Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 304 posts

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#281

Post by cmonnow »

iamshs wrote: post #146
thanks1banks2 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India is a secular state. We treat all religions with equal respect. This is in the constitution. This issue is an internal matter following due process within our parliamentary framework.

If India is so secular why is there a tax law called Hindu Undivided Family or HUF, which Muslims cannot use to reduce their taxable income? How can a damn tax law be applicable on basis of religion? If it is so secular then why does Indian Constitution term Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs under Hindu religion umbrella. Since when is it for the constitution to define religions? If India is so secular than why does it ban…

If India is so secular, why is polygamy allowed for Muslims, but not Hindus ?

Equal treatment does not mean same treatment.

A doctor treats both men & women equally, so he gives the woman estrogen and the man testosterone. Would you prefer it if the doctor gave everyone estrogen ?

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#282

Post by debuggerpk »

iamshs wrote: post #261
debuggerpk wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

haha .. if you can see the irony in your comment. So a resourceless Pakistan miraculously recovered from the bloody partition in mere three months to not only plan an insurgency, but also had the resources to execute it. Go Pakistan then? right?

Go learn your own history, Pakistan has given their highest bravery awards to these tribal invaders. Resourceless doesn't mean bereft of guns. British Army resources were divided among India and Pakistan.

lol. Pakistan was meant to get 1/3rd, never go that.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#283

Post by selimthegrim »

cmonnow wrote: post #280
NikolaeVarius wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Majority support annexing of the region

Kashmir is already part of India, since 1947. No question of 'annexing'. It was given 'special' privileges, which lead to nothing for 70 years. Now they were revoked. Imagine if Florida had special privileges like No Federal Tax , and yet continued to remain a s*ithole like, say Missisippi? How would other states take it?

They don’t like it very much at all - see Puerto Rico

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#284

Post by selimthegrim »

hemansan wrote: post #157

India is preventing the fate of Yugoslavia. It would have been occupation if Kashmiris had lesser rights but that's not the case. People don't ask what rights did people of Kashmir didn't have that people of India had since 1947. India is a country of diverse religions, and ethnic groups. If a minority group demands separate nation should you give autonomy to it? If London becomes Muslim majority, and demands separat…

For your sake I hope not - when Kosovo autonomy was revoked all other republics became afraid. If I were Mamata Didi right now I’d be up late at night worrying about how many seats my assembly victory margin has to be for it not to be taken away with Darjeeling being made a UT.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#285

Post by cscurmudgeon »

iamshs wrote: post #203
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't understand how anyone who stands for gender equality and minority rights can support Kashmir being autonomous. This move by the Indian government is objectively good for minorities (Christians, Hindus, Jains etc) and women in the state. https://www.dailyo.in/voices/article-35a-women-in-kashmir-fu... Kashmir had 70 years to rectify this after Independence but to chose to double down on ethnic cleansing of mino…

Because gender equality and minority rights points are being used as a greenhorn to subjugate an entire minority. Article 370 giving them autonomy is gone, and not only their autonomy is gone but the state has been degraded as a Union Territory directly under Federal control. A law which has been abrogated by locking down 10 Million people, and not allowing them the right to protest. I think we all know why the law h…

370 and autonomy is just a dog whistle for subjugating minorities and women. You didn’t answer my question: Why wait to fix minority/ women rights for 70 years?

Kashmir’s minorities have drastically decreased in the last 70 years due to large scale systematic cleansing and India has increased its minority population.

India is the lesser evil.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#286

Post by cscurmudgeon »

iamshs wrote: post #198
vakataka wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, Indian Muslims have their own personal law while the rest of the population follows uniform civil code. They get Hajj subsidies and other perks that no other community gets. As for taking refugees, a country can deny entry based on any number of reasons. In 2018, the number of refugees taken in by the US has gone down. That doesn't mean US is less secular. I agree Indian constitution is not the most secular but…

Hindus are also given subsidies for travel to their religious sites, inside India and to China. Mansarovar Lake and Amarnath pilgrimage. So that is one propaganda point of yours busted. Let's bust the second point: Why are only Muslim refugees being expelled, and why is there a specific citizenship law that gives Indian citizenship to Hindus and excludes Muslims?

Muslims also get Haj subsidy.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#287

Post by sifar »

RestlessMind wrote: post #270
sifar wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot have peace by coercion. Period. It will either be an illusion or delusion.

There are many instances in history where coercion was required to bring peace, especially in "bad situations" ranging from war to insurgencies to domestic terrorism. Most notable examples: Germany in 1945, Japan in 1945, counterinsurgency in Iraq in 2007-08, rooting out LTTE in Sri Lanka in 2009.

May be I should have clarified a bit more. I am talking about coercion of the native populace of an internal region by its own government. The first two were global conflicts. The last one may qualify but again it is a self-serving cycle. You create a situation which leads to a region revolting and then you need to pacify it through force.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#288

Post by eklavya »

selimthegrim wrote: post #274
eklavya wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would sure seem to be the case unless you see from where refugees are allowed. They are not allowed from all over the world, only areas dealing with partition or Indian history.

My family is Ahmedi. We left India in 1947. Pakistan stripped us of our right to vote in 1974-84. I guess we can't be oppressed there, chief. Congratulations on your airtight logic.

I am sorry, I forgot about that. It's not feasible though, at least in the present scenario. I wish it was different.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#289

Post by dang »

iamshs wrote: post #261
debuggerpk wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

haha .. if you can see the irony in your comment. So a resourceless Pakistan miraculously recovered from the bloody partition in mere three months to not only plan an insurgency, but also had the resources to execute it. Go Pakistan then? right?

Go learn your own history, Pakistan has given their highest bravery awards to these tribal invaders. Resourceless doesn't mean bereft of guns. British Army resources were divided among India and Pakistan.

You broke the site guidelines frequently and egregiously in this thread. We ban accounts that do that. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules while posting here, regardless of how wrong or bad you think other comments are? And please don't use HN for nationalistic flamewar.

Re: India Shut Down Kashmir’s Internet Access

#290

Post by dang »

debuggerpk wrote: post #247
iamshs wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, tribals were armed by Pakistan. Tribals from Pakhtun invaded Kashmir. Locals actually helped repel the tribal attacks. Let’s not overlook stated facts.

haha .. if you can see the irony in your comment. So a resourceless Pakistan miraculously recovered from the bloody partition in mere three months to not only plan an insurgency, but also had the resources to execute it. Go Pakistan then? right?

Please do not post flamewar comments to HN, and especially not nationalistic flamewar.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN