Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958
India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir - Page 4
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 61 to 77 of 77

Thread: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

  1. #61

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    By "strong Indo-Aryan Leader" you mean the guy with an Arabic and Mongol name? Kind of symptomatic for the predicament of Pakistan as a whole. At least the "provincial yokel" is not a wannabe Arab. And he somehow managed to become PM of India, despite not being a member of the Gandhi clan. But maybe you have a separate definition of "provincial yokel".
    Naturally this is the core of a pathology. Islam has been in South Asia for over 1000 years. That's a timeline contemporaneous with Christianity in many parts of Europe. It isn't foreign which seems to be the line you take when with the "wannabe Arab" comment.

    Modi runs a Hindoo analogue of the Muslim Brotherhood and was quite clearly implicated in anti-Muslim pogroms. Yokel.

    His political pedigree is at the core of just about every period of regular communal violence meted out not just against Muslims but also Christians and Sikhs in modern India. The equal of anything in Pakistan.

    PM Khan is superior to him in every capacity.

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    Yes, I'm sure "countless whingers" in the rest of the world were simply thrilled at the prospect of a nuclear war. Name one person in this thread who disapproved of Khan's move.
    They agreed through gritted teeth. Really pains them....
    Last edited by The Gurkhan; March 01, 2019 at 07:40 PM.

  2. #62
    Diocle's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    More or less, where Desaix has fallen.
    Posts
    12,297

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    I hope I won't live so much to see World War 3, but if WW3 is written in mankind fate, I think it will began there, in the North of Indian sub-continent, of course China and Russia will be on the stage of this last obscene play as main characters, soon followed by the others bigs of the scene: USA and their European ancillaries ..
    .. India and Pakistan will play the same role usually played by "Harlequin" and "Pulcinella" in the Italian "Commedia dell'arte", sadly I doubt they will ever have the time to fully realize the concept.

  3. #63

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post

    Did not mean to knock India in a personal way. But still India does not seem to bringing coherence to air force acquisitions and dragging its feet as well. I would think a bulk purchase Gripen would be an easy and significant upgrade over mirage 2000s and old migs. Given Saab has a electronic warfare version and carrier version in the works, India could seriously streamline its air force and not be using such an odd mix of everyone else's kit. But at the same time the nuclear situation sort of precludes a major war with either China or Pakistan unless somebody really blunders. After that I can't see Pakistan or China having the ability to invade and compel India much so I can imagine that havinge the best shiny new stuff for the air force in large quantities might not be a budget priority. Even the US military gets a bit queasy at the cost of training. For a bulk upgrade of the IAF would no doubt involve a lot of man hours.
    In India, unfortunately for our hard-working armed forces, defence purchases are almost never simply about increasing army/airforce/navy efficiency and capability. A hefty dose of geo-political advantages are the real target. Sweden can't do much for Indian International positions, so the government won't even seriously consider the Grippen, no matter how good it is, or no matter how well it fits the requirements. Saab would have to make some really big concessions on pricing and tech-transfer to be able to compete. The default positions are Russia, the EU(essentially France), the UK, and the US. All these are UNSC members capable of voting on behalf of India to block Chinese moves against India, and having billions of dollars of deals which take years to complete gives India some leverage over their decisions, plus an entry into their industry lobbies etc. Most of the equipment which we "have" to buy, just to keep our brave guys in uniform at least minimally capable of fending off our enemies credibly, we get from Israel and Russia, mainly because they are the best value for our buck and extremely modifiable and combinable with other systems. Other "western" advanced war systems also come with a huge number of qualifications and conditions, and are the result of many diverse companies working together, each of which might be susceptible to be pressurised (through sanctions, lobbying, bribery etc.) into with-holding spares or upgrades. No such problem exists with Russian or Israeli firms which are highly dependent on their own governments and thus unlikely to stop services unless specifically told by their leaders. And both these countries also take a less than obedient view of international law, so in a pinch, India can still wrangle out their help. Thus paradoxically, India usually buys advanced systems from Russia and Israel, but is happy to buy smaller low tech stuff from the US and the EU (like assault rifles, towed artillery etc.). The current shift towards US and EU advanced systems has a lot to do with the emerging Russia-China bonhomie. This unfortunately leaves our armed forces having to utilise what they have to the best of their capabilities, which they have done for our seven decades of existence as a free Nation exceptionally well. The gaps are filled with the blood of our soldiers, which is why it is easy to understand the rage this debate causes in India, which tragically leads to more debate and less stuff for our armed forces. One of the perils of democracy, I guess. Pakistan and China both don't face this issue, because they form a bloc in the UN to scratch each other's backs, and well, they're not democracies (or haven't been one consistently).

