1. "One of them is that Pakistan has a fundamental identity problem and can therefore only define herself in anti-Indian terms. This is clearly not the case in reality." But is that not so? You have only stated, not justified this. Strange. What is pakistan based on if not an anti-india stance? . 2. "The other argument that one hears in India questions the role of Pakistan army,... " But this role is correct. Conjoined with the misconception in pakistan that india is out to get it (a misconception propagated by the paki establishment itself), the paki heads ARE in the business of keeping its own people in fear. . India paki relations ARE a communalism - secularism 'paradigm', more so because of the communal pakis. "the social reality of the subcontinent, the history of religious tolerance", as you mention, are because of the Hindus / Indians, and not because of the pakis and other islamic entities in the subcontinent. . Strangely, muslims are getting the credit for peace in the subcontinent while they are actually the reason why the question of peace arises here. It is the largely peace-loving Hindu thinking Indians who have maintained peace in the subcontinent. pakis and bangdeshis have, time and again, challenged that peace.
RE:Hmm...
by Ashok Patil on Apr 17, 2007 12:06 PM Permalink
Kushik, your are talking my language bro. but remember, he his just playing to the gallery since he is talking at jamia millia islamia. got my point?When you say that muslims are getting credit for bringing peace in the sub continant(and world, wont you give credit to snake charmer who siters deadly snake and baskets it too?after all they are folloers of relegion that propogates peace.
RE:Hmm...
by PIYUSH SRIVASTAVA on Apr 17, 2007 11:05 AM Permalink
(Menon and banerjee)s name resemble being as communists and who do not have any proud of being Indian.
