Progress against terrorism
-
Rohit Sinha wrote: IMO. It's only the separatist/fundamentalist/whatever groups that are causing all the trouble. Aren't there fundamentalists inside India, so dangerous that they can deny even the Supreme Court orders. There is no no separatist/fundamentalist involved or sponsored from Pakistan in the situation of Indian occupied Kashmir. The people involved are those who belong to what you called "POK" as your government frequently pointed their training camps are in what they called "POK". And yes, there is no cross border terrorism, firstly there is no common border in Kashmir and people can move freely from what you call "POK" to Indian occupied Kashmir, they do not require any passport, it is their own country. And the day is not far when Kashmiris will get rid from Indian occupation and have their own independent country.
Chaudhri Raheel Ahmed wrote: Aren't there fundamentalists inside India, so dangerous that they can deny even the Supreme Court orders. No. Chaudhri Raheel Ahmed wrote: There is no no separatist/fundamentalist involved or sponsored from Pakistan in the situation of Indian occupied Kashmir That's what you say. Intelligence reports, however, have a different story to tell. Who do you think I'll believe? Chaudhri Raheel Ahmed wrote: And the day is not far when Kashmiris will get rid from Indian occupation and have their own independent country. How? Will you bomb more people to do that? It's going to achieve nothing, I tell you. Indian occupation indeed. But before that happens, all you hate mongers will be gone and sleeping with your 69 virgins in heaven anyway, so why bother? I'm getting tired of replying to your posts, because they contain no logic, reason or even a semblance of understanding. I'm all for a peaceful way out of the situation, and forget the past, and for friendly and brotherly relations between India and Pakistan. But people like you (there are your counterparts here too, who don't want to have anything to do with Pakistan) don't want it. Your kind thrives on hatred. I think you should either join politics or one of those terrorist gangs.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother Teresa -
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: But what about those ULFA (Assam) and Naga terrorist ba****ds who operate from Bangladesh? Those are different. I won't call them terrorists. They don't go about killing "innocent" people. True, they kill people too, but only if you do something to them, or are a government/military person. Like if you inform the police about them, etc. They are murderers, even mass murderers, but not terrorists. There is a difference. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: And what about the Bangladeshi Muslims who infiltrate into India by the hundreds everyday? Even they are different. And hey, they are not terrorists at all. They are just illegal immigrants who come here looking for work. They are very poor people who could not even get two meals a day in Bangladesh. True, some terrorists mingle with them to get inside, but the average Bangladeshi coming here is just a poor guy who wants to work for food or something. And please, don't call every PITA a terrorist. It'll only serve to take the credibility away from our position about the real terrorists. :)
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother TeresaOK, the NSCN is not going about killing people, but it indulges in harrasment and extortion and killing of policemen. So, it falls into the gray area. It's good, however, that Isak & Muivah have declared a ceasefire. But ULFA is definitely a terrorist group. Killing Binahri and UP laborers (yes, construction workers), blowing up trains and refineries, killing policemen- all that is definitely terrorist activity. Maybe I'm wrong about calling Bangladeshi infiltrators terrorists technically, but their intentions towards India are NOT friendly. Anyway, why should we let them come here? As thanks for letting ULFA use their country for terrorist training and providing a safe haven? I'm not a hardcore nationalist (really, I tread the middle ground and take a balanced approach); but you seem to be too soft in some areas. Vikram.
