West Asia News and Discussions

[shyamd]

And immediately hired by the next general as an advisor.

[shyamd]

Expect major announcements from Egypt on military and diplomatic appointments. The SCAF only found out Morsi's decision by TV apparently. Let the fun and games begin

[Surya]

how come none predicted tantawi's firing

I thought we were ahead of the curve

[pentaiah]

If everything is predicted it will end up like Judith miller of NYT Niger yellow cake and aluminum tubes for Uranium enrichment by Saddam and invasion green signal by UN ? No

[Theo_Fidel]

and please save us the quantification of Kashmiri Islamism with a cute statistic about 40 "protesters" at some random rally. the atrocities perpetrated there, and that continue to be perpetrated, in the name of Islamic demographic consolidation, are very well known. don't insult the intelligence of others by peddling your cute one-liner statistics. It doesn't become you. perhaps, I can open your eyes by telling you that there has been an ongoing genocide in Kashmir for the past 2 decades, and maybe that will make you sensitive enough to not peddle psec nonsense statistics.

This is the exact rhona dhona I pointed out earlier. You have no answer to my question of they are 200 million, we are 1.2 Billion yet no one in the Middle east cries 'bajrang bali'. Your cries of genocide and violence and oppression are noted for being inhumane. But it doesn't answer the question.

I would suggest you go and look at the place of ALL people within your ideology. All ideologies that have failed this test or have failed at reform in this regard find themselves weak and vulnerable. Your wish to deny Muslims a place within India very much calls for the destruction of India itself. I don't think it is far fetched to say that you wish the destruction of your nation.

My loyalties are very different. I defend my nation and its constitution to the death, as my ancestors and one great grandfather most definitely did quite literally. Every Indian Muslim has expressed the same to me. I fail to see what attraction your ideology has for Indians.

[brihaspati]

Theo ji,
you mean every Indian Muslim you have talked to. Surely there is at least one example of an Indian muslim in custody now, who does not fit your bill. Having said that, I guess you have not come through first hand experiences of Muslim society in a situation where there has been recent past experiences of how Muslim societies and groups change drastically when opportunities for atrocities on their non-Muslim neighbours arise without prospect of retaliation. Sweet words and good behaviour and assertions of loyalty or patriotism vanishes overnight. This is an experience I have had first hand, and there are too many incidents carried down in family and extended networks.

For large parts of GV, and even places like Andhra as referred to by Devesh ji, the trust was and truly broken - and it will remain so until and unless the institutional framework by which the whole theology carries on preserving the memes of opportunistic violence, is completely eliminated. This should not be equated to elimination of people.

For the west Asia thread, this is perhaps not relevant - and I would request everyone in this particular sub-exchange of views to accept that different regional experiences prime us differently to look at the long term intentions of certain religious institutional structures - differently. The most cautious one is a better one than which trusts naively or implicitly.

[johneeG]

and please save us the quantification of Kashmiri Islamism with a cute statistic about 40 "protesters" at some random rally. the atrocities perpetrated there, and that continue to be perpetrated, in the name of Islamic demographic consolidation, are very well known. don't insult the intelligence of others by peddling your cute one-liner statistics. It doesn't become you. perhaps, I can open your eyes by telling you that there has been an ongoing genocide in Kashmir for the past 2 decades, and maybe that will make you sensitive enough to not peddle psec nonsense statistics.

This is the exact rhona dhona I pointed out earlier. You have no answer to my question of they are 200 million, we are 1.2 Billion yet no one in the Middle east cries 'bajrang bali'. Your cries of genocide and violence and oppression are noted for being inhumane. But it doesn't answer the question.

I would suggest you go and look at the place of ALL people within your ideology. All ideologies that have failed this test or have failed at reform in this regard find themselves weak and vulnerable. Your wish to deny Muslims a place within India very much calls for the destruction of India itself. I don't think it is far fetched to say that you wish the destruction of your nation.

My loyalties are very different. I defend my nation and its constitution to the death, as my ancestors and one great grandfather most definitely did quite literally. Every Indian Muslim has expressed the same to me. I fail to see what attraction your ideology has for Indians.

Are you of the view that Indian constitution is perfect and its framers(past, present and future) are also perfect?

Why make unnecessary attempts to deify the constitution or its framers?

A more rational approach would be to consider that the constitution(like any man-made object) will have some flaws, no?

Any idea will have its advantages and disadvantages. The same idea may be advantageous to some while disadvantageous to others. The same policy also applies to the ideas within the constitution also. Some ideas within the constitution may be advantageous to one group and disadvantageous to another group. Then, it is natural for the group benefiting from this idea to support it and the group that is being harmed by this idea to oppose it.

IMHO, the most critical thing about the constitution is the phrase:'We the people of India...'

That phrase makes it amply clear that constitution is nothing more than a set of rules(or guidelines) for Indians BY Indians. It is the people of India that constitute the constitution and the same people will have the right to change it into whatever form they may want to.

Wanting the present constitution to be changed does not mean going against the Nation. Here, one more thing needs to be understood. The idea of India for different people is different. For some people, India is a nation that was born on 15th Aug. For others, India is an age old civilization that was freed from over occupation on 15th Aug.

Anyway, I imagine you have brought the constitution into the discussion because 'Secularism' is enshrined in Constitution. To my limited knowledge, our constitution did not have the word 'secular' until dear leader, Indra Gandhi, in her infinite wisdom chose to insert that word during Emergency. Now, so does that word 'secularism' inserted into our constitution truly represent the will of the people of India?

----

There is another point: There are good people and bad people everywhere. Agreed. But, there are also good and bad ideologies. One should not mistake the ideologies and people. Perhaps, one can find a caring Nazi. But that would not mean that Nazism is a caring ideology, would it?

Maybe you will not agree to the concept of good and bad ideologies. Even if you do, we may disagree on which ideology falls into which category. But, atleast, you will have to concede onething i.e. some ideologies are inherently against some others.

For example: A white supremacy ideology is inherently against the non-whites.

Similarly, certain will be ideologies that are in sharp contrast to each other and cannot live in harmony.

For example: An ideology that claims that the earth is flat cannot co-exist with an ideology that claims the earth is spherical.

Similarly, Islam is in sharp contrast to Hinduism. Regardless of which of these ideologies is 'correct' and which is not(or which of them is 'good' and which is not), what cannot be ignored is that they are inimical to each other.

Can a muslim and Hindu be friends? Of course. As long as, they ignore their ideological differences, they can be friends. They can also pretend to be friends. Alternatively, they may be friends in a certain environment and turn against each other in another environment.

Can Hinduism and Islam be friends? Not really. It is in the nature of how these things are.

Individuals should not be confused with ideologies. Individuals are, often, at the mercy of ideologies and not vice versa.

[devesh]

This is the exact rhona dhona I pointed out earlier. You have no answer to my question of they are 200 million, we are 1.2 Billion yet no one in the Middle east cries 'bajrang bali'. Your cries of genocide and violence and oppression are noted for being inhumane. But it doesn't answer the question.

I would suggest you go and look at the place of ALL people within your ideology. All ideologies that have failed this test or have failed at reform in this regard find themselves weak and vulnerable. Your wish to deny Muslims a place within India very much calls for the destruction of India itself. I don't think it is far fetched to say that you wish the destruction of your nation.

My loyalties are very different. I defend my nation and its constitution to the death, as my ancestors and one great grandfather most definitely did quite literally. Every Indian Muslim has expressed the same to me. I fail to see what attraction your ideology has for Indians.

what makes you think I want everyone in the ME to cry 'bajrang bali'? to my knowledge, I have never expressed such a wish on BRF. this is an imaginary ghost of your choosing, not mine. so, you should answer that question yourself, as I have nothing to say for it.

once again you insist on creating this mythical group called "muslims". when the Hindus are not recognized in this country as a unified entity, and any and every little perceived and imaginary difference among the "hindus" is immediately quantified as a separate group, I don't see why I should oblige in making this mythical group called "muslims". AFAIC, it doesn't exist. there exists a vast population under the grip of a foreign ideology which has consistently proven itself capable of producing genocidal rapine tendencies. that is what I know, and that is what I'll stick to.

it is the ideology that is the boiler room for producing these tendencies. I call for the destruction of the ideology, not the people. I have never expressed any inclination to eliminate the population. what I have always said is that the ideology needs to be TACKLED, by engagement, argument, and debate. the behavior and actions of theology sponsored and theology justified reasoning is the issue here, and they need to be put in the open. I have known too many examples where shades of the white-supremacist-apartheid mentality time and again show up even in the most educated Muslim minds, and even the non-educated mullah-style Muslims (yes, they do exist; you shd visit certain areas of Hyd and you'll see a curious section of men who are not theologians directly, madrassah educated, involved in small-time dhandas, dressed in sherwanis, and who will out-persian even the persians themselves, in their contempt for Kafirs), for me to simply blindly ignore these warnings and merrily go around dreaming of "patriotic muslims". those muslims might exist, but as long as the Islamic Institutional Architecture is thriving, you can never be sure that the genocidal rapine tendencies have been erased.

I am glad to know of your loyalties. that fact was highly relevant and contributed a great deal to this discussion.
as for my loyalties, which also I'm sure will contribute tremendously to this debate, I don't owe my loyalty to any constitution. The Constitution is not set in stone. especially, when you have interpreters of said constitution who always, always insist on creating micro-identities among Hindus, while completely ignoring glaring differences among non-Hindus, the cautious nature towards this constitution is doubly warranted. simply b/c it has been used a most useful tool in solidifying differences among the Hindus, while always it does opposite to the non-Hindus.

My ideology doesn't need to have any attraction for other Indians. even if it doesn't, I still insist on believing and propagating my version of truth. we should let history be the judge of whose ideology has what. it is too early to judge and disregard, although I'm sure some of us want to hurry to that part. we'll be long gone by the time history judges the attraction of our "ideologies". enough said.

[KLNMurthy]

US is there for their interests. End of story. Do those individuals really think US regime was helpful to the Bahraini regime when protests took place last year?

As for assad - blatant lies are being propagated that Indians are saying that Asads fall is somehow "positive" - UN statements are enough to disprove those lies.

Everybody knows KSA interests doesn't align with ALL our interests (key difference here) and we cooperate where there is alignment and where there isn't we are competitors (as has been explained before - Afghanistan/Iran being one of them) - just like any other nation which I am sure those individuals are aware about.

KSA will do what is in its interest as will Pak (which was to give Iranians nuclear support which incidentally KSA hasnt forgotten).

As for India - every deal India does means money in political pockets - who knows that better than the US - who recently failed to get the MRCA (or get the movement on Iran that they wanted) contract despite everything that was listed - money, political pressure, NGO's paying protestors etc etc. India will do everything in its interests and despite all those things listed - which is not a new phenomenon (as those who have an agenda would love to propagate).

Its funny how certain interests have no faith in Indians - yes all indians are weak, money hungry, poor SDREs.

Anyway, 6 years, billions of dollars, extraditions etc later - still no green KSA mosque and the only known offer by K Abdullah to renovate Jama masjid rejected? Lol!

It doesn't have to be seen as a trading of accusations: one side suggesting that the rulers are naive greedy near-traitors, while the other side insists that it is a chanakian balancing act that is being unfairly maligned. On BRF, it seems necessary to remind ourselves from time to time that we are on the same side--that of India.

Here's how I see it: yes, it is a balancing act, but with the following problems:

1. Not enough evidence that there is a well-thought out pro-Indian policy in action, other than, short-term balancing of multiple interests and making money. Some instances can be pointed out (resistance to US pressures on Iran, assertions about pushbck on Saudi aggression etc.) but there is a mass of evidence that suggests that the so-called balanced policy consists of simply setting the controls on "equal-equal" and going on autopilot, with no long-term vision or plan.

2. If the ultimate goal is to play off adharmic interests against each other, even promoting specific adharmic forces (like Saudi) in the short term, with the plan to do away with the last adharmic standing (similar to how chankiya exploited the adharmic lecherous nature of his ally Parvata Raja to put an end to him) well, there is no evidence of this again. We don't see any awareness of the dharmic mission and goals, in fact we are only seeing glani or decline / rollback of dharma.

To me, these are valid concerns that need to be addressed without defensiveness.

[KLNMurthy]

Americans are stupid. They think Indians are going to cower down and by playing dirty they think we will give them big contracts. They used SS and others to attack Sonia personally openly in the media. but I think they are finally getting the message that this intimidation and dirty tactics won't work. Treat us like real partners and offer us the best.

...

They found a way to kick SS out of Harvard. Is that consistent with SS being an American tool to attack Sonia?

[KLNMurthy]

Bji,

Agree onleee.

...

WRT KSA they are fools if they think the Syrians are going to love them unconditionally. As I pointed out earlier, the Syrians tend to believe in a more cosmopolitan origin rather than a pure Arab one. Will KSA try to undermine Syrian democracy, absolutely. But in the age of twitter it will be hard to make it stick.

...

I still think the vast majority of ME does not subscribe to the Islamist wet dreams. KSA sheikhs may dream these things but the folks on the ground do not.

A nation and people don't have to be exact clones of KSA to be their vassals and part of the extended wahabi empire. Once the vassal status stabilized there will be more than enough time to wahabize the population as appropriate.

[Philip]

The cover-up of the atrocities that are being perpetrated in the kingdoms and sheikdoms and abysmal state of human rights in these countries,which are the bastiosn of western support,make a mockery of the sanctimonius mouthings from Washington and its satellites. The message to the world's nations is very clear.If you are not militarily strong enough to ward off armed invasion direct or by proxy from the US,then submit as a servile vassal entity.India has to accelerate its N-warhead production massively with hundreds of tactical nukes to ward off the Sino-Pak axis of evil and induct an unspecified number of ICBMs on lnd (mobile) and at sea.We also need a few dedicates strategic bomber sqds. too.The IAF has nothing in its inventory that can fly to Beijing and back armed with LR stand-off nuclear tipped ASMs.

This is why Iran is so desperate to develop its own N-weaponry and protect itself from invasion,vis the monarchist Islamist despots led by the Saudis and their Sancho Panza, Qatar.

Here is an intriguing look at Aleppo,now in the throes of another historic battle.How history repeats itself!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 37175.html
Aleppo's other battle line

More than 800 years after Saladin fought back the Crusaders, the ancient Citadel of Aleppo is once again the scene of conflict, writes Kim Sengupta

One shell demolished the front of the house, leaving a gaping hole where the arched gateway once stood. A second gouged out a crater 10ft wide in the walled garden and a third smashed into bedrooms and the library. The family of seven living there all suffered injuries, three of them severe and needing emergency surgery.

"We thank Allah that they are alright. But this home has now gone. It is 390 years old," said Awni Abu Riadh. "There was a fountain in the garden which was one of the oldest working ones in the city. My uncle Ahmed had collected a history of this house, but that has gone with the library. Look all around. Bashar's army are ruining this great city; they are trying to take away our past."

Compared with its surroundings, the beautiful Ottoman house of Ahmed Mansour – now destroyed – is relatively new. Standing on the rubble, one can see, through other buildings damaged by the fighting, the Citadel of Aleppo, built on original fortifications which date back to 3000 BC; a World Heritage Site of history and culture which had been restored to some of its glory through extensive excavation and conservation.

The Assyrians and Babylonians used a fortress in this place, with its command of the plains beyond. Alexander the Great captured it on his way to Persia; one of his generals enlarging the settlement which later became Aleppo. Byzantine and Sassanian emperors fought endless battles over the city and citadel for its strategic position and rich hinterland. Saladin, the great general, planned many of his campaigns against the Crusaders from here; Baldwin II, one of the Christian kings of Jerusalem, was imprisoned in the castle. Aleppo was subsequently put to the sword by Genghis Khan's Mongols and the Tartars of Tamerlaine.

The citadel is now once more a battleground. The forces of the regime occupy the castle and the rebels the Iron Gate, Bab al-Hadeed. The cobbled streets, shaded courtyards and covered bazaar – one of the most famous in the region – are used to trade fire. Increasingly, there is damage from air strikes, one of them blowing up a 17th century bathhouse and surrounding properties.

This, the second frontline of Aleppo, is a vast contrast to the first, Salaheddine, which has been pulverised by bombing and air strikes and is now a dark and forbidding place of constantly echoing gunfire and the stench of bodies buried beneath collapsed houses.

At the Aleppo Citadel, the destruction is not on that scale. There is more life than death; flocks of turtle doves rise at the sound of battle but return to their nests, and enough architecture remains standing to draw admiration from the rebel fighters. "That mosque, that mosque is beautiful, isn't it?" said Mohammed Khaladi of the Abu-Bakr brigade, from the nearby town of Al-Bab. "It is very old. It is especially used for special occasions. Famous sermons have come from there," Not this day however; caught in the crossfire, its walls already pockmarked by bullets, the doors of the house of worship remained shut.

The main problem came from regime snipers using the arrowslits on the castle's walls to fire down, with some success. "They are a big problem," acknowledged Mohammed Khaladi. "They are very well protected, very difficult to hit. We have the castle surrounded and we have tried to capture it a few times, but it is difficult."

The last attempt, a charge uphill to shouts of "Allah Hu Akhbar", ended at the moat, which could not be crossed. The regime troops inside could offer thanks to Saladin's son, Sultan al-Zahir al-Ghazi, who, during his 18-year rule from 1193, doubled the depth of the moat, strengthened the approach way, and built a bridge and viaduct to better co-ordinate defence.

Jamal Ali Zaied was shot during the operation. "It was a hard climb up the hill. I had just stopped to rest for a second when I felt pain in my arm and it started bleeding heavily," he explained. "I had to climb back down and with only one hand my rifle slipped off. I couldn't get it back because there was so much firing." Like many among the opposition militias, Mr Zaied has had to arm himself, and the loss of the $1,800 (£1,150) Kalashnikov AK-47 was keenly felt, especially as he had not been able to use it effectively. "We have to use RPGs against tanks, not Kalashnikovs. We need heavier weapons to get inside the castle, we need to use more mortars," he said.

Successive conquerors of Aleppo used the artillery of the time – giant catapults flinging boulders to weaken Aleppo's walls, and the Mongols and Tartars made effective use of inflammable "Chinese Fire". Mr Zaied did not know about it, but thought it was a sensible strategy to have taken.

Basel Ahmedi also took part in the rush for the citadel. He had been inside it once, four years ago, for a concert at the old amphitheatre which was used for cultural events before the uprising. "It was classical Arabic music; the setting was very interesting. I would like to see the place again once we get in." Mr Ahmedi had also served in Salaheddine, and being at the castle front was far preferable. "There we had bombing, day night, day night. It is not like that here," he said.

The Old City around the citadel had become a place of refuge for many who had fled Salaheddine; now they find themselves amid fighting and uncertainty once again. Haji Ahmed Mahmoud Makhboul was moving his family for the second time, possibly to a village in the neighbouring Idlib province. "I hope they manage to get peace, we cannot continue to live like this," was his fervent wish. "We had to leave behind everything in Salheddine and we don't know what has happened there. All we now have is what we are carrying."

[Philip]

Robert Fisk shedding a little light into the shadowy world of intrigue and devilry that is active in the conflict.

Robert Fisk: In the end, all Israel and her Western allies want to do is to break Iran – via Syria
The long view: A video allegedly shows Samaha transporting explosives from a car in an underground car park

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 37174.html

In just seven minutes, Michel Samaha got my book un-banned after seven years on Lebanon's blacklist. Even Rafiq Hariri, when he was Prime Minister couldn't get Pity The Nation into Beirut's book shops. "There is a sentence about a Syrian tank guarding a hashish field in the Bekaa Valley," he told me. "This is not the time for me to take this up."

But the moment that Samaha was appointed Hariri's Information Minister in the 1990s, he called up his chum Brigadier Jamil Sayyed, the immensely pro-Syrian head of the Lebanese General Security, and Sayyed unbanned my history of the Lebanese civil war with a flick of his signature. Sayyed, I should add, is a rather sinister figure who looks like the sort of chap who ties ladies to railway lines in silent movies. The academic and journalist Samir Kassir, no friend of the Assad regime, claimed Sayyed threatened him. Shortly thereafter, Kassir was murdered by car bomb. The UN also believed Sayyed was involved in Hariri's murder – President Bashar al-Assad was said to be very, very angry with Hariri for wanting to free Lebanon from Syria's loving embrace – but then, after four years' imprisonment without trial, the UN released Sayyed because the "witness" upon whom it based its evidence turned out to have given false testimony. And the old UN donkey admitted, privately of course, that Assad may not have been involved.

Michel Samaha is a Greek Orthodox Christian, originally a supporter of the right-wing Christian Ketaeb but experienced a "road to Damascus" conversion and ended up a friend and adviser of Assad. He was also – conspiracy theorists, take careful note of this – a holder of the Legion d'Honneur, awarded, so they say, for helping the French secret service. So all the greater was the thunderclap last week when 10 heavily armed members of the Lebanese General Security intelligence section bust into Samaha's summer villa in the Metn hills, handcuffed the ex-minister and former MP, and took him off for interrogation in Beirut. Very quickly, a tale unfolded in the Lebanese press; Samaha had been tasked by Syria's Brigadier-General Ali Mamlouk to set off bombs in northern Lebanon to provoke a civil war between Sunni and Shia, creating the now famous "spillover" of Syria's bloodbath which the world has long been predicting – and paid £120,000 to arrange the whole shooting match. A video allegedly shows Samaha transporting explosives from a car in an underground car park. Another supposedly depicts him announcing that Assad approved of the whole affair. Samaha, said the press, had admitted the lot.

Lebanese editorials adopted a western journalistic perspective, pompously telling readers Samaha's innocence must be assumed unless he is proven guilty, while piling on the accusations. One of the few journalists to object was Scarlett Haddad of L'Orient Le Jour. When Lebanon is awash with explosives, guns and missiles, she asked, why would Syria need to import bombs into Lebanon? And why would a figure like Samaha, who has warned against any sectarian conflict in northern Lebanon, lend himself to such a plot? Indeed, why should a well-connected man get mixed up in the dirty business of handling bombs, a task normally assigned to voyous, or "street kids"? A report that Assad personally phoned the Lebanese President, Michel Suleiman, to intervene was denied by Suleiman.

Among those who dwell in the deep politics of Lebanon, however, there are other thoughts. New sanctions have been levelled against a Syrian oil firm. Sanctions were taken against Lebanese Hezbollah two days ago. Madame Clinton is raging against Assad but doing nothing. Leon Panetta, the cliché-laden US Defence Secretary, said the battle for Aleppo was "the nail in the coffin" of the Assad regime. But right now the armed revolutionaries are retreating. In the end, it's all about Iran, the target of Qatar's and Saudi Arabia's and America's and Israel's suspicion and hatred. Break Iran – via Syria.

So how does the arrest of an Assad intimate, Michel Samaha, fit into all this? Just another rusty nail in the coffin? I've been calling him for six months to ask for his assessment of the Syrian crisis. Once he was in Damascus, and said he'd call back next day. When in Beirut, he said he'd call back. He didn't. Then his wife told me he was in Paris. I remembered the Legion d'Honneur. Now we're all waiting for the videos.

[Pranav]

I don't see why I should oblige in making this mythical group called "muslims". AFAIC, it doesn't exist. there exists a vast population under the grip of a foreign ideology which has consistently proven itself capable of producing genocidal rapine tendencies. that is what I know, and that is what I'll stick to. ... I call for the destruction of the ideology, not the people.

A logically valid position ...

Christianity too will have to undergo changes. Although proselytization continues among third world populations, large sections of Western societies are entering a post-Christian phase. Nowadays one often sees Christianity being reinterpreted as a subset of Dharma, which is welcome.

Anyway, this discussion is veering OT.

[Virupaksha]

Americans are stupid. They think Indians are going to cower down and by playing dirty they think we will give them big contracts. They used SS and others to attack Sonia personally openly in the media. but I think they are finally getting the message that this intimidation and dirty tactics won't work. Treat us like real partners and offer us the best.

...

They found a way to kick SS out of Harvard. Is that consistent with SS being an American tool to attack Sonia?

KLNMurthy ji,
Its the usual modus operanda of insinuation of opposite party, sir, dont worry. smile and leave it at that. It only means SS is doing something right. With his personal life in a specific way, they cant even say that he is not "secular" and that causes them a major load of takleef.

Even if SS is that, he is playing a very important role at the end. The ruling regime and their islamist backers are clearly not enthused by that role. He has made himself too public with those explanations to reconcile with the ruling regime & their backers even after a significant passage of time. So even if others including backers try to jump from this side to that side and that side to this side, SS has made himself non-viable to the other side and is stuck on one side.

Shyamd garu,
You are becoming too difficult for me to differentiate you and your sources. Lets just say you are becoming too native to your sources for me to distinguish.

[Pranav]

FSA stormed a Post Office in the city of Al-Bab, north of Aleppo. A gruesome video has surfaced of FSA soldiers throwing the postal workers off the roof.

[Philip]

The savagery happening is abominable.Yet Hilary-the-Klingon pours paens of praise for these "freedom fighters".Here is an excerpt from a report from the Independent UK on the fighting.Rebels on the retreat as Assad's forces pound them.

Quote:“They were full of talk about their experience in Iraq and Afghanistan; bombmaking and IDs [IEDs] but at the end, nothing.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 26802.html

Special report: Hundreds of rebel fighters leave Aleppo after relentless shelling by regime forces

Revolutionaries abandon the frontline they had held with such resilience for the last 12 days.

It began with a few of the rebel units pulling out, sleepless and disoriented after two nights of relentless shelling, fearful that they were being surrounded by regime forces. By mid-morning the departures had turned into a major retreat, with hundreds of fighters pouring out of Salaheddine, many of them then straight out of Aleppo.

The revolutionaries had abandoned the frontline - a crucial strategic point - they had held with such resilience against massive battering for the last 12 days. They have also left much of an adjoining district, Saifaldallah. The pounding they had received for hour after hour from the air and the ground had been worse than anything before; The Independent was there very much towards the end of the onslaught, but it was still daunting and, yet again, indiscriminate.

Despite repeated attempts the rebels had failed on Wednesday night to dislodge around half-dozen tanks which had made their way to Salaheddine Square, setting up a bridgehead for troops and armoured carriers positioning themselves at the flank of the rebel fighters on 9 and 10Street who had borne the brunt of the attacks. At just after 3am the artillery rounds reached a new intensity and these fighters saw tanks rolling towards them through the streets of Salaheddine.

The breakthrough means that regime forces are now in the ascendancy, having broken the opposition’s staunchest line of defence in the narrow, twisting streets of Salaheddine. They are now in a position to bring in additional forces through Hamdaniyah, which they hold, and aim to link up with other troops at Aleppo Castle and the city’s airport. In addition, rebel fighters, un-nerved by rumours, have disappeared from some of the inner-city districts they had taken in the last two weeks.

In the afternoon the opposition Free Syria Army officially acknowledged that Salaheddine has been lost. Commander Wassel Ayub, said: “The FSA’s brigades have staged a tactical withdrawal from Salaheddine. We had full control of the district last night, but then regime forces bombarded in an unprecedented way.”

The pull-out gained momentum when the city was relatively quiet, with just a few rounds of shellfire in the distance and the odd helicopter-gunship firing overhead. We found the men of the Dar al-Sabah Khatiba (battalion) frantically evacuating their headquarters, a school at Bustan al-Qasar, well outside Salaheddine. “The soldiers are on two sides of us, it is too dangerous to stay here, too dangerous,” said an officer, Abdullah al-Fawzi. “We are just taking what we can carry.” Later, at a nearby town, Captain Abu Khalid was adamant: “We shall go back in there, definitely, but first we must take some rest.”

He had been in Salaheddine for the whole night. “The worst thing was when the tanks came in. We had destroyed them in the past, but this time there were so many of them and we were very tired. We fought along some streets, but then we had to leave, otherwise we would have all been killed.”

Ominously for the opposition, some of their best fighters from outside Aleppo, who had been at Salaheddine and the city’s second frontline, the Iron Gate, were leaving, anxious that their home towns and villages were unprotected if the regime did capture the city quickly and push on. The arrival of reinforcements from other places - the opposition claimed 20,000, although the real figure may be half that - had helped to balance, to an extent, the massive build up by the regime.

Among those going were men of the Abu-Bakr brigade from the eastern town of Al-Bab, their commander Zahar Sherqat, widely respected in the revolutionary ranks, was driving through the deserted streets by himself in a white Toyota Corolla ensuring that those in his charge was withdrawing in an orderly way. He also stopped in several neighbourhoods to assure the people that he and the rebels will be back.

Commander Sherqat, a slim, soft-spoken man, was at pains to explain: “There is absolutely no point in wasting lives, at the end we did not have enough heavy weapons. These will come. We can’t stop them at the moment, but we shall regroup and get back in here, not Salaheddine maybe but the rest of the city. Aleppo will break the regime, but it will take time, in the meantime we must protect our homes and families. ”

By late afternoon the rebels were talking about launching a counter-offensive and even claimed to have taken back some of the ground. But streets in most areas under their control were redolent of checkpoints, with fighters without transport desperately trying to get out. We gave some of them a lift to the Sahar district, in the outskirts, where minibuses were lined up to take people out of Aleppo.

An Islamist battalion which had become noted for its unfriendliness to outsiders including fellow rebels, and had claimed Assad’s army would be defeated quickly if only they had more fellow jihadists, were the first to run from Salaheddine. One of their getaway vehicles, a red pick- up truck, had been hit from the air, just as it had come out of the district. Remains of three bodies lay at the back. A passing fighter, Hussein Ali Motassim, gestured: “They were full of talk about their experience in Iraq and Afghanistan; bombmaking and IDs [IEDs] but at the end, nothing.”

Regime troops had initially made little effort to move forward as the rebels withdrew from their positions. By early evening tanks and armoured cars had begun to venture into these areas. But they did not stay for long, leaving after lobbing shells, although there was little by way of return fire. Later helicopter-gunships strafed an area from which the rebels had already withdrawn.

The attacks resulted in civilian casualties, a rising number in the last few days, carried by neighbours and family members to a field hospital. The medics, unlike the fighters, had not left, although the punitive action they face from the regime can be brutal, three young doctors arrested were found dead, another was killed by a sniper on Salaheddine Square yesterday despite wearing a white coat.

Hadil Ami, a female doctor in her early 20s, treating an elderly man with deep cuts to his chest and arm from broken glass, said simply: “This is the time when our patients need us the most, we have got those who are injured and traumatised but also very afraid. We can’t send many of the injured to the Government hospital, especially now, because they would be looking for Shabaab [rebel fighters] who are injured. I am not doing anything wrong here at all, I am doing my job, but that is not something which will interest the Mukhabarat [secret police] - they think we are all suspects.”

Regime forces, accompanied by the Mukhabarat and the Shabiha, the loyalist militia, were last night going through the houses in Salaheddine, searching for rebels. “What they mean are civilians they can capture and torture and then show some dead bodies saying they are terrorists,” said a fighter, Abu Karim, with cigarette burns and deep bruises from his time in custody. “They will be disappointed, everyone has either run away, or they are dead. But they will have plenty of opportunities to kill if they take back Aleppo.”

The storming of the station at al-Marju in Salhein was carried out by over 700 fighters; the 45 strong security detachment inside resisted before a bomb made out of a water storage container and TNT was bodily flung over the sandbags by two volunteers. Fifteen of the regime officials were killed, the rest arrested, except four who got away. “They were snipers, three of them were Iranians, the other was a Russian,” maintained Abdel Rahman Moussa, one of the rebels. “The Russian must have been valuable, right at the end they sent 200 soldiers to get him out. We keep on hearing about Russians and Iranians, also we think come Hezballah people are here as well.”

Rumours of foreign mercenaries in the pay of Assad, as well as the imminent launch of chemical weapons, were rife in the city, with no detectable for either. Also absent were the hundreds of foreign Islamists who, according to some Western media reports, have descended to raise the flag of al-Qa’ida and jihad in Aleppo.

“Where are they? The Chechens, the Africans and the Pakistanis, all with so many weapons?” Asked Abu Suleiman, a rebel officer, crouching down in an alley as an attack on a fourth security post, near Sher Osman, predominantly manned by the Shabiha, was faltering due to ammunition running out and what appeared to be a Mig-23 dropping ordnance. “We can do with them. No, not them, their weapons. That is going to be a problem very soon unless we start getting fresh supplies coming through. That may happen, the routes in the east have opened up.”

The rebels spent some of their last Kalashnikov ammunition providing covering fire as families fled from the street, a little girl crying until she was reunited with her pet Myna bird in a cage. As they made their way out an elderly man hobbled over to the fighters to offer his thanks. Or so they thought: “You people are destroying this country, have you no shame? I am 83 years old and I have seen nothing like it, even when we were fighting the French. Basher al-Assad is a great man, he is the President”, with that Mohammed Ibadullah Seif, leaning on his stick, rejoined his family.

PS:X-posted in the Geopolitics thd. Our former For.Sec. KC Singh on being Non-Aligned in the current context.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/columnis ... on-aligned

[shyamd]

It doesn't have to be seen as a trading of accusations: one side suggesting that the rulers are naive greedy near-traitors, while the other side insists that it is a chanakian balancing act that is being unfairly maligned. On BRF, it seems necessary to remind ourselves from time to time that we are on the same side--that of India.

Here's how I see it: yes, it is a balancing act, but with the following problems:

1. Not enough evidence that there is a well-thought out pro-Indian policy in action, other than, short-term balancing of multiple interests and making money. Some instances can be pointed out (resistance to US pressures on Iran, assertions about pushbck on Saudi aggression etc.) but there is a mass of evidence that suggests that the so-called balanced policy consists of simply setting the controls on "equal-equal" and going on autopilot, with no long-term vision or plan.

2. If the ultimate goal is to play off adharmic interests against each other, even promoting specific adharmic forces (like Saudi) in the short term, with the plan to do away with the last adharmic standing (similar to how chankiya exploited the adharmic lecherous nature of his ally Parvata Raja to put an end to him) well, there is no evidence of this again. We don't see any awareness of the dharmic mission and goals, in fact we are only seeing glani or decline / rollback of dharma.

To me, these are valid concerns that need to be addressed without defensiveness.

Firstly what do you define as pro Indian policy?

2nd- of course we all want the same thing but have different was to achieve, it's obvious that for some people it's personal.

[shyamd]

They found a way to kick SS out of Harvard. Is that consistent with SS being an American tool to attack Sonia?

and by that 1 event you think that he doesn't work for the US interests? He still meets om baba.

I have said before he is a smart guy and his ideology of all Indians identifying themselves under the Indian identity is the right way to go about things. But I am just pointing out the facts.

Have you noticed that he is loudest when US- India relations are bad? Things are relatively normal now.

[shyamd]

Shyamd garu,
You are becoming too difficult for me to differentiate you and your sources. Lets just say you are becoming too native to your sources for me to distinguish.

Sir, I didn't say that was from my sources. If it was, I would have said it.

Just think about it yourself and look back at his allegations and the details he went into. He was blatantly getting info from someone who couldn't be touched.

But I have nothing personal against him and I said before his idea is what the country needs.

[Virupaksha]

Shyamd garu,
You are becoming too difficult for me to differentiate you and your sources. Lets just say you are becoming too native to your sources for me to distinguish.

Sir, I didn't say that was from my sources. If it was, I would have said it.

Just think about it yourself and look back at his allegations and the details he went into. He was blatantly getting info from someone who couldn't be touched.

But I have nothing personal against him and I said before his idea is what the country needs.

knowing all its "colorfull" history and the accidenteds, SS would have been one of the stupidest to take on the the ruling regime of India frontally and publicly without some kinds of backers. Do you think he doesnt know that all these "internet hindus" would not be even an iota of support when the regime decides to do "something" about him. He is taking a HUGE risk and he knows it too.

and my statement to you is not in respect to this particular issue alone. In this particular case however, lets just say that more than SS, I am more intrigued by your hostility towards him as this is not the first time you raised it and also because you brought it with very very scant connection to the thread itself.

Since it is OT, I will keep that intrigue to myself and will develop my own theories about it. As such this will be my last post on this issue.

[shyamd]

knowing all its "colorfull" history and the accidenteds, SS would have been one of the stupidest to take on the the ruling regime of India frontally and publicly without some kinds of backers. Do you think he doesnt know that all these "internet hindus" would not be even an iota of support when the regime decides to do "something" about him. He is taking a HUGE risk and he knows it too.

exactly - but he did it with US support. He may be brave but I dont think he is stupid. He knows that if something happened to him - people will get political mileage out of it and maybe international enquiry bla bla. Which is why more often than not his allegations went unanswered/ignored - that was the tactic INC chose.

and my statement to you is not in respect to this particular issue alone. In this particular case however, lets just say that more than SS, I am more intrigued by your hostility towards him as this is not the first time you raised it and also because you brought it with very very scant connection to the thread itself.

I have no hostility to him. I've praised his ideology in previous post where others have even disagreed with me praising his ideology! I just merely pointed out a fact that he was being used by the US. That is all.

The only thing I have said before is that his twitter replies to people are very rude and arrogant, he thinks aam aadmi are stupid. Have a look at his twitter timeline and you will see what I mean.

The scant connection is that US has been using the same tactics that KSA is supposedly using/or apparently going to use in India.

[KLNMurthy]

They found a way to kick SS out of Harvard. Is that consistent with SS being an American tool to attack Sonia?

and by that 1 event you think that he doesn't work for the US interests? He still meets om baba.

I have said before he is a smart guy and his ideology of all Indians identifying themselves under the Indian identity is the right way to go about things. But I am just pointing out the facts.

Have you noticed that he is loudest when US- India relations are bad? Things are relatively normal now.

Actually no, what I see is that SS is making headlines right now in AP.

SS's ouster from Harvard is, on the face of it, a n attack on him by the American establishment. It weakens considerably your . case that he is a tool of the US against Sonia Gandhi. You may be having inside knowledge that SS meets Obama; but going from that nugget to a CT about SS requires a lot of dot-connecting. There is another theory, maybe CT that Sonia is herself a tool of the US, so is it then necessary for the US to have an uber-tool or backup tool in the form of SS? Anything is possible, but an intelligent mind should know how to evaluate information. Right now, the best thing is to judge people by what they say and do.

[KLNMurthy]

It doesn't have to be seen as a trading of accusations: one side suggesting that the rulers are naive greedy near-traitors, while the other side insists that it is a chanakian balancing act that is being unfairly maligned. On BRF, it seems necessary to remind ourselves from time to time that we are on the same side--that of India.

Here's how I see it: yes, it is a balancing act, but with the following problems:

1. Not enough evidence that there is a well-thought out pro-Indian policy in action, other than, short-term balancing of multiple interests and making money. Some instances can be pointed out (resistance to US pressures on Iran, assertions about pushbck on Saudi aggression etc.) but there is a mass of evidence that suggests that the so-called balanced policy consists of simply setting the controls on "equal-equal" and going on autopilot, with no long-term vision or plan.

2. If the ultimate goal is to play off adharmic interests against each other, even promoting specific adharmic forces (like Saudi) in the short term, with the plan to do away with the last adharmic standing (similar to how chankiya exploited the adharmic lecherous nature of his ally Parvata Raja to put an end to him) well, there is no evidence of this again. We don't see any awareness of the dharmic mission and goals, in fact we are only seeing glani or decline / rollback of dharma.

To me, these are valid concerns that need to be addressed without defensiveness.

Firstly what do you define as pro Indian policy?

2nd- of course we all want the same thing but have different was to achieve, it's obvious that for some people it's personal.

Pro-India is a little like what some US judge said about obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." there are certain hallmarks: for example, making it the first and top priority to show our enemies that an attack on India and Indians will have severe consequences. I appreciate the complexity of maneuvering through a maze of hostile powers and ideologies, but I am not reassured about the commitment to make Indic India prevail.

As to the personal angle, personally I have found this to be a tough debating forum and it is helpful to have a thick skin.

[KLNMurthy]

Yes, it is intriguing that SS is benignly ignored by Indian rulers and I see shyamd's point that Saudi influence mongering exists along with the US counterpart. This is normal--all countries mong influence; the question is the outlook and caliber of our guys. This is where I have a problem. I think they have lost the mojo of looking out for India--even in a corrupt, mafia-like context--and are vulnerable for a takedown because they have lost the connection with India. Because of the system, when they go down India will go down with them.

From my reading, shyamd is saying not to worry, this mafia still has its native soil connection and mojo. I think his assertion needs more convincing evidence, and concerns like mine should not be pooh-poohed out of hand like shyamd sometimes does. At the same time, it is not right to simply accuse shyamd of all kinds of outlandish things simply because he has more belief in the mafia. (I hope all agree that what we have is more like a mafia than a praja rajya devoted to dharma)..

[shaardula]

i agree with the broader theme of Theo's posts. I have been following his writing here on various threads.

What we have today is really what we have. For two reasons:

#1. Our past: We are a fertile, organic society that has gone through several stages of influence, assimilation and changes for several thousands of years, both through inner direct experience of practical living with people of different ideas, and through outer acquired experience of ideas from across the world through books and internet. There is no point in denying this evolution. It is especially dangerous to discard all the evolution, and set some arbitrarily chosen reference point in our imagined utopian past as our bench mark. Every such push to return to a mythical pure state has been proven to be false factually and ineffective practically - think sundry efforts to establish societies based on purity of language, race, religion etc etc ....

#2. Our present: The pulls and pushes that we experience today, especially the ones that donot show us in good light, are a natural outcome of living in this age. There is no point in shutting ourselves to outside world. Instead of adopting the incestuous paki rho-dho tactic, we must the assume the sdre posture of openness to life and expericence, especially if we claim to be sdre.

So, what we have today is really what we have. More importantly, what we have is the best thing we have. Even otherwise, Theo is right. Today, we have a scale of hunger for material, spiritual , and ideas that none of us in has experienced in our own living past, forget ancient past. For eg., Our women have possibly never had it this good since their tribal/forest days, 2500 years ago. Anybody who has paid attention to their grandma's stories, knows that what happened in the long gone past is very difficult to know, even if the story teller is an expert historian.

Think pak, think india. What is the key differentiator? We chose to prioritize, even if we have to be sometimes lead by our ears, the experiences of the contemporary over the claims of the ancestor. We SDRE's have always done this - we were always inwards looking. For eg., most of our science is inward looking. But what is different from yesterday is that in the past, as individuals, we were less exposed to universal ideas, we relied on gurus, today everyone of us is directly experiencing the ideas and lives of people from world over. Any non-idealogical indian i meet is basically asking, Why not make the best use of it? Changes are thus happening more rapidly. The key sdre characteristics are shame, jugaad, chivalry, honour, knowledge, self-doubt and broad-mindedness on fundamentals. Armed with these and ideas of the modern mankind, we will go farther than even yagnavalkya and his ilk ever went.

It is one thing to use the vedic wisdom of letting wisdom flow from all directions as a rhetoric slogan, it is another to stick by it in practice. having lived through the current orthodoxy, i choose to slap my thighs and stand by the meta-principles of my sampradaaya, than by its particulars. even our priests, know this, for they have have modified the original mantras, to use the american geography to cite references when establishing pravaras - establishing spatio-temporal-geneological identities. These are not fly by night convenience seekers. I have watched them perform their services for years now, and, as a trained assistant to priests, am always moved by their procedures. Why are we, those who will not take up to actually serve, so stuck up?

[KLNMurthy]

^^
good post by shaardula. Plenty to think about and debate, well-expressed. I hope it can be archived, though it is OT.

On the same OT, we do need to reinvent, revitalize and reincarnate dharma from time to time, as the Lord said.

[ramana]

The flame spreads in WANA.

Nightwatch, 12 Aug 2012

Syria: The only significant news is the opposition claims to control a secure zone north of Aleppo that links to Turkey. The opposition says, however, that it needs air defense weapons, implying it is not as secure as it claims.

The opposition claim coincides with a US report that CIA is carefully controlling the weapons it dispenses through Turkey because it does not want Islamists to overthrow the al Asad government, but does not want them to lose.

Comment: Control of a secure base is part of the definition of civil war and distinguishes it from an uprising. The opposition claim is probably premature, as long as the Syrian government has an air force.

The US administration reportedly and belatedly does not want the opposition to win because it fears that the US may have abetted genocide, if the al Asad regime collapses in violence. The Syrian opposition fighters from all over the Middle East have committed so many atrocities against Syrian minorities and prisoners that international organizations have denounced the opposition.

The US wants, apparently, some kind of negotiated arrangement, but cannot control the violence it has released, encouraged and supported.

Egypt: By now most Readers know that Field Marshal Tantawi and Army Chief of Staff General Sami Enan have retired and been replaced as of 12 August. The June 2012 constitutional declaration by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, limiting presidential powers, has been rescinded, repealed or made null and void, by a resurgent President Mursi. Both military men remain as advisors to President Mursi.

Tanta WI's replacement is General Abdellatif Sisi. Enan's replacement is General Sidki Sobhi.

Comment: Western press coverage of the event ranges from the absurd to the curious. The absurd versions are that Mursi stood up and ordered them to retire, essentially firing them on his own authority.. That is clearly not consistent with reports that he consulted with the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces before taking any action.

The details of that consultation are critical to any judgments of the significance of what happened and are what makes it most curious. There are no reports about the substance of the consultation.

One thing that is certain is that the US has been viscerally opposed to an elected president of Egypt whose powers were limited by an armed forces veto. That view appears to have deterred investors and potential aid donors as well because the political power arrangement was not stable enough to encourage investment or aid.

Thus, without warning and no power, Mursi has transformed Egypt into a respectable presidential democracy, waiting for a parliament. This is almost risible and not to be taken seriously based on weekend reports. For example it is not clear whether the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces still exists. It is not clear whether Tantawi was ousted by his subordinates in the same way that he ousted his President, Mubarak. How does this affect multiple law suits against nearly everyone in public office?

On the evidence adduced to date, this looks like a face-lift for Egyptian democracy to satisfy American sensibilities and to attract investors, but without really changing the underlying power-sharing arrangement. Nothing indicates the Egyptian armed forces surrendered to Mursi their exclusive control of defense interests, internal security problems and military economic enterprises.

It is all cosmetics with no substance.

Morocco: Hundreds of protesters demonstrated against corruption, high costs of living and the jailing of activists in Morocco's main cities on 11 August. The demonstrations were called for by rights groups, trade unionists and the 20 February Movement amid public frustration at the perceived failure of the government to uphold its electoral promises.

Comment: It is premature to make judgments about political stability at this time, except that the Monarchy looks stable and progressive. Nevertheless, low level protests of this kind have been the precursors of the Arab spring.

The King has been ahead of the curve in liberalizing the political system, but such measures in other countries have only encouraged the activists, rather than satisfied them. At this point, the activists have small numbers and are weekend agitators.

The NightWatch hypothesis is that the Arab monarchies are determined to save themselves against onslaughts of democracy, but are in as much danger as the civilian governments.

Saudi Arabia's interest in Syria, thus, is clearly anti-democracy as well as anti-Iran, as is Qatar's. Over the weekend several Imams issued fatwas that democracy is not consistent with Islam. This is a long standing view of all conservative Muslim clerics, by the way, but it will not save the Arab monarchies.

Morocco is in danger of becoming the next victim of the so-called Arab spring. Morocco poses significant challenges to the Arab monarchs because of the geographic distances involved in lending aid to the King and the vast cultural differences between Moroccans and, say, Saudi Arabians.

The Kingdom is not in danger at this time, however. The process of undermining a monarchy is just beginning.

[Surya]

Virupaksha wrote:
Shyamd garu,
You are becoming too difficult for me to differentiate you and your sources.

aha one more has awakened

[shyamd]

FSA says it shoots down Mig 23 jet. Syrian news agency says downed due to technical failure.

11th August

The coming weeks will be more interesting as you will see helicopters and airplanes fall out the sky.

7th August

Big escalation next week. SAMs will now be deployed as of next week. More later.

[Austin]

Israel contemplates prospects of a war against Iran

Lebanon and the Gaza Strip would be a serious danger to Israel in case of a war against Iran, former director of the Mossad secret intelligence service Danny Yatom said in his interview with the Israeli radio.

He said that Israel’s biggest concern was caused by thousands of missiles that the Shiite Hezbollah movement and Palestinian Hamas store in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

We would have to destroy part of Lebanon and Gaza to protect Israeli people from missile attacks, Yatom concluded.

Israel has repeatedly declared that it will deliver a blow on Iran if the latter makes an atom bomb.

[shyamd]

He has been personally calling up journalists that talk positively about Israel striking Iran apparently. One journalist was invited to the PMO.

[abhishek_sharma]

A few months ago, there was significant takleef when some people questioned the loyalty of Salman Khan and Shahrukh Khan. But now it is okay to suggest that S. Swamy works for US interests? I like this asymmetry.

[brihaspati]

shaardula wrote

#1. Our past: We are a fertile, organic society that has gone through several stages of influence, assimilation and changes for several thousands of years, both through inner direct experience of practical living with people of different ideas, and through outer acquired experience of ideas from across the world through books and internet. There is no point in denying this evolution. It is especially dangerous to discard all the evolution, and set some arbitrarily chosen reference point in our imagined utopian past as our bench mark. Every such push to return to a mythical pure state has been proven to be false factually and ineffective practically - think sundry efforts to establish societies based on purity of language, race, religion etc etc ....

#2. Our present: The pulls and pushes that we experience today, especially the ones that donot show us in good light, are a natural outcome of living in this age. There is no point in shutting ourselves to outside world. Instead of adopting the incestuous paki rho-dho tactic, we must the assume the sdre posture of openness to life and expericence, especially if we claim to be sdre.

So, what we have today is really what we have. More importantly, what we have is the best thing we have. Even otherwise, Theo is right. Today, we have a scale of hunger for material, spiritual , and ideas that none of us in has experienced in our own living past, forget ancient past. For eg., Our women have possibly never had it this good since their tribal/forest days, 2500 years ago. Anybody who has paid attention to their grandma's stories, knows that what happened in the long gone past is very difficult to know, even if the story teller is an expert historian.

Think pak, think india. What is the key differentiator? We chose to prioritize, even if we have to be sometimes lead by our ears, the experiences of the contemporary over the claims of the ancestor. We SDRE's have always done this - we were always inwards looking. For eg., most of our science is inward looking. But what is different from yesterday is that in the past, as individuals, we were less exposed to universal ideas, we relied on gurus, today everyone of us is directly experiencing the ideas and lives of people from world over. Any non-idealogical indian i meet is basically asking, Why not make the best use of it? Changes are thus happening more rapidly. The key sdre characteristics are shame, jugaad, chivalry, honour, knowledge, self-doubt and broad-mindedness on fundamentals. Armed with these and ideas of the modern mankind, we will go farther than even yagnavalkya and his ilk ever went.

I am not sure that you realize the inner contradiction in what you are saying.

(1) When you are talking of a past - that you yourself are not so sure of as in grandmother's tales - how can you claim that this "openness" was or was not there in the past? how can you be so sure that the past relied more on gurus? That same past that is unreliable, mythic and reconstructed?

(2) How can you be sure that what you are being exposed to now, or what seems to have been a natural evolution - was inevitable or desirable? how does that evolution necessarily enrich you? To decide you need to have a fixed set of values that can compare both the past as well as the present. Thus to eulogize this social/political evolution as it is represented - you have to stand on the crutch of a fixed scale of values - something that does not change with time. Does it not inherently contradict the theory of complete "openness" to all possible changes? At least your values are not changing then! Can you use values that remain constant over mythic/reconstructed periods and evolutionarily "progressive" periods?

This is the west Asia thread: consider west Asian issues for example. How would you judge between the pre Morsi and post Morsi period in Egypt? On what basis? Obviously the concepts that will come up most commonly - are things like "democracy", constitutional legislativism. But then how do you fix these things alone as "desirable"? On what basis? Digging starts - and you will come up with ideas like fairness, equal rights, right to decide structure of power relations within the state, etc. Why are they "desirable" and the "best"? Even more damagingly, as you are forced to peel off layer by layer such justifications - you may not realize that you are setting up a hierarchy of values - in which one previous layer justifies the next.

Three problems arise :

(1) are your ideas of such layered values the same as the people who are resorting to them in actual Egyptian scene?
(2) are you sure that first layer of values that appeared as "desirable" and supposedly justified on the second layer mentioned above, are really justifiable as such? Is Egyptian or Morsiian democracy really represnetative or follows through from the more fundamental principles of "fairness" and "equal rights"? Are these values after all justified in Egyptian society at present? Did dEgyptian societal "evolution" from the days of the Pharaohs or Greek and Roman invaders proceed along these ideas of fairness and equality of rights etc?
(3) did evolution in Egypt actually prevent "evolution" or promoted "change"? Or can openness without discrimination as tow hat you are opening to lead to counter-evolution?

These are not so simplistic questions as to be determined simply by opening-up or evolutionary processes. There is this pseudo-Darwinian metaphoric thinking that assigns a "higher value" to whatever comes through circumstantial adapatation for reproductive survival - not just in human sense, but also in terms of agents in a system. Note that extreme success at adaptation can actually lead to annihilation. When you discard most of what you carry by inheritance as no longer useful, you could be losing the very skill needed to survive in situations that the very force of competitive evolution is inducing around you.

We cannot forget the lessons of the past - especially in situations like where we have to deal with violently repressive and erasing imperialistic ideologies. We will be wiped off. That is the lesson that we should take from ME. Not every Indian opened up and adapted to the ME violent memes - otherwise we would not be talking here.

[devesh]

#1. Our past: We are a fertile, organic society that has gone through several stages of influence, assimilation and changes for several thousands of years, both through inner direct experience of practical living with people of different ideas, and through outer acquired experience of ideas from across the world through books and internet. There is no point in denying this evolution. It is especially dangerous to discard all the evolution, and set some arbitrarily chosen reference point in our imagined utopian past as our bench mark. Every such push to return to a mythical pure state has been proven to be false factually and ineffective practically - think sundry efforts to establish societies based on purity of language, race, religion etc etc ....

#2. Our present: The pulls and pushes that we experience today, especially the ones that donot show us in good light, are a natural outcome of living in this age. There is no point in shutting ourselves to outside world. Instead of adopting the incestuous paki rho-dho tactic, we must the assume the sdre posture of openness to life and expericence, especially if we claim to be sdre.

So, what we have today is really what we have. More importantly, what we have is the best thing we have. Even otherwise, Theo is right. Today, we have a scale of hunger for material, spiritual , and ideas that none of us in has experienced in our own living past, forget ancient past. For eg., Our women have possibly never had it this good since their tribal/forest days, 2500 years ago. Anybody who has paid attention to their grandma's stories, knows that what happened in the long gone past is very difficult to know, even if the story teller is an expert historian.

who is "discarding" evolution here? the current position of India is a natural consequence of the way that the past shaped up into the present. there is no denying it. no one can and should deny history. those who try to deny history, usually belong in the camp of our Indian psec historians. denial of history is a major pass-time of theirs. I think your pontificating on "denying history/evolution" would serve a far better purpose if directed against them.

why are you talking about a mythical pure state? Have I mentioned such a thing? Theo_Fidel brought up that imaginary ghost. I am not concerned about the past here. forget the past. I am speaking of the present. I am saying that the present is not as dreamy as some people are making it out to be. there are too many centrifugal forces that are being allowed to germinate from seeds to saplings to vast trees. it is this that I am concerned with.

[RamaY]

Is (social) evolution really progressive, especially the variety that influenced Bharat? Does it mean the religious colonizations, holocausts, genocides too are part of this evolution?

Lets take this to OT thread.

[devesh]

Is (social) evolution really progressive, especially the variety that influenced Bharat? Does it mean the religious colonizations, holocausts, genocides too are part of this evolution?

Lets take this to OT thread.

yes, good question. the "progressives" always get stumped here. They fail to understand that it is not evolution that is "wrong" here, but their version of evolution. they make the cardinal mistake of assuming modern Nehruvian-defined secularism to be the "prime" principle/value. this means that the violent repression under foreign ideologies is simply ignored or turned a blind eye to. this keeps them from facing up the failure of their flawed understanding by which they choose to judge and measure history.

take away the Gomorrah of Secularism, then they will start actually arriving on a set of principles from which to judge evolution.

[johneeG]

Before we discard or accept evolution, we should be clear about what is evolution theory?

Wiki on Evolution:

Evolution is any change across successive generations in the inherited characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.

Wiki on Natural Selection:

Variation exists within all populations of organisms. This occurs partly because random mutations cause changes in the genome of an individual organism, and these mutations can be passed to offspring. Throughout the individuals’ lives, their genomes interact with their environments to cause variations in traits. (The environment of a genome includes the molecular biology in the cell, other cells, other individuals, populations, species, as well as the abiotic environment.) Individuals with certain variants of the trait may survive and reproduce more than individuals with other variants. Therefore the population evolves. Factors that affect reproductive success are also important, an issue that Charles Darwin developed in his ideas on sexual selection, for example.

Simply put: Evolution is a biological process which allows the people to adapt to the their respective habitats by developing certain traits. These traits need not be better(morally, socially, financially, politically or otherwise). The only thing these traits guarantee is survival. Survival of the fittest, not best...

Example: If 50 human beings are marooned on an Island and have nothing to eat. Then, some of the people may turn into cannibals and survive, while others may simply perish. But, does that mean cannibalism is better? Nope.

So, evolution does not mean a future is better than past or the latest is better than the previous. Evolution simply means that the people(ideologies, products,..etc) will change to adapt and survive. To survive, they may develop very lethal and dangerous traits. To survive, they may develop perverted and base qualities. To survive, they may develop deception and ruthlessness. So on...

Anyway, those who blindly apply the 'evolution' logic to social developments(like religion, arts, ideologies...etc) would have to agree that Ram Gopal Verma ki Aag is better than Sholay.

[devesh]

johneeG saar: I think "evolution", in this case, meant the non-stationary aspect of social and cultural dynamics of a society. not necessarily biological, or perhaps, not only biological.

[johneeG]

johneeG saar: I think "evolution", in this case, meant the non-stationary aspect of social and cultural dynamics of a society. not necessarily biological, or perhaps, not only biological.

Yes, I understood that and I was countering exactly that point.

I was making two points:
a) According to the modern science, evolution is a biological process...not a political, social, financial or ideological process. We should be clear on this.

b) According to the natural selection theory, evolution is simply a process by which a specie adjusts to its habitat by suitably adapting(i.e. by developing traits that allow it to survive in that habitat). There is absolutely no guarantee that the evolution will be progressive or regressive(by any yardstick). The only point is that the evolution will allow the survival by suitably changes in the biology.

Most people sub-consciously make 2 wrong assumptions:
a) People think 'Evolution' theory applies to all systems(social, political, ideological, artistic, financial, ...etc). But, modern science does not suggest any such thing.

b) People think 'Evolution' equals progress(or advancement or development). Perhaps, they sub-consciously think that the technological advancement is a natural process of evolution. So, they go on to assume that 'evolution' applies to all other systems as well. As I already mentioned, Modern Science(to my limited knowledge) does not talk about social, technological, political or financial evolution. It talks only and only about biological evolution. But more importantly, 'evolution' does not even equal progress or advancement. It simply means developing qualities that allow a specie to survive. So, if we apply the 'evolution' theory to social situations, then it must mean that people and ideologies will develop those traits that allow it to survive. The changes that are necessary for survival are not necessarily 'higher' or 'better'. In fact, very dangerous, perverse, evil and ruthless traits may also be developed for the survival.

For example, Hindus have gone through several years of foreign subjugation. To survive, Hindus developed certain traits. One such trait is to appease the aggressor by praising their religion. That means, Hindus would praise Christ, but condemn missionary activities of church. Hindus would claim that church was going against the lofty teachings of Christ. Because directly criticizing Christianity would entail problems. So, this method was adopted. Similarly, Hindus would say that Mohammad invented a beautiful religion which is highjacked by some blood-thirsty scoundrels. Directly criticizing Islam was risky, so this method was used. Even today, when conversions are rampant, Hindus try and use the logic that one must respect all religions and no religion should trespass into other's areas. All religions must respect each other. This logic is used to condemn conversion without having to condemn the religion which is converting. Again, a survival tactic. Because directly criticizing those religions may invite trouble. So, Hindus found a way to criticize conversion without criticizing the religions that inspire conversions. All this is evolution...or more specifically adaptation for survival.

Survival of the fittest, not the best...

'Fittest' could mean anything... It could mean:
a) Most intelligent, b) Most ruthless, c) Most deceptive, d) Fastest, e) Richest, f) Largest, g) Most perverted, h) Most beautiful, i) Tallest, j) Healthiest, k) Fairest, l) Darkest, m) Most pliable, n) Most gullible, o) Stupidest, p) Most powerful, q) Poorest, r) Weakest, s) Youngest, t) Oldest, ....etc.

In short, 'Fittest' can mean anything(positive or negative). This theory does not guarantee any constant progress. It only guarantees suitable changes to adapt.