  4. #64

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by The Gurkhan View Post

    They agreed through gritted teeth. Really pains them....
    Uh...no we didn't. Most Indians (who by the way, aren't screaming and shouting on our ed up TV networks; seriously Fox news has nothing on our guys!) are quite glad to see a Pakistani PM behaving rationally. We only wish this rationality had dawned in his head a little earlier, maybe before his country organised a terror attack on our soldiers. To put it another way, when i was a kid, Imran Khan was my favourite fast bowler; able to win for his team matches that were almost lost; but as a PM he is sadly sitting in the wings, with the innings being screwed up by the Pak army and Intelligence services, while the stands are filled with cheering, hate-filled jihadis.
    Last edited by anant; March 02, 2019 at 03:07 AM.

  5. #65
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by Yayattasa View Post
    I'm not implying the British are completely responsible for this and I have no idea where you got this from. Denying British colonialism has anything to do with, though, is na´ve. They aren't completely responsible, but of course it has something to do with it.
    I can't see they contributed to Islamic/Hindu discord beyond manipulating them whilst in power as a divide and rule tactic. British control was so complete that it eradicated older forms of rule (the Pirnces were ciphers in the independence movement beyond mucking up bits of the partition. An independent India could hardly exist without reference to British forms as there was no other power to negotiate with or resist. The British created the Republic of India and Pakistan to the extent they were only possible after British rule, but their hostility inheres in other aspects of their being such as religious bigotry, something that has a long history in South Asia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yayattasa View Post
    Pakistan is one of the countries that bled most and fought most for the American self-defeating War on Terror. And for what?
    I guess to deflect attention away from the Saudi-led, Saudi-planned, Saudi-paid Saudi terrorists who attacked the US in 2001.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  6. #66

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by The Gurkhan View Post
    Naturally this is the core of a pathology. Islam has been in South Asia for over 1000 years. That's a timeline contemporaneous with Christianity in many parts of Europe. It isn't foreign which seems to be the line you take when with the "wannabe Arab" comment.
    And Christianity isn't a native religion for Europe, just like Islam is a foreign religion to anywhere which isn't Arabia.
    So they take of Pakistanis always being "wannabes" because of Islam isn't wrong. Not to mention that even if belief in Islam was native to that land, it is quite funny how Pakistan's is dominated by China, government of which doesn't really shy away from using its pimp hand on its own Islamic fundamentalists within China. Which is why Pakistani government is pathetic no matter what take you'd chose.

  7. #67

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    And Christianity isn't a native religion for Europe, just like Islam is a foreign religion to anywhere which isn't Arabia.
    So they take of Pakistanis always being "wannabes" because of Islam isn't wrong. Not to mention that even if belief in Islam was native to that land, it is quite funny how Pakistan's is dominated by China, government of which doesn't really shy away from using its pimp hand on its own Islamic fundamentalists within China. Which is why Pakistani government is pathetic no matter what take you'd chose.
    This is good of you to say as it shows a genuine consistency to your beliefs. Which is often lacking when people complain about Islam being supposedly foreign often in an Indo-Iranian context. At least your pagan larping is sincere.