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: Pakistan is our major PITA I disagree. The general Pakistani population wants peace as much as you and me, IMO. It's only the separatist/fundamentalist/whatever groups that are causing all the trouble. But since we are on the recieving end of terrorism, and it comes from Pakistan, we club all of them together and see them as our enemy number one. Not so. Of course, most Pakistanis also see us as their enemy number one, but just like with us, this is just a matter of perception. Get rid of the hate mongers and everything will be fine. It'll take some time, but it can be done. In fact, there are two missions in my life. Mission number two is to unite the two countries again. :-O (Read my sig) Mission number one is to get rich and live happily.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother TeresaRohit wrote: The general Pakistani population wants peace as much as you and me. Much as I'd like to believe in it (really, I WANT to believe that), I can't- because I know it isn't true. Why else would they pour in their money for Jehad in India? Why else do Indian flags get burnt in Pakistan (and Sharjah, for that matter)? Now you're going to say we burn Paki flags- SO WHAT? I mean, we do it in retaliation, we can't keep twiddling our thumbs. Rohit wrote: Mission number two is to unite the two countries again. Do you know that not a single Paki will be pleased to see this? This will only fuel more hatred for us amongst their minds: 1. They have always suspected India of wanting to do this. 2. Pakistan is A NATION BORN OUT OF HATE. They became Pakis (as opposed to being Indians, that is) because they hated India (Hindus, to be more specific). 3. Why would people suffer bloody partition and lose thousands of their kith and kin, only to hug their erstwhile enemies? Do you remember that L K Advani said (a year ago or so) that his dream was to create an Indo-Pak confederacy? He said confederacy, not union or merger. This was instantly denounced by the Pakis as "part of their evil intentions on Pakistan" and as "India cannot accept an independant and sovereign Pakistan". Having read all this, do you still believe it's possible to unite India and Pakistan? I want to believe this, but I can't. I wish you luck in your effort, but I'm highly skeptical of it. All the same, I'd like to see you succeed. :Vikram flashes a thumbs-up sign: Rohit wrote: Mission number one is to get rich and live happily. Just like me, again :) Do reply to this- I'm curious to see what reply you can have. Plus, it's quite interesting to have these discussions with a fellow-Indian( or any person) who knows what he's talking. All that my classmates are interested is going to movies, boozing, cellphones and ogling (Hindi- sight maarna)
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
OK, the NSCN is not going about killing people, but it indulges in harrasment and extortion and killing of policemen. So, it falls into the gray area. It's good, however, that Isak & Muivah have declared a ceasefire. But ULFA is definitely a terrorist group. Killing Binahri and UP laborers (yes, construction workers), blowing up trains and refineries, killing policemen- all that is definitely terrorist activity. Maybe I'm wrong about calling Bangladeshi infiltrators terrorists technically, but their intentions towards India are NOT friendly. Anyway, why should we let them come here? As thanks for letting ULFA use their country for terrorist training and providing a safe haven? I'm not a hardcore nationalist (really, I tread the middle ground and take a balanced approach); but you seem to be too soft in some areas. Vikram.
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.Vikram Punathambekar wrote: I'm not a hardcore nationalist (really, I tread the middle ground and take a balanced approach); but you seem to be too soft in some areas. Being nationalist means acting in the best interest of one's nation, IMO. OK, replace nationalist with patriot. Patriotism is not about killing or denouncing everyone who doesn't agree with you. Being a patriot, I realise that there are certain groups in our country who are angry and feel deserted. We need to dissipate their anger. OK, so maybe their way of doing things is wrong. But we can't just throw them out. We can't just kill them all. We have to listen to them. I'm not soft, but I try to use my head instead of my heart. :) The heart tells me to get angry at them, the head tells me to act rationally and calmly.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother Teresa -
I thought this deserved a second reply. KaЯl wrote: Another dilemma: when an army bombs a city and kills civilians, is that a terrorist action or bearable collateral damages? I would not call this a terrorist action. It was not done with the intent to harm civilians. I believe any terrorists action must be with that intent. Now I am not sure how to address the bearable option. It is definitly not a desirable option. A great deal must be considered with how much effort was taken to minimize those involved, with out expecting the troops to risk excessive harm themselves. This does not have a clear boundary. "For as long as I can remember, I have had memories. Colin Mochrie."
War became terrorist when the goal changed from defeating the enemy to eliminating physically the enemy. This evolution (evolution doesn't mean progress) appeared during WW1, with the first massive uses of WMD. Michael A. Barnhart wrote: I would not call this a terrorist action. It was not done with the intent to harm civilians. I believe any terrorists action must be with that intent. Playing the role of the devil's advocate, I could say the objective of the 9/11 was to shock the US. The death of civilians become no more a target but a mean, even a collateral damage: "Shock and Awe". In my opinion, the word "terrorist" doesn't mean anything: 9/11, and all the others, wasn't a terrorist attack, but a criminal action. Political motivations can't be considered as a cover for a crime.
Show me a hero, and I'll show you a bum - Greg "Pappy" Boyington
-
Rohit wrote: The general Pakistani population wants peace as much as you and me. Much as I'd like to believe in it (really, I WANT to believe that), I can't- because I know it isn't true. Why else would they pour in their money for Jehad in India? Why else do Indian flags get burnt in Pakistan (and Sharjah, for that matter)? Now you're going to say we burn Paki flags- SO WHAT? I mean, we do it in retaliation, we can't keep twiddling our thumbs. Rohit wrote: Mission number two is to unite the two countries again. Do you know that not a single Paki will be pleased to see this? This will only fuel more hatred for us amongst their minds: 1. They have always suspected India of wanting to do this. 2. Pakistan is A NATION BORN OUT OF HATE. They became Pakis (as opposed to being Indians, that is) because they hated India (Hindus, to be more specific). 3. Why would people suffer bloody partition and lose thousands of their kith and kin, only to hug their erstwhile enemies? Do you remember that L K Advani said (a year ago or so) that his dream was to create an Indo-Pak confederacy? He said confederacy, not union or merger. This was instantly denounced by the Pakis as "part of their evil intentions on Pakistan" and as "India cannot accept an independant and sovereign Pakistan". Having read all this, do you still believe it's possible to unite India and Pakistan? I want to believe this, but I can't. I wish you luck in your effort, but I'm highly skeptical of it. All the same, I'd like to see you succeed. :Vikram flashes a thumbs-up sign: Rohit wrote: Mission number one is to get rich and live happily. Just like me, again :) Do reply to this- I'm curious to see what reply you can have. Plus, it's quite interesting to have these discussions with a fellow-Indian( or any person) who knows what he's talking. All that my classmates are interested is going to movies, boozing, cellphones and ogling (Hindi- sight maarna)
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.Vikram Punathambekar wrote: I can't- because I know it isn't true. Why else would they pour in their money for Jehad in India? Why else do Indian flags get burnt in Pakistan (and Sharjah, for that matter)? Now you're going to say we burn Paki flags- SO WHAT? I mean, we do it in retaliation, we can't keep twiddling our thumbs. Apart from pouring money into Jehad, everything is true for India too. Indians hate Pakistanis as much as they hate us. So, who is the bigger culprit? As for the Jehad, the average person on Pakistani streets has nothing to do with it. He is neither aware of who is running the show nor is interested. He is just a normal person like you and me. There are only a few people, the fundamentalists, the hate mongers, the terror lords, who are doing all this, and claim to represent the majority. Not so. The leadership and media over there are thriving on hatred for us, and keep fueling it by spreading propaganda. Just like our own media and leadership do it. As for burning flags, and other similar things, it doesn't matter who did it first. You burn flags and effigies to show your hatred and/or to protest. What caused it is irrelevant. If you hate someone, you hate someone. Reasons are there only to justify it later on. Hatred needs no reasons. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: 1. They have always suspected India of wanting to do this. I wasn't talking about gobbling up Pakistan. My intention/dream is a new country with both the countries combined. Just think. What a great Cricket team we could have! ;P We have similar culture, food, music, tastes, language, everything. They watch our movies. They listen to our songs. We watch their plays. We lift the tunes for our songs from many of their songs. The only difference is that they are an Islamic country and we are secular. If we become one, we can become a major player in the golbal scene. We can combine our talents, skills, and complement each other in a way that is only possible when we become one. And most of all, we'll not have to think about terrorism or the Kashmir issue, and can concentrate on things of more importance, like economy, infrastructure and health. There are several advantages of a united India + Pakistan, and will benefit both, not just one, of us. IMO, this is the only solution to the Kashmir problem. This has carried on too long to pretend that either of us is going to give up our claim on Kashmir. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: 2. Paki
-
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: I'm not a hardcore nationalist (really, I tread the middle ground and take a balanced approach); but you seem to be too soft in some areas. Being nationalist means acting in the best interest of one's nation, IMO. OK, replace nationalist with patriot. Patriotism is not about killing or denouncing everyone who doesn't agree with you. Being a patriot, I realise that there are certain groups in our country who are angry and feel deserted. We need to dissipate their anger. OK, so maybe their way of doing things is wrong. But we can't just throw them out. We can't just kill them all. We have to listen to them. I'm not soft, but I try to use my head instead of my heart. :) The heart tells me to get angry at them, the head tells me to act rationally and calmly.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother TeresaRohit Sinha wrote: I try to use my head instead of my heart. In that case, before you make any decisions, decide for yourself whether you have a better heart or better head. HEY, I'm being serious- don't think I'm trying to c-o-c-k a snook at you or trying to score brownie points. I was in a similar position once, and this advice helped me. [EDIT] Why does C O C K as in "c-o-c-k a snook" appear censored?" [EDIT] And one more thing- don't be overly afraid of doing wrong- (I'm not telling you to do wrong) it isn't the end of the world. It's better to take a quick decision and be wrong than to agonize at length and find out you were right too late. Regards,
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
KaЯl wrote: Perhaps should we first define, or at least agree, on a definition of the word "Terrorism". What's the difference between "terrorism" and "resistance", except a difference of point of view? Um, yeah. I'm not buying that for a second. World War 2: Do you call them the "French Resistence" or the "French Terrorists"? IMHO, the best way to reduce terrorism is prevention: reduce the poverty through the World (misery is a root for despair), enhance education (the solution) and ban violence from our acceptable behaviours. Yeah, I hear that worked really well in preventing Osama Bin Ladin (worth an estimated $800 million) from getting involved in terrorism. ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
Brit wrote: World War 2: Do you call them the "French Resistence" or the "French Terrorists"? Most of them were executed of deported as terrorists, and few years later they were celebrated like heroes, and sometimes by the same people. Would the 3rd Reich have won the war would we all consider them as criminals. Undoubtly, some actions of the Resistance can be call "terrorist", like the assassinations "for the example", or some blind bombings. Brit wrote: Yeah, I hear that worked really well in preventing Osama Bin Ladin (worth an estimated $800 million) from getting involved in terrorism. I don't think Bin Laden is working alone, and that all Al-quaida members are millionaires! Would palestinians blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired? I see two reasons for such an extremist behaviour: fanatism and despair. Fanatism can be reduce by education, despair by giving a future.
