[Reader-list] Tourist heaven turns into valley of fear

[Kshmendra Kaul]

Dear Aashish

1. Alas! Looks like you have commented without having read my post. I had written:
""""  I must say here that comparisons provide no justification and any 'excess' whatsoever by the Indian Army (or CRPF, or BSF, or RR) are totally unacceptable to me as an Indian.""""
    So, why are you Alaasing! your pompous lecture on logic to me? 

2. Again your convoluted interpretation of my having stated 'excesses' in the manner I did is all your own doing. The word 'Excesses' by itself does not enumerate the acts committed (or being accused of). It also does not provide an objective or even subjective evaluation of the acts nor the extent (gravity) of the excess. That is why I put it the word 'excesses' in inverted commas. It needs qualification. 

Kshmendra


________________________________

From: Aashish Gupta <aashu.gupta20 at gmail.com>
To: Kshmendra Kaul <kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 5:14:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Tourist heaven turns into valley of fear



From: Kshmendra Kaul <kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com>
To: yasir ~يا سر <yasir.media at gmail.com>; sarai list <reader-list at sarai.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:59:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Tourist heaven turns into valley of fear


Dear Yasir

Kashmir being a part of India, it should not be surprising that the Indian Army was/is present there. 

You speak though of the 'nature' of that presence. Till the Pakistan sponsored Islamic Terrorism showed up in Kashmir, the Indian Army's 'nature' of Peacetime presence was like that of any other Army in the border region of any other country which has an enemy nation across the border. The Indian Army was deployed in the 'border posts' and was confined to Cantonment Areas elsewhere.

It was only because of the 1965 Operation Gibraltar infiltration/invasion plan of Pakistan that the Indian Army had to first 'act' in the civilian areas. After the 1965 War and whatever possible mopping up of the Pakistani infiltrators, the Indian Army had no deployment in the civilian areas.

With the start of the Pakistan sponsored Islamic Terrorism in late 1980s, the Indian Army was again forced to 'act' in the civilian areas.  

Whatever  other 'excesses' the Indian Army may have committed against innocent Kashmiris, we did not have the kind of Artillery and Aerial Bombing attacks that the Pakistan Army has repeatedly resorted to against Pakistanis. I must say here that comparisons provide no justification and any 'excess' whatsoever by the Indian Army (or CRPF, or BSF, or RR) are totally unacceptable to me as an Indian.

As far as 'sandwiched' or 'bun kabaabed' Afghanistan, Pakistan and India are concerned, the only thing stringing them together is Islamic Terrorism.

Kshmendra


Dear Kshmendra

The fact - that the Indian army was present in the civilian areas of Kashmir because of Pakistan - does not, in any way, absolve them of the excesses they committed. Neither the fact that the Pakistani (or American) army commits greater violations make the human rights violations of the Indian army acceptable. 

I thought this lesson in logic would be known. Alas! 

And ok, the Indian army was forced to act. Let's accept this for a moment. Does acting iclude what the army did? Does the presence of terrorism force soldiers to rape, abduct, main and kill innocents?

You put excesses within inverted commas. Would you like to clarify why you do that? Are they so called excesses? We would have a new term then - Pseudo-Excesses. 

Aashish