  8. #68
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by The Gurkhan View Post
    This is good of you to say as it shows a genuine consistency to your beliefs. Which is often lacking when people complain about Islam being supposedly foreign often in an Indo-Iranian context. At least your pagan larping is sincere...
    I dunno, the Prose Edda revels the Aesir to be illegal immigrants from Asia Minor, well known for sexual misconduct and violence. Kvenland for the Vanir!
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  9. #69

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by The Gurkhan View Post
    This is good of you to say as it shows a genuine consistency to your beliefs. Which is often lacking when people complain about Islam being supposedly foreign often in an Indo-Iranian context. At least your pagan larping is sincere.
    The term "larping" applies to adherents of Abrahamic cults to a much bigger extent then to those that prefer native spirituality or simple agnosticism.

  10. #70
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    If Trump's not busy in Korea, maybe he can fix Kashmir?

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    The term "larping" applies to adherents of Abrahamic cults to a much bigger extent then to those that prefer native spirituality or simple agnosticism.
    Don't bring me into this, us agnostics are strictly table top (mostly DMs), not LARPers.

    The Abrahamic faiths through their virile success have preserved many truly ancient traditions (Islam preserves worship of the Black Stone, Christianity preserves Yule and Cohanim DNA is a witness to virile endurance), unlike the weak pagans who were so easily forced into docile submission because of their lack of courage and virtue. Thor and Wotan and their worshippers have proved as spineless as say a terrorist who shoots children. I'm pretty sure their entire religious inheritance was lost: modern pagans like modern witches play make believe with an imaginary past.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  11. #71

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    on't bring me into this, us agnostics are strictly table top (mostly DMs), not LARPers.

    The Abrahamic faiths through their virile success have preserved many truly ancient traditions (Islam preserves worship of the Black Stone, Christianity preserves Yule and Cohanim DNA is a witness to virile endurance), unlike the weak pagans who were so easily forced into docile submission because of their lack of courage and virtue. Thor and Wotan and their worshippers have proved as spineless as say a terrorist who shoots children. I'm pretty sure their entire religious inheritance was lost: modern pagans like modern witches play make believe with an imaginary past.
    This sounds like an immature attack, rather an actual argument.
    The few things that made Abrahamic cults successful were... "pagan" elements within them. Without those, we'd just have same psychotic ramblings of tribal pedophile "prophets" like Muhammad or Abraham(who knows, maybe Jesus "liked" kids too), which had little value, just like those "prophets" themselves were. These "prophets" would have more in common with other primitive cult leaders Jim Jones or Shoko Asahara then with some truly enlightened individuals from Greco-Roman era.
    Clearly, modern polytheists do not need make belief - there is variety of works available, both written in that era or modern works based on analysis of former and archaeological finds. In that way, modern polytheism has more in common with its ancient version then modern Christianity or Islam with their older versions even from more recent times, let alone from the time of their inception

  12. #72
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    This sounds like an immature attack, rather an actual argument.
    Your argument is sloppy and collapses under is own weakness: no attack is needed. Agnosticism has nothing to do with weak faux paganism. Did you try and prop up pagan weakness with the sturdy prop of clear and honest thought? More evidence of its weakness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    The few things that made Abrahamic cults successful were... "pagan" elements within them. Without those, we'd just have same psychotic ramblings of tribal pedophile "prophets" like Muhammad or Abraham(who knows, maybe Jesus "liked" kids too), which had little value, just like those "prophets" themselves were. These "prophets" would have more in common with other primitive cult leaders Jim Jones or Shoko Asahara then with some truly enlightened individuals from Greco-Roman era.
    "Truly enlightened individuals from the Graeco Roman era"? Like Plato and Socrates? Pederasts both.

    I raised the so called pagan elements within the Abrahamic faiths ironically.: they have taken the little that was worthy in paganism and made it strong and pure. the rest was washed away like mud.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Clearly, modern polytheists do not need make belief - there is variety of works available, both written in that era or modern works based on analysis of former and archaeological finds. In that way, modern polytheism has more in common with its ancient version then modern Christianity or Islam with their older versions even from more recent times, let alone from the time of their inception
    Bold claims, but classical paganism was mere folk belief, or phony cult activity sustaining the political order. Do you think anyone in ancient Rome believed their Emperor was a God?