Show me a hero, and I'll show you a bum - Greg "Pappy" Boyington
-
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: I can't- because I know it isn't true. Why else would they pour in their money for Jehad in India? Why else do Indian flags get burnt in Pakistan (and Sharjah, for that matter)? Now you're going to say we burn Paki flags- SO WHAT? I mean, we do it in retaliation, we can't keep twiddling our thumbs. Apart from pouring money into Jehad, everything is true for India too. Indians hate Pakistanis as much as they hate us. So, who is the bigger culprit? As for the Jehad, the average person on Pakistani streets has nothing to do with it. He is neither aware of who is running the show nor is interested. He is just a normal person like you and me. There are only a few people, the fundamentalists, the hate mongers, the terror lords, who are doing all this, and claim to represent the majority. Not so. The leadership and media over there are thriving on hatred for us, and keep fueling it by spreading propaganda. Just like our own media and leadership do it. As for burning flags, and other similar things, it doesn't matter who did it first. You burn flags and effigies to show your hatred and/or to protest. What caused it is irrelevant. If you hate someone, you hate someone. Reasons are there only to justify it later on. Hatred needs no reasons. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: 1. They have always suspected India of wanting to do this. I wasn't talking about gobbling up Pakistan. My intention/dream is a new country with both the countries combined. Just think. What a great Cricket team we could have! ;P We have similar culture, food, music, tastes, language, everything. They watch our movies. They listen to our songs. We watch their plays. We lift the tunes for our songs from many of their songs. The only difference is that they are an Islamic country and we are secular. If we become one, we can become a major player in the golbal scene. We can combine our talents, skills, and complement each other in a way that is only possible when we become one. And most of all, we'll not have to think about terrorism or the Kashmir issue, and can concentrate on things of more importance, like economy, infrastructure and health. There are several advantages of a united India + Pakistan, and will benefit both, not just one, of us. IMO, this is the only solution to the Kashmir problem. This has carried on too long to pretend that either of us is going to give up our claim on Kashmir. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: 2. Paki
Rohit Sinha wrote: they are an Islamic country and we are secular Rohit Sinha wrote: We have similar culture #1 and #2 contradict each other. Still, your argument to my point #1 is nice. [NO sarcasm]What a pity it's going to remain just a dream.[/NO sarcasm] Rohit Sinha wrote: Doesn't mean we actually hate each other. Oh, yeah? So how come Indians and Pakis aren't running around hugging each other? The Sikh question is very different. Yes, there were riots; yes, there was bloodshed. But Sikhs are not very different from Hindus, and they had a common enemy- Muslim Pakistan, so they had to patch up soon. So, don't draw a parallel between Hindu-Muslim relations/riots and Hindu-Sikh relations/riots. Rohit Sinha wrote: Sounds like fun Actually, I'm not against the stuff listed there per se (apart from boozing, and I myself do none of the 4 )except it happens that they're CSE students, and they'll have NOTHING to do with computers except watch pr0n movies on their PCs. If forced to do a program (under threats of losing internal marks, mostly), they either use VB X| or Turbo C++ X| X| X| . Are they gonna become (my) managers? I'm not adopting a holier-than-them attitude, just stating facts. And I know facts about my classmates, don't I? And why the ;P when you mention that we'd have a great cricket team?
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
Rohit Sinha wrote: I try to use my head instead of my heart. In that case, before you make any decisions, decide for yourself whether you have a better heart or better head. HEY, I'm being serious- don't think I'm trying to c-o-c-k a snook at you or trying to score brownie points. I was in a similar position once, and this advice helped me. [EDIT] Why does C O C K as in "c-o-c-k a snook" appear censored?" [EDIT] And one more thing- don't be overly afraid of doing wrong- (I'm not telling you to do wrong) it isn't the end of the world. It's better to take a quick decision and be wrong than to agonize at length and find out you were right too late. Regards,
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.Vikram Punathambekar wrote: In that case, before you make any decisions, decide for yourself whether you have a better heart or better head. I've got both a very good heart and a very good head, and the competetion is actually very tough. Hard to decide which is better. ;P Vikram Punathambekar wrote: And one more thing- don't be overly afraid of doing wrong- (I'm not telling you to do wrong) it isn't the end of the world. It's better to take a quick decision and be wrong than to agonize at length and find out you were right too late. I agree.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother Teresa -
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: In that case, before you make any decisions, decide for yourself whether you have a better heart or better head. I've got both a very good heart and a very good head, and the competetion is actually very tough. Hard to decide which is better. ;P Vikram Punathambekar wrote: And one more thing- don't be overly afraid of doing wrong- (I'm not telling you to do wrong) it isn't the end of the world. It's better to take a quick decision and be wrong than to agonize at length and find out you were right too late. I agree.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother TeresaRohit Sinha wrote: I've got both a very good heart and a very good head Yeah, yeah, sure... :rolleyes:
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
Indian agencies are highly active in Pakistan (like vice versa). Daily India point out about the training camps and their locations which is not possible without intelligence (if they are right saying so). In 1965 Indian Airforce surprisingly attacked the secret Sargodha Airport in Pakistan which was not known to anyone else. RAW is and was actively involved in terrorism in Pakistan and people are daily captured. Rohit Sinha wrote: And the fact that Pakistan has tried to invade Indian borders several times (and lost). When they lost tell me ? In 1948 they occupied your territory, so called "POK" today. In 1965 you were unable to occupy an inch of Pakistan territory, when 5000 common people of Lahore laid down their lives when they stand infront of your tanks having explovies accompained with their bodies. (what you called terrorism becsuse it is a suicidal way). In 1971, no no this time you attacked Pakistan, your army generals admit that, and were successful though Bangalis were even not ready to join "you". And yes in 1985, you invaded Siachen without informing China or Pakistan.
