" aka hunting for higher TRP.
kmkraoind wrote:johneeG wrote:To me the strange thing is: whenever there is tension on Bhaarath-baki border, there are wails of new-clear flash point from western outlets. This time, there have not been such wails till now. Why?
1. Actually new-clear flash point is being used to browbeat India, but after ISIS and AQ headaches, no body wants to strengthen Islamic new-clear weapons in any way (even diplomatically).
2. Ajit Doval staying a few days in US more then Modi. I bet he met have policy makers in US and had given what India is expecting and what US can expect from India. Probably, they will adhere to that unwritten code.
3. After OBL incident, I bet US must have secured most of strategic assets of Pak. Even I read somewhere here in the forum recently that their F-16 cannot be used as Pakis will. So Us have placed tighter controls on Pak. US know that India has intention of spoiling its growth story with Nuclear blackmails and Pak cojones are in US hands, so no worry of escalation.
4. US needs a big ally in Asia, either to tame PRC or Araps, so anything that spoils India's growth story is not in interest of US, so they must have given red lines to big news corporations. No doubt leftists like NYT can cross some yellow lines, but not all lines. All US news papers will depend on US establishment for such global juicy bits.
I bet after PNS Zulfiquar incident (either it may be hijack or an effort to steal new-clear material), US-India must have come to on same page on many things.
pankajs wrote:Noclear phlashpoint argument is aimed at the Indian public onleee and is effective only till such time that it is believed by the Indian masses. The moment it is ripped apart in public by Modi by perusing retaliation in face of noclear blackmail it stops being a factor except when it is used.
The Pakis, west and the WKK's realized that the only way to preserve the sanctity of the noclear umbrella in the face of Modi's stand is to leave it in the background for the moment.
Saars,
there are two points:
a) Generally, the western outlets & their dheshi proxies start wailing about new-clear flash-point.
b) One is told that all the previous regimes's hands were tied due to new-clear weapons.
a) Why are the western outlets & their dheshi proxies not wailing about new-clears this time?
Somehow the answers given by you guys is not convincing to me. Raising the specter of new-clear weapons would be not be such a big deal for people like Aholedesai or his compatriots. As for west, its always looking to do equal equal. Just look at the noble prize. So, why are they not wailing about new-clears? If we understand that, then perhaps it will be key to dealing with this new-clear wailings in future also.
b) One is told that all the previous regimes's hands were tied due to new-clear weapons.
Earlier, it was cold war. During cold war, Amirkhan would jump in to protect the Bakis directly. After the cold war, bakis have been under the protection of new-clear umbrella. Previous Bhaarath's regimes have tacitly sent signals that it is the new-clears which are stopping the Bhaarath. Then, why are they not stopping Modi? Is Modi not afraid of new-clears? What if the Bakis are really mad? What if they use new-clear weapons against Bhaarath? That would be a disaster for Bhaarath, no? So, why is not Modi afraid like his predecessors?
I think the only answer is:
muraliravi wrote:
The nuclear flashpoint has not been used simply becos bakistan has no nukes and India knows this very well. Barking dogs dont bite. Have you ever seen a country which really has nukes go around telling the world that we are nuclear armed 1000 times a day. Those who have it dont open their mouth. Have you ever seen Indian GOI establishment claim about our nukes day in and day out. Reality is bakis dont have nukes. Its a different matter that if push comes to shove, *deleted* will lend them some. But do they have any of their own, the answer is a no.
I think this is the only answer to explain Modi's fearlessness. Bakis are nuke nude.
So, what was protecting the Bakis all these days was not the new-clears. No, it was the kongis who were protecting the Bakis.
In a way, the Baki-army(RAPEs) & kongis(Elites) are both products/proxies of the west. So, both of them protect each other.
aditya wrote:
India is able to offer these freedoms to its citizens because it is a successful democracy. It was good for India to lose the 1857 war; if the British had lost, Indians would have continued to be governed by kings and nawabs, and under shari'a courts that existed during the Mughal era. At the time of independence, the British left behind a justice system that was blind to religious and caste inequities in Indian society, an inclusive democracy that guaranteed equal rights and religious and political freedoms for all; English language that opened doorway to enlightenment and scientific education; and a civil service that treated everyone as Indians rather than Muslims, Hindus or Christians.
Hmmm... Further from the above article by Tufail Ahmed
Effectively, India is a 'western' country. 
In the popular imagination, the west is viewed as a geographic concept, covering mainly the United States, Britain and parts of Europe. However, the ground realities are otherwise. Several countries, notably Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea, are situated in the east, but in terms of their values and politics are firmly part of the west. Conversely, countries such as Russia and some in Latin America are geographically in the west but cannot be called a western country as their citizens do not enjoy the social and political freedoms available to free people in the west. The organising principles of Indian polity and society are the same that define a western country: a multi-party system, individualism, liberty, a free press and rule of law.
It may or may not be noteworthy that a former Indian intelligence chief has endorsed the above, wholesale.
However, on a related track, Jaideep A. Prabhu @orsoraggiante opines:
http://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/the ... ar-BB897SI
The state of Indian academia is just as depressing; not a single programme is considered among the world's best, Indian journals have no presence in their fields, and few professors have publications in the most esteemed journals and presses. As a result, students seek out Western universities which have better libraries, better informed professors, and access to the best academic journals. These institutions inevitably pass on the value systems and priorities of the host culture to their students. The cumulative effect of this knowledge system is that an Indian who wishes to study Iranian history or Shintoism will most likely end up looking at his subject through Western eyes.
At a practical level, the reliance on Western universities and thinktanks subverts any uniquely Indian perspective - if it exists - from emerging. The spread of post-Enlightenment European rationalism posited several false universals such as linear history, time, and Liberalism that are only now being noticed, ironically more so in Western universities. The loss of indigenous voices is damaging not just nationally but also internationally for two reasons: one, the burden of Third World progress falls squarely on the West and its unique experience, and two, the implantation of Western values on local cultures has failed time and again in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.
Now which think tank does Tufail Ahmed work for? ...
Link
True, India is a western country. Kangrez was setup be westerners. Bakiland is also a western country. The difference between average western country and India or Bakiland is: India is populated by mostly non-western Hindhus whereas Bakiland is populated by mostly non-western Muslims. This is the difference between an average western country and India or Bakiland.
This is the definition of proxy-colonialism: Rulers are westernized and the ruled are non-western.
The election of Modi is precisely changing these contours. By ejecting the kongis, Modi has started a process of de-colonization in Bhaarath. If this process continues it will have affect on entire region from Iran to Indonesia and Tibet to Lanka. All the artificial entities will find it hard to exist. All these artificial entities were created and sustained by the west and its proxies, particularly kongis.
.