681–690 of 714 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I lived in Gujarat and Rajasthan, so point taken. My uncle had to flee Surat during communal violence concealed in an ambulance
You can't extrapolate that to entire India though can you? I live in Southern part of India where there is very little communal violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If enough people can be convinced of a “serious” extraterrestrial event we might be able to speed up that science and tech tree. Honestly think about the spending and the opportunities it will unlock. Not to mention we might all stop fighting each other and work together… on science and tech. So much of the science and tech we use today was the result of some similar storytelling, and it has sometimes had some real c…
You should have preceded that with "Watchmen spoiler alert".
I think programming people to believe there’s a credible ET threat would be kind of cool. It would never affect them, and it would be hard to prove or disprove either way. And people would rather err on the side of expansion and survival, than extinction.
Neither India nor Pakistan can sustain a conventional war for more than 2 weeks, as they do not have sufficient armaments. Both sides also lack an effective defence against short-range missiles and drones. If the situation deteriorates, it can quickly lead to nuclear war as nonrational actors are present on both sides. I hope this situation does not escalate further. Please note that in a conventional war, economic c…
There is a lot of Indian English-language media on YouTube and Twitter. There the war drums have been sounding strongly for the past weeks. They seem to draw a parallel between India/Kashmir/Pakistan and Israel/Gaza/Iran - seeing India as the superior and morally just super power against a weak corrupt dysfunctional terrorist-sponsoring Pakistan. So in that thinking right now there is an opportunity to get a final so…
India has been notoriously hostile to its minorities and it seeks displacement of the “majority” population of Kashmir because they have been seeking secession from India. Typically when a country has acted harmfully, world leaders of the west have intervened especially in the case of India and Pakistan because it is a great disruption to trade and profit. It seems this time the West is overwhelmed with several issue…
i wonder where the terrorists went during the coronavirus pandemic. there was almost no problems in gaza or indo-pak area.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Voting with a foreign military presence doesn't count. Also, a lot of the kids are orphans (their parents having been murdered by the Russians). And a lot have parents trying to trace them and get them back (there's a whole association for this).
Weird, because we have military bases in a lot of countries that seem to vote.
But I'm not aware of anything of this type happening today. Do the US soldiers in e.g. Rammstein go to police how people vote?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the default outcome is not another attack. This action guarantees another attack, because it has paid of in the actual PR dividends the ruling forces of both sides desired. This has zip to do with the citizens, and everything to do with party / power bloc legitimacy. Winning on economics and good governance is hard.
I can't even begin to understand this logic. Why do you think Pakistan orchestrated the last attack? Do you think those reasons had anything to do with the expectation of retaliation from India? The default is that Pakistan's motivations do not change and they keep doing what they've been doing. Ergo, another attack. Yes this is stupid and worse for both sides, but it only takes one party to start a fight.
The structure was designed for being disavowed.
I expect it was more the army looked away, over condoned.
And yes, the expectations are to generate a response from the BJP.
By this rubric there are 4 actors on the stage.
- The people of Pakistan, the Pakistani army,
- The people of India, the BJP.
I’ve had this discussion with friends who are Pakistani and they concur that this makes the most sense.
The opinions of the Pakistani army have dramatically changed as per their interactions, having been at a nadir due to their domestic handling of events, and now these actions have reinvigorated public opinion.
The BJP has had its military credentials burnished.
I’d go a step deeper and suspect that there was a traditional response from India planned, and then at some point in the past 72 hours, a functionary on the BJP side raised the potential of a massive PR coup and the old guard got sidelined.
This has worked. This means this behavior will be repeated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Israel and Russia also want peace. China wants peace with Taiwan. The US wants peace with Greenland and Canada. You have to be careful with that word, peace, because all wars are defensive.
Israel did want peace with Gaza (Gaza specifically, not West Bank). After the 2005 Gaza disengagement, Israel did a lot to normalize relations with Gaza. They wanted peace until they gave up all attempts to do so, after October 7th. Peace implies disengagement by maintaining long-standing borders. India wants peace by maintaining Line of Actual Control (LAC). Be it China or Pakistan, India has never been the one to e…
Before I write a novel of a response, can you rigorously define "long-standing borders", as well as the implied words of "nation", "country", and "state"? How far back in history is "long standing" valid for? Some of these things are matters of history, how do you deal with historians disagreeing on the ground truth? What happens when someone strongly asserts something that is factually untrue?
All wars are defensive in that the combatants are told they are defending, not attacking. Russians in Ukraine don't think they are attacking, they think they are defending Russia from NATO or de-nazifying Ukraine, or at least that is their national narrative.
Mostly I think your post proved my overall point, which is that peace is not a meaningful word because its meaning is relative to its speakers beliefs rather than in reference to a universalize-able moral framework describing about what justice is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm not sure Pakistan is comparable to Imperial Japan. > (Source: [before the inevitable downvotes] am Indian.) How does that relate to downvotes after saying something like that?