Chaudhri Raheel Ahmed wrote: And yes in 1985, you invaded Siachen without informing China or Pakistan. Hello? Is that Musharraf? Yes, this is Vajpayee. We're going to nuke Islamabad, Karachi and Lahore. Thought I'd let you know. You think we'll give you a two-month notice before attacking you? In any case- No, it wasn't us who captured Siachen. We simply frove you back.
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
Indian agencies are highly active in Pakistan (like vice versa). Daily India point out about the training camps and their locations which is not possible without intelligence (if they are right saying so). In 1965 Indian Airforce surprisingly attacked the secret Sargodha Airport in Pakistan which was not known to anyone else. RAW is and was actively involved in terrorism in Pakistan and people are daily captured. Rohit Sinha wrote: And the fact that Pakistan has tried to invade Indian borders several times (and lost). When they lost tell me ? In 1948 they occupied your territory, so called "POK" today. In 1965 you were unable to occupy an inch of Pakistan territory, when 5000 common people of Lahore laid down their lives when they stand infront of your tanks having explovies accompained with their bodies. (what you called terrorism becsuse it is a suicidal way). In 1971, no no this time you attacked Pakistan, your army generals admit that, and were successful though Bangalis were even not ready to join "you". And yes in 1985, you invaded Siachen without informing China or Pakistan.
Chaudhri Raheel Ahmed wrote: And yes in 1985, you invaded Siachen without informing China or Pakistan. Hello? Is that Musharraf? Yes, this is Vajpayee. We're going to nuke Islamabad, Karachi and Lahore. Thought I'd let you know. You think we'll give you a two-month notice before attacking you? In any case- No, it wasn't us who captured Siachen. We simply drove you back.
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
Rohit Sinha wrote: they are an Islamic country and we are secular Rohit Sinha wrote: We have similar culture #1 and #2 contradict each other. Still, your argument to my point #1 is nice. [NO sarcasm]What a pity it's going to remain just a dream.[/NO sarcasm] Rohit Sinha wrote: Doesn't mean we actually hate each other. Oh, yeah? So how come Indians and Pakis aren't running around hugging each other? The Sikh question is very different. Yes, there were riots; yes, there was bloodshed. But Sikhs are not very different from Hindus, and they had a common enemy- Muslim Pakistan, so they had to patch up soon. So, don't draw a parallel between Hindu-Muslim relations/riots and Hindu-Sikh relations/riots. Rohit Sinha wrote: Sounds like fun Actually, I'm not against the stuff listed there per se (apart from boozing, and I myself do none of the 4 )except it happens that they're CSE students, and they'll have NOTHING to do with computers except watch pr0n movies on their PCs. If forced to do a program (under threats of losing internal marks, mostly), they either use VB X| or Turbo C++ X| X| X| . Are they gonna become (my) managers? I'm not adopting a holier-than-them attitude, just stating facts. And I know facts about my classmates, don't I? And why the ;P when you mention that we'd have a great cricket team?