    As for the Northern cults, they were struck dumb by the splendour of Christianity, and the few dregs of their benighted religion hat survive were transcribed by monks and other educated Christians, who saw fit to preserve the swirling tatters of superstition their forebears had used to cloak their utter ignorance of the world and their own souls in. It was a gesture of mature kindness and intellectual honesty quite beyond the atavistic cult leaders and cynical politicians who manipulated and remade their sham faiths to the needs of the moment.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  13. #73

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Your argument is sloppy and collapses under is own weakness: no attack is needed. Agnosticism has nothing to do with weak faux paganism. Did you try and prop up pagan weakness with the sturdy prop of clear and honest thought? More evidence of its weakness.
    What pagan "weakness"? I don't think your post makes much sense...
    "Truly enlightened individuals from the Graeco Roman era"? Like Plato and Socrates? Pederasts both.

    I raised the so called pagan elements within the Abrahamic faiths ironically.: they have taken the little that was worthy in paganism and made it strong and pure. the rest was washed away like mud.
    It was asctually other way around - paganism added redeeming qualities, to otherwise intellectually worthless ramblings of psychotic savages such as Muhammad or Abraham, who were nothing more then animals compared to their "pagan" counter-parts. I mean what would Christianity be without Greek philosophy, and what would Islam be (not the dumb Wahabi version, but Sufi) without Zoroastrianism and other "pagan" teachings?
    Bold claims, but classical paganism was mere folk belief, or phony cult activity sustaining the political order. Do you think anyone in ancient Rome believed their Emperor was a God?

    As for the Northern cults, they were struck dumb by the splendour of Christianity, and the few dregs of their benighted religion hat survive were transcribed by monks and other educated Christians, who saw fit to preserve the swirling tatters of superstition their forebears had used to cloak their utter ignorance of the world and their own souls in. It was a gesture of mature kindness and intellectual honesty quite beyond the atavistic cult leaders and cynical politicians who manipulated and remade their sham faiths to the needs of the moment.
    They weren't really struck dumb, in fact, most accepted Christianity merely for show (to be recognized by other European rulers, that's pretty much it), places like Iceland still practice same beliefs their ancestors practices centuries before. Seems your attempts at trolling show lack of factual knowledge. Sad!

  14. #74
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    What pagan "weakness"? I don't think your post makes much sense...
    Exposure to education in the glorious Abrahamic tradition will equip you to understand . Allow me to play Devils' Advocate (a Christian office) to test the strength of your proposition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    It was asctually other way around - paganism added redeeming qualities, to otherwise intellectually worthless ramblings of psychotic savages such as Muhammad or Abraham, who were nothing more then animals compared to their "pagan" counter-parts. I mean what would Christianity be without Greek philosophy, and what would Islam be (not the dumb Wahabi version, but Sufi) without Zoroastrianism and other "pagan" teachings?
    What would we be without the humble mud we stand on? Our ancestors struggled in blind ignorance before the daylight came, that does not make day inferior to night. The best paganism is but a pedestal for Abrahams word to be elevated upon. When we aim at the target and miss on our first throw, when we attempt a picture and make a mess the first few times, these blunders are not superior to our masterpieces.

    As children we approached the divine through clumsy metaphors like penis-hammers and paedophile thunder kings, or developed philosophies that enshrined silly oligarchic wet dreams. As men we approach the divine with clarity and humility.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    They weren't really struck dumb, in fact, most accepted Christianity merely for show (to be recognized by other European rulers, that's pretty much it),
    In fact Abraham's heirs kept their faith through political failure, persecution, exodus and exile until their tribes were restored. Abraham's God, through the ministry of slaves and women, conquered the mind and soul of Rome at its absolute peak through blood shed, not by victims, but by witnesses. The more glorious paganism of Hellas knew its master, and their wisdom led them to the altar of Christ. The son of Aminah took his vision of the One God and carried it across three continents: the virility of this faith cannot be doubted, and it came to embrace the subtlety of both eastern and western philosophy as well. I agree Wahabism is an unworthy bastard of this great tradition, to be ranked with thieving vikings and other weak pagan bandit traditions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    places like Iceland still practice same beliefs their ancestors practices centuries before. Seems your attempts at trolling show lack of factual knowledge. Sad!
    Glorious Iceland? Staging post for the failed invasion of Vinland and the failed colonisation of Greenland? Mighty indeed this pagan realm. It does no stand beside Rome, Mekkah or Jerusalem.

    Sadly the paganism of Iceland is not the paganism of Athens: this last lost refuge of inbreeding, poverty and darkness is a fitting hole for the childish rags of lost belief to go to die. Poor soil, poor health, poor diet and impoverished intellects. Elsewhere Norse could not wait to throw off their silly superstitions, and changed their language and culture too where they could manage it: they preferred to become Slav, or Irish, or French, or Italian than remain sons of Odin. Who could blame them?

    Thunder in the sky? Must be a big dude! My dog has concluded as much and cowers under the table in fear fit for a pagan.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  15. #75

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    Sounds more like low-energy attempt at trolling or religious fanaticism rant, I don't really see why should anyone with at least basic knowledge of history think that "pagan" ideas that laid foundation of Western civilization are inferior to ideas of such "enlightened" people like Westbro Baptist Church or wahhabis. I'm sure that you yourself would prefer to live among decadent pagan Romans , rather then within some "enlightened" barbarian tribe following Arbaham, Muhammad, Jim Jones or some other unwashed psychotic "prophet".

  16. #76
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    A long way OT apologies to OP. Things seem to have cooled wonderfully in Kashmir, and hopefully non of our posters are in harm's way there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Sounds more like low-energy attempt at trolling or religious fanaticism rant, I don't really see why should anyone with at least basic knowledge of history think that "pagan" ideas that laid foundation of Western civilization are inferior to ideas of such "enlightened" people like Westbro Baptist Church or wahhabis. I'm sure that you yourself would prefer to live among decadent pagan Romans , rather then within some "enlightened" barbarian tribe following Arbaham, Muhammad, Jim Jones or some other unwashed psychotic "prophet".
    ...but...but..Heathen, if I lived among decadent Pagan Romans how would I communicate with you? Pagan societies failed to generate sufficient wattage to power the internet.

    [/mudpit mode] Seriously though, don't combine my position as an agnostic with your position as a pagan as we are very far apart.

    I respect genuine faith and if you are a sincere pagan I respect that, with the same reservations I'd apply to a Christian etc. There is more meat for (for example) a devotee of Odin to base formal religious observance on than a Wiccan, whose practice is an invention of the 20th century at the every oldest. Do you observe rites to Odin?

    On the terminology, Pagan is a Christian term for "not us" rather like Gentile: using it (I would think) automatically subordinates the user to the Christian paradigm (like "witch" does). Loosely associating stuff like the Thor fertility cult, the divine and heroic figures of Germanic epic poetry and so on with all other "pagan=non Christian" ideologies (ranging from Hellenic polytheism, Hellenistic mystery cults, classic philosophy schools etc) is at best a weak equivalence to my eyes. Socrates does nothing to enhance the status of Odin, and Thor is a long way from agnosticism.

    In the interests of full disclosure, as an agnostic with vague Epicurean leanings (too ignorant to know how vague) I strongly suspect we all LARP our way through life, supervised by an invisible DM whose dice can barely be heard rattling against the screen of our unknowing.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  17. #77
    Heinz Guderian's Avatar *takes off trousers
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    16,498

    Default Re: India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

    I met alot of unhappy Indians in the Gulf during and after the conflict. Most neutrals over there (by neutrals i mean me, my aussie mates, two americans, a japanese girl, an argentinian gay, and an old french lady) think the Pakistanis won. The Paks seemed to provide statements backed with evidence whilst the Indis seemed like they were making stuff up most of the time.




Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •