Comments on: Obama on Pakistan: Focus on Civil Society and Military http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/ All that flavorful brownness in one savory packet Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:11:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: madam begum http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238984 madam begum Mon, 11 May 2009 04:05:59 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238984 <blockquote>Ancient Persians....</blockquote> <p>Bahais and Zorarastrians of Iran are very disappointed by what happened to their country and its pre-Islamic cultures. Well, to be fair, sunni muslims are not too happy there either.</p> <p>However, Orthodox Christianity in Kerala is very old. Even older than many of the later sects of "Hinduism" that sprouted up. I don't think there were ever any issues between Orthodox Mallu Christians and Hindus though, were there?</p> Ancient Persians….

Bahais and Zorarastrians of Iran are very disappointed by what happened to their country and its pre-Islamic cultures. Well, to be fair, sunni muslims are not too happy there either.

However, Orthodox Christianity in Kerala is very old. Even older than many of the later sects of “Hinduism” that sprouted up. I don’t think there were ever any issues between Orthodox Mallu Christians and Hindus though, were there?

]]>
By: zee http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238983 zee Mon, 11 May 2009 04:05:56 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238983 <p>Kabir, I am glad for that! I bet you will also agree that for a better future of our countries, we can only acknowledge the past and move on. But, the past should not be allowed to be a tool for politicians (VHP/BJP) and establishments (like ISI). I will be glad if more money from US would be spent on non-religious studies in Pakistani madrasas, like in many of the Indian madrasas. After all, empty mind is a devil's workshop; and that is what is happening in many cases, where religion is filling the void (instead of science, art, music, technology). Nothing can achieved if we keep staring in our rear view mirror and try to think only wrt our religions. Religions are part of our ancient heritage and thought process of our ancestors, but hey, science is our future. That is what should be taught be in school. Also, religion doesn't quite alleviate poverty.</p> Kabir, I am glad for that! I bet you will also agree that for a better future of our countries, we can only acknowledge the past and move on. But, the past should not be allowed to be a tool for politicians (VHP/BJP) and establishments (like ISI). I will be glad if more money from US would be spent on non-religious studies in Pakistani madrasas, like in many of the Indian madrasas. After all, empty mind is a devil’s workshop; and that is what is happening in many cases, where religion is filling the void (instead of science, art, music, technology). Nothing can achieved if we keep staring in our rear view mirror and try to think only wrt our religions. Religions are part of our ancient heritage and thought process of our ancestors, but hey, science is our future. That is what should be taught be in school. Also, religion doesn’t quite alleviate poverty.

]]>
By: garv http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238982 garv Mon, 11 May 2009 04:00:23 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238982 <blockquote>Typical secular doublespeak.Those were just wars between Indian kings.</blockquote> <p>no, no! i am agreeing with you. i am just saying that i am going to break down some temples and steal the idols. FOR LOVE!</p> Typical secular doublespeak.Those were just wars between Indian kings.

no, no! i am agreeing with you. i am just saying that i am going to break down some temples and steal the idols. FOR LOVE!

]]>
By: Kabir http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238980 Kabir Mon, 11 May 2009 03:42:38 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238980 <p>Zee @ 107, I totally agree with you. Btw, I never said above that the Mumbai terrorist weren't Pakistani, I just meant that they don't represent an entire nation of 170 million people, just as the VHP doesn't represent all 1 billion Indians. They (the 11/26 terrorists) were a group funded and trained by certain sections of Pakistani society (the ISI), but I don't think it's fair to say they represent an entire population.</p> Zee @ 107, I totally agree with you. Btw, I never said above that the Mumbai terrorist weren’t Pakistani, I just meant that they don’t represent an entire nation of 170 million people, just as the VHP doesn’t represent all 1 billion Indians. They (the 11/26 terrorists) were a group funded and trained by certain sections of Pakistani society (the ISI), but I don’t think it’s fair to say they represent an entire population.

]]>
By: garv http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238978 garv Mon, 11 May 2009 03:34:50 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238978 <blockquote>& it might be all the rage to bash the Pak govt on cutting a deal with the Taliban, but what heck was the Obama Adminstration thinking when it stated aloud that Talks with Taliban moderates were 'worth exploring'.</blockquote> <p>exactly. it is stunning that there isn't enough critical examination of this in the us media. or if obama's statement is looked at, it is seen as a pragmatic choice given the overextended american troops.</p> <blockquote>It almost makes one wish for a new republican president in 2013. </blockquote> <p>he is going by petraeus' advice - this is exactly the strategy, paying off sunni tribal leaders and supplying them with weapons provided they fought "terrorists" is one of his leading counterinsurgency strategies. so it would be naive to think that a different president would do anything different. karzai was a bad choice for pm given how corrupt he has been - but what's the alternative. nation building is neither cheap nor of a short time duration. the q is given that things in af-pak are pretty far gone and given that the commitment in iraq is going to be significant, what realistic hope does the us have of nation building in afghanistan? (and let's not mince words, nation building is what's needed).</p> & it might be all the rage to bash the Pak govt on cutting a deal with the Taliban, but what heck was the Obama Adminstration thinking when it stated aloud that Talks with Taliban moderates were ‘worth exploring’.

exactly. it is stunning that there isn’t enough critical examination of this in the us media. or if obama’s statement is looked at, it is seen as a pragmatic choice given the overextended american troops.

It almost makes one wish for a new republican president in 2013.

he is going by petraeus’ advice – this is exactly the strategy, paying off sunni tribal leaders and supplying them with weapons provided they fought “terrorists” is one of his leading counterinsurgency strategies. so it would be naive to think that a different president would do anything different. karzai was a bad choice for pm given how corrupt he has been – but what’s the alternative. nation building is neither cheap nor of a short time duration. the q is given that things in af-pak are pretty far gone and given that the commitment in iraq is going to be significant, what realistic hope does the us have of nation building in afghanistan? (and let’s not mince words, nation building is what’s needed).

]]>
By: zee http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238977 zee Mon, 11 May 2009 03:29:00 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238977 <blockquote>Ok, it's your right to think of the Muslims and the British together as a "bad experience." I personally don't think that's the most helpful or useful way to view South Asian or Indian history, but if that's your viewpoint, so be it.</blockquote> <p>Bad or good, the later Mughals were definitely Indian: they were not draining the money to a different country (like the British) altogether. Their were also many Hindu rulers who were no good for their subjects, so this debate makes no sense. I think all that some people are trying to point out that it should be acknowledged that many of the Muslim rulers systematically plundered many of the temples and Hindu culture. Yes, that should be acknowledged, and also that many Hindus in Bangladesh have been ill-treated. But that should NOT be the excuse of the VHP to plunder any Islamic sight. That not only hurts and antagonizes the Muslim population and gives Pakistani terrorists an excuses (yes they were Pakistani), but also ultimately leads to the last laugh for the British...as we continue their pogrom of divide and rule even today very efficiently. Sad!</p> Ok, it’s your right to think of the Muslims and the British together as a “bad experience.” I personally don’t think that’s the most helpful or useful way to view South Asian or Indian history, but if that’s your viewpoint, so be it.

Bad or good, the later Mughals were definitely Indian: they were not draining the money to a different country (like the British) altogether. Their were also many Hindu rulers who were no good for their subjects, so this debate makes no sense. I think all that some people are trying to point out that it should be acknowledged that many of the Muslim rulers systematically plundered many of the temples and Hindu culture. Yes, that should be acknowledged, and also that many Hindus in Bangladesh have been ill-treated. But that should NOT be the excuse of the VHP to plunder any Islamic sight. That not only hurts and antagonizes the Muslim population and gives Pakistani terrorists an excuses (yes they were Pakistani), but also ultimately leads to the last laugh for the British…as we continue their pogrom of divide and rule even today very efficiently. Sad!

]]>
By: DizzyDesi http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238976 DizzyDesi Mon, 11 May 2009 03:17:47 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238976 <blockquote>What do people think of this statement? I have a couple of thoughts below.</blockquote> <p>There is an interesting column on it in Dawn <a href="http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/columnists/16-cyril-almeida-damn-yankees-859-hs-03">Damn Yankees</a></p> <blockquote>MR. OBAMA: I’m confident that we can make sure that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is secure, primarily, initially, because the Pakistani army, I think, recognizes the hazards of those weapons <b>falling into the wrong hands.</b></blockquote> <blockquote>Second, his refusal of the question is wise, </blockquote> <p>It may seem wise to a domestic audience in Washington, but who knows what a conpiracy laden Pak audience will make of it? The best option is to be clear and consistent over a period of time, but the Obama administration does not have a clear message as of now. For all the talk about no blank cheques, is'nt that just what the US is doing through the "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends_of_Pakistan">Friends of Pakistan</a>"</p> <p>(<a href="http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C04%5C19%5Cstory_19-4-2009_pg1_10">Pakistanis see friends’ $5 billion pledge as political boon</a>)</p> <p>& it might be all the rage to bash the Pak govt on cutting a deal with the Taliban, but what heck was the Obama Adminstration thinking when it stated aloud that Talks with Taliban moderates were 'worth exploring'. Did that not undercut the administration's line vis a vis Pak's own deals(<b><i>taliban moderates?!</i></b>),</p> <p>Obama is going in a lot of goodwill in the subcontinent, and is squandering it left right and center, with a mixture of arrogance and incompetence. It almost makes one wish for a new republican president in 2013.</p> What do people think of this statement? I have a couple of thoughts below.

There is an interesting column on it in Dawn Damn Yankees

MR. OBAMA: I’m confident that we can make sure that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is secure, primarily, initially, because the Pakistani army, I think, recognizes the hazards of those weapons falling into the wrong hands.
Second, his refusal of the question is wise,

It may seem wise to a domestic audience in Washington, but who knows what a conpiracy laden Pak audience will make of it? The best option is to be clear and consistent over a period of time, but the Obama administration does not have a clear message as of now. For all the talk about no blank cheques, is’nt that just what the US is doing through the “Friends of Pakistan

(Pakistanis see friends’ $5 billion pledge as political boon)

& it might be all the rage to bash the Pak govt on cutting a deal with the Taliban, but what heck was the Obama Adminstration thinking when it stated aloud that Talks with Taliban moderates were ‘worth exploring’. Did that not undercut the administration’s line vis a vis Pak’s own deals(taliban moderates?!),

Obama is going in a lot of goodwill in the subcontinent, and is squandering it left right and center, with a mixture of arrogance and incompetence. It almost makes one wish for a new republican president in 2013.

]]>
By: garv http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238975 garv Mon, 11 May 2009 03:10:13 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238975 <blockquote>The biggest threat to the safety of Indian Muslims right now is not Priyanka next door</blockquote> <p>is that what advani and varun like you to call them, madam?</p> The biggest threat to the safety of Indian Muslims right now is not Priyanka next door

is that what advani and varun like you to call them, madam?

]]>
By: Madam Begum http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238974 Madam Begum Mon, 11 May 2009 03:05:00 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238974 <p>The biggest threat to the safety of Indian Muslims right now is not Priyanka next door, but other Muslims (next door).</p> The biggest threat to the safety of Indian Muslims right now is not Priyanka next door, but other Muslims (next door).

]]>
By: garv http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2009/04/30/obama_on_pakist/comment-page-3/#comment-238973 garv Mon, 11 May 2009 02:37:18 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=5747#comment-238973 <blockquote>Dr. Koenraad Elst has refuted Eaton's nonsensical claims about Hindu iconoclasm. </blockquote> <p>just as dr. william dembski has refuted darwin's nonsensical claims about evolution :)</p> <blockquote>Looting an "idol" to install it in your own temple is not iconoclasm</blockquote> <p>ok :) i will go loot some temples now, it seems like it is the RIGHT thing to do. don't worry, i am a hindu too, so it's a-ok!</p> <blockquote>Babri Masjid was ONE incident only. Mosques are safe and sound in India, as long as no terrorist from you know where decides to do a suicide mission inside one. </blockquote> <p>there is no need to call <a href="http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/politics/grand-ram-temple-in-ayodhya-will-be-built-advani_100181862.html">advani</a> and <a href="http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040404/edit.htm#1">togadia</a> terrorists!</p> Dr. Koenraad Elst has refuted Eaton’s nonsensical claims about Hindu iconoclasm.

just as dr. william dembski has refuted darwin’s nonsensical claims about evolution :)

Looting an “idol” to install it in your own temple is not iconoclasm

ok :) i will go loot some temples now, it seems like it is the RIGHT thing to do. don’t worry, i am a hindu too, so it’s a-ok!

Babri Masjid was ONE incident only. Mosques are safe and sound in India, as long as no terrorist from you know where decides to do a suicide mission inside one.

there is no need to call advani and togadia terrorists!

]]>