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.Vikram Punathambekar wrote: #1 and #2 contradict each other. No, they are unrelated to each other. Culture and constitution are different. Culture and religion are also different. Though of course both affect each other. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: What a pity it's going to remain just a dream I'll do my best to make it a reality. :) I know it's going to take a lot of time. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: So, don't draw a parallel between Hindu-Muslim relations/riots and Hindu-Sikh relations/riots. I was only giving an example to illustrate the point that it is possible to forgive and forget. There is tension between Indian Muslims and Hindus because of the Pakistan connection. Many people still think our Muslims have their loyalties towards Pakistan. This is the reason for the animosity. But if India and Pakistan at least become friends again, you'll see this disappear. Vikram Punathambekar wrote: Are they gonna become (my) managers? They'll probably end up in banks, LIC, or some other burocratic (yeah, the spelling is intentional) organization. Not that these are bad jobs as such, but hardly made for a CS graduate.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother Teresa -
Chaudhri Raheel Ahmed wrote: And yes in 1985, you invaded Siachen without informing China or Pakistan. Hello? Is that Musharraf? Yes, this is Vajpayee. We're going to nuke Islamabad, Karachi and Lahore. Thought I'd let you know. You think we'll give you a two-month notice before attacking you? In any case- No, it wasn't us who captured Siachen. We simply frove you back.
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.Count on that guy to say the most ridiculous things. I've seen him earlier here, and each time it's because he gets an erection when he sees Pakistan mentioned. Otherwise he keeps his butt in the sand making sand bubbles.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother Teresa -
Count on that guy to say the most ridiculous things. I've seen him earlier here, and each time it's because he gets an erection when he sees Pakistan mentioned. Otherwise he keeps his butt in the sand making sand bubbles.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
- Mother TeresaRohit Sinha wrote: I've seen him earlier here I can't get him in the "who's who" section. Perhaps he isn't a member. Rohit Sinha wrote: it's because he gets an erection when he sees Pakistan mentioned. Otherwise he keeps his butt in the sand making sand bubbles :laugh: Hahahahaha. You remind me of a reply Nish made to some guy who posted "that's just great for you terrorists" in a discussion of an article by somebody called Muhammad on Arabic support for WinCE. Rohit Sinha wrote: Count on that guy to say the most ridiculous things Yeah, who'd say "we're gonna come and kick your butt, so watch out?". And the way he says "and China, either" - it's absurd. Without America and China supporitng Pakistan...
Vikram. ----------------------------- 1. Don't ask unnecessary questions. You know what I mean? 2. Avoid redundancy at all costs. 3. Avoid redundancy at all costs. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design. -
Brit wrote: World War 2: Do you call them the "French Resistence" or the "French Terrorists"? Most of them were executed of deported as terrorists, and few years later they were celebrated like heroes, and sometimes by the same people. Would the 3rd Reich have won the war would we all consider them as criminals. Undoubtly, some actions of the Resistance can be call "terrorist", like the assassinations "for the example", or some blind bombings. Brit wrote: Yeah, I hear that worked really well in preventing Osama Bin Ladin (worth an estimated $800 million) from getting involved in terrorism. I don't think Bin Laden is working alone, and that all Al-quaida members are millionaires! Would palestinians blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired? I see two reasons for such an extremist behaviour: fanatism and despair. Fanatism can be reduce by education, despair by giving a future.
Show me a hero, and I'll show you a bum - Greg "Pappy" Boyington
KaЯl wrote: Undoubtly, some actions of the Resistance can be call "terrorist", like the assassinations "for the example", or some blind bombings. This statement subtley shows that you see a distiction between resistence and terrorism. KaЯl wrote: I don't think Bin Laden is working alone, and that all Al-quaida members are millionaires! The key is "what is the rate?" not the actual count. I might argue that the poor outnumber the rich in society by a factor of 100 to 1, so when we see that there are more poor than rich in Al-Queda, that doesn't indicate any causal relationship unless you can show that the poor outnumber the rich in Al-Queda by more than a factor of 100 to 1. Also, a good number of the 9-11 terrorists had college degrees. And, there are even members of the House of Saud which support Al-Queda. KaЯl wrote: Would palestinians blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired? Yes, if they believed they were going to be rewarded in heaven with far greater riches - as many of them are taught to believe. Again, the 9-11 terrorists provide us with an example of people willing to die, but were educated and middle-class. I might agree with you a little more if you said, "Would palestinians be as willing to blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired?" ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
-
KaЯl wrote: Undoubtly, some actions of the Resistance can be call "terrorist", like the assassinations "for the example", or some blind bombings. This statement subtley shows that you see a distiction between resistence and terrorism. KaЯl wrote: I don't think Bin Laden is working alone, and that all Al-quaida members are millionaires! The key is "what is the rate?" not the actual count. I might argue that the poor outnumber the rich in society by a factor of 100 to 1, so when we see that there are more poor than rich in Al-Queda, that doesn't indicate any causal relationship unless you can show that the poor outnumber the rich in Al-Queda by more than a factor of 100 to 1. Also, a good number of the 9-11 terrorists had college degrees. And, there are even members of the House of Saud which support Al-Queda. KaЯl wrote: Would palestinians blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired? Yes, if they believed they were going to be rewarded in heaven with far greater riches - as many of them are taught to believe. Again, the 9-11 terrorists provide us with an example of people willing to die, but were educated and middle-class. I might agree with you a little more if you said, "Would palestinians be as willing to blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired?" ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
Brit wrote: This statement subtley shows that you see a distiction between resistence and terrorism. Yes I do, but the distinction I make is totally subjective and relative to my culture, experiences and moral beliefs, another could think differently. Brit wrote: I might agree with you a little more if you said, "Would palestinians be as willing to blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired?" Ok. Would some palestinians be as willing to blow themselves as human bomb if they weren't so despaired? :)
Show me a hero, and I'll show you a bum - Greg "Pappy" Boyington
-
In light of the recent attacks[^] in Saudi Arabia, what are your views on the progress in the "war on terror?" 1) Are we winning or making a dent in terrorist efforts? Can we win? 2) Is the rest of the "civilized" world participating or are they just paying lip-service to the US? 3) What are your ideas on how to deal with terrorists? (Leave them alone is not an answer.)
Jason Henderson
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
Jason Henderson wrote: Are we winning or making a dent in terrorist efforts? Can we win? You're making terrorists. It's kind of like going on a diet, and starting by trying to eat all the cream cakes in the world, so there's none left to tempt you. Jason Henderson wrote: Is the rest of the "civilized" world participating or are they just paying lip-service to the US? Your current president has turned most of the world against the US ( as a nation, not in terms of dealing with individuals ). Jason Henderson wrote: What are your ideas on how to deal with terrorists? (Leave them alone is not an answer.) Go after people who actually are terrorists, rather than easy targets to make you look good to voters. I seem to remember there was this dude called Bin Laden, does anyone remember him ? Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder
-
Trollslayer wrote: but unless you deal with why people are willing to sacrifice their lives you won't win. What is your basis for believing we will "win" even if we do that? Your assumption is that the underlieing cause is some kind of noble, justified indignation that can ultimately be dealt with in a rational, diplomatic manner. What if the answer is that they simply want all women to wear sacks over their heads? That would be fine with me, but are you willing to go along with that to make them happy?
Stan Shannon wrote: What if the answer is that they simply want all women to wear sacks over their heads? That would be fine with me, but are you willing to go along with that to make them happy? This got a laugh out of me :-) C'mon though, seriously, we all know what their problem is. It's US foreign policy, for example, backing of Israel. Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder