Pakistan and China keep making a fool of US while...

[Terimaki Tojay]

Indians and Americans are fighting on this forum
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/497499.cms
[ February 15, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Jason Menard]

This is getting really old.
Btw in case anyone is interested in reading the above drek, I wouldn't bother. It's full of the ever-present underlying anti-Americanism that is typical of that publication, and well, most other Indian sources that are linked here. I guess these publications are only printing the type of content that sells though. :roll:
[ February 15, 2004: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]

[Damien Howard]

I don't know if it really shows much anti-americanism, but it certainly shows that this publication is bias in its representation of the news. My reasoning for this statement being the fact that the title uses a racially insensitive term in its title to refer to Pakistan. As does this forum.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Damien Howard:
My reasoning for this statement being the fact that the title uses a racially insensitive term in its title to refer to Pakistan. As does this forum.

The racially insensitive term is with an extra vowel added to the end, and then when in reference to a person or group of people. To tell you the truth, the only place I had ever heard that term was in England, although I suppose it may be in use elsewhere as well.

[Jim Yingst]

"This forum" doesn't use any term, Damian. One poster did. I changed it. Personally I have no idea why or if "Pak" might be considered offensive, but it's easy to change, so what the heck.

[nan sh]

I doubt the trustiness of the documents, there are no secrecy
that Pakistan and Chinese exchange military technology.
but they never did that with written! if Chinese want
to pass any thing to Pakistan in written, it would be in English, not in Chinese.
This is another devilish Chinese, not the first time, would not the last one.

[Devesh H Rao]

Originally posted by Damien Howard:
I don't know if it really shows much anti-americanism, but it certainly shows that this publication is bias in its representation of the news. My reasoning for this statement being the fact that the title uses a racially insensitive term in its title to refer to Pakistan. As does this forum.

PAK means holy..
dunno from where you get the idea that it is a racial slur..
yeah but as jason pointed out it is easy to add a vowel to it which then becomes racially insensitive term.
all in all the whole episode reminds me of a story i used to hear in my childhood about two cats fighting over a saucer or milk and a monkey taking advantage of the mistrust between the cats makes off with the milk and the cats are left licking their paws.

[Terimaki Tojay]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
This is getting really old.
Btw in case anyone is interested in reading the above drek, I wouldn't bother. It's full of the ever-present underlying anti-Americanism that is typical of that publication, and well, most other Indian sources that are linked here. I guess these publications are only printing the type of content that sells though. :roll:

Just because a newpaper publishes some new that one is unable to digest does not make it anti-american. As per your logic, Washington Post too would be anti-american. The artical posted on TOI was from Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42692-2004Feb14.html
Here are some excerpts from Washington Post's artical:

Libyan Arms Designs Traced Back to China
Pakistanis Resold Chinese-Provided Plans
By Joby Warrick and Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, February 15, 2004; Page A01
Investigators have discovered that the nuclear weapons designs obtained by Libya through a Pakistani smuggling network originated in China, exposing yet another link in a chain of proliferation that stretched across the Middle East and Asia, according to government officials and arms experts.
...
The bomb designs and other papers turned over by Libya have yielded dramatic evidence of China's long-suspected role in transferring nuclear know-how to Pakistan in the early 1980s, they said.

Originally posted by nan sh:
I doubt the trustiness of the documents, there are no secrecy
that Pakistan and Chinese exchange military technology.
but they never did that with written! if Chinese want
to pass any thing to Pakistan in written, it would be in English, not in Chinese.
This is another devilish Chinese, not the first time, would not the last one.

Well, then you should really doubt the trustiness of Washington Post because that's where the report came from. Here is what it says:

The packet of documents, some of which included text in Chinese, contained detailed, step-by-step instructions for assembling an implosion-type nuclear bomb that could fit atop a large ballistic missile. They also included technical instructions for manufacturing components for the device, the officials and experts said.

It is amusing to know how people can just outrightly reject some thing based on their own prejudices instead of facts

[Terimaki Tojay]

Here is an artical from BBC. May be this is fake too :roll:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3491329.stm
Some excerpts:

China's actions "were irresponsible and short-sighted, and raise questions about what else China provided to Pakistan's nuclear programme," Mr Albright told the Washington Post.
...
These documents are very incriminating of China
David Albright, ex-UN arms inspector.

[Joe Pluta]

It is amusing to know how people can just outrightly reject some thing based on their own prejudices instead of facts
This is the sort of personal statement that we avoided in the other thread, Teri.
Joe

[Mapraputa Is]

JM: I guess these publications are only printing the type of content that sells though. :roll:
Can't the same be said about any "free" press?

[Terimaki Tojay]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
It is amusing to know how people can just outrightly reject some thing based on their own prejudices instead of facts
This is the sort of personal statement that we avoided in the other thread, Teri.
Joe

Statement: "Some people can just outrightly reject some thing based on their own prejudices instead of facts".
I think this a perfectly valid and true statement with no personal attack.
For me, it is also amusing to know that such people exist. So what's wrong with my statement. Whom did I attack personally??

[Jason Menard]

I'm talking about the tone of the article, not the raw facts. The author of this particular article is not-so-subtley attempting to depict the US as a bunch of idiots, as seen for example by his choice of phrasing in the following quotes.
- "The United States has just found evidence of the world's worst kept nuclear secret"
- "In fact, long before Americans discovered that much of their manufactured goods are 'Made in China'"
If this were an isolated incident, I would have dismissed it, figuring that i simply extracted the wrong tone from these comments or was placing too much meaning on them. I don't think that's the case in this instance. The truth is that this is a consistant pattern in the Indian press, not at all an isolated incident.
Then there's the title for this topic... but I won't get into that.
[ February 16, 2004: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]

[Ranga Sreenivasan]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
The truth is that this is a consistant pattern in the Indian press, not at all an isolated incident.

Granted that its a consistent pattern...but its not baseless . Most of the times the stories reported would have also appeared somewhere in the western media.
The media isn't anti-american (if you want to call it that :roll: ) without a reason. There are so many instances where the american political establishment were alerted to the facts, yet they chose to keep a blind eye over them. That really is frustrating for their Indian counterparts since India is constantly under surveillance and ridiculed for even the slightest move (that is not in compliance with the West's opinion).
By giving enough coverage to the topic, the media and in return the people of India hope that the US would not make such mistakes in the future. Aiding countries like Pakistan has a very direct negative consequence in India. I just hope that the current round of talks between India and Pakistan should help create a better relationship between the two countries.

[Terimaki Tojay]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
It's full of the ever-present underlying anti-Americanism that is typical of that publication.
I guess these publications are only printing the type of content that sells though.

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

I'm talking about the tone of the article, not the raw facts.

Sorry, when you wrote content I assumed, apparantly wrongly, that you were talking about the raw facts and not the tone.
Anyway, so what you do think of the raw facts given by Washington Post? I hope you didn't find any bad tone in their article

BTW, those statements that you've excerpted, are not really anti-american. They are the exact facts. Up till now, even after evidence through their own sources, the US does not "know" (==publicly acknowledge that they know) that Pakistan and China are cohorts in nuclear proliferation. Even after loads of evidence from the AQKhan episode, US govt. gave a clean chit to Pak. govt. Even after the killing of their own scribe in Pak. US still does not "know" that Pakistan is the real hotbed of terrorism. So what else can press say except to mock at the hypocrisy of the US govt?
[ February 16, 2004: Message edited by: Terimaki Tojay ]

[Terimaki Tojay]

Originally posted by Damien Howard:
I don't know if it really shows much anti-americanism, but it certainly shows that this publication is bias in its representation of the news. My reasoning for this statement being the fact that the title uses a racially insensitive term in its title to refer to Pakistan. As does this forum.

Pak is not a racially insensitive term. It is a standard short form for Pakistan. As is Ind for India, Aus for Australia, Eng for Elngland and so on. You can find this written in many places. The score boards of a cricket match being the most common

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by Ranga Sreenivasan:

Granted that its a consistent pattern...but its not baseless . Most of the times the stories reported would have also appeared somewhere in the western media.
The media isn't anti-american (if you want to call it that :roll: ) without a reason. There are so many instances where the american political establishment were alerted to the facts, yet they chose to keep a blind eye over them. That really is frustrating for their Indian counterparts since India is constantly under surveillance and ridiculed for even the slightest move (that is not in compliance with the West's opinion).
By giving enough coverage to the topic, the media and in return the people of India hope that the US would not make such mistakes in the future. Aiding countries like Pakistan has a very direct negative consequence in India. I just hope that the current round of talks between India and Pakistan should help create a better relationship between the two countries.

So what you are saying is, we should stick our noses in it? Then we would be told to keep out of it.

[Ranga Sreenivasan]

Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
So what you are saying is, we should stick our noses in it? Then we would be told to keep out of it.

You are indirectly already sticking your noses into it by providing aid to Pakistan and waiving huge amounts of debt... :roll:
So keeping out of the region and not trying to appease Pakistan would help in a big way...
The rhetoric about Pakistan being a natural ally, etc. should be toned down if not completely dropped...

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Ranga Sreenivasan:
You are indirectly already sticking your noses into it by providing aid to Pakistan and waiving huge amounts of debt... :roll:
So keeping out of the region and not trying to appease Pakistan would help in a big way...
The rhetoric about Pakistan being a natural ally, etc. should be toned down if not completely dropped...

Why? We have interests in the region. Pakistan needs to be controlled and urged into a direction more to our liking. It's not like India has ever been an ally of the US.

[Damien Howard]

Originally posted by Terimaki Tojay:

Pak is not a racially insensitive term. It is a standard short form for Pakistan. As is Ind for India, Aus for Australia, Eng for Elngland and so on. You can find this written in many places. The score boards of a cricket match being the most common

My mistake I made an assumption, and you know what they say about assumptions
I just assumed since "Paki" is an offensive term and "Jap" is an offensive term, that "Pak" would be as well. Sorry for causing all the unnecessary hoopla.
I still believe though that the paper should have said Pakistan and I don't believe they meant to say "holy" when they wrote Pak (I think someone mentioned in an earlier post that Pak meant holy), it doesn't fit into the context of the title or the article.

[Ranga Sreenivasan]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

Why? We have interests in the region. Pakistan needs to be controlled and urged into a direction more to our liking. It's not like India has ever been an ally of the US.

True its never been an ally...a fallout from the cold-war days.
But that was in the past...Now, if at all anybody is a natural ally (in that region) its India and not Pakistan...And while the US may want to urge Pakistan to go in a direction suited to their liking...it should not be done at the expense of India...
Since it isn't clear as to what the US interests are in the region, the Indians have taken a rather cautious approach...questioning US motives and expressing frustration over the abject ignorance shown by the US officials with regards to the proliferation issue.
And after all that, they still find a great ally in Pakistan...which is absolutely baffling.

[Devesh H Rao]

Originally posted by Damien Howard:

I still believe though that the paper should have said Pakistan and I don't believe they meant to say "holy" when they wrote Pak (I think someone mentioned in an earlier post that Pak meant holy), it doesn't fit into the context of the title or the article.

Hmmm ya in the context of the article it sure dosen't mean holy.....
but at the same time there is nothing racial about the word.

Ranga Sreenivasan

But that was in the past...Now, if at all anybody is a natural ally (in that region) its India and not Pakistan...

By the way ranga i would like to know why do we care if we are an ally of US in the region it is anytime better to be known as "India" rather than "an americas ally".
we cant demand or beg for respect we gain it and it can be done only by standing by our convictions.
All this talk of ally and friendship in the international context seems hollow when it comes to the crux. if we are not strong on our own we are never goin to have friends who we can trust. The best part would be to tackle pakistan on our own and let US get about their business in dealing with pakistan and hope they do a good job of it.
all we can do is wish the best of luck to GWB and hope he knows his geopolitics well.

[ChanSan Mehbubani]

Originally posted by Devesh H Rao:

all we can do is wish the best of luck to GWB and hope he knows his geopolitics well.

I think he is there for only few months in that post? I doubt whether American people will vote again in the favour of man who bombs a country without solid proofs and kills many innnocents.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
So what you are saying is, we should stick our noses in it? Then we would be told to keep out of it.

But nose sticks in it, nose should be removed from that.
I have noticed here that americans are not much aware of their foreign policies. And even if they know they are very much dont care about it because I think, they think its not going to affect them much.
They are told how much charity has been given to world but they are not told where this charity is being used. And how dangerous it could be when thing goes in wrong hand.
But now I also least care about this Pakistan issue because India might be first to get affected by this and I know India can deal with Pakistan with very ease.
And if Americans not worry about themselves then why should I worry about them.

[Devesh H Rao]

Originally posted by Tanga Palti:

I think he is there for only few months in that post? I doubt whether American people will vote again in the favour of man who bombs a country without solid proofs and kills many innnocents.

That's their business...
we also have a problem on hand here on who to vote for,a party which is headed by a able leader but has people like modi on its roster or a party whose only claim to fame is the name gandhi with 2 kids and a lady who may not know all the states in india to show for it.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by R K Singh:
I have noticed here that americans are not much aware of their foreign policies. And even if they know they are very much dont care about it because I think, they think its not going to affect them much.

Yeah, we're all naive and clueless. You all need to seriously get over yourselves.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by R K Singh:
I know India can deal with Pakistan with very ease.

I wouldn't be so blaise about the situation. Let's assume the worst case scenario where both countries, very enamoured with their shiny little nuclear weapons, decide to unload their new toys on each other. Maybe not even all of them, maybe just a couple here or there. You can say buh-bye to your IT industry as but one of many consequences, as foreign firms quickly realize that it makes no sense to do business in an environment such as that. Heck, even a serious buildup on the borders of the countries and the serious threat of war could be enough to damage India's economy and destroy their software industry.

[Devesh H Rao]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

1. business
2. threat

Business is short term,
Threat is long term.
It is basically for us to decide for how long we give more importance to short term gains over long term loss.
A human being cares for from where he will get food as long as he dosent see any threat to his life but if he is cornered he will fight to death irrespective of whether he gets food or money business be damned.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

Heck,

As I said when I have stop worrying about Ameticans then why should you worry about Indians.
As I said earlier, India has not much to loose.
Indian economy has not reached the point from where if it cant go down/back. So still India is poor and if economy goes down then instead of US Pizza, people will again start eating Jwar Roti.
And we have enough people to die (1 billion) for country.
How much that war will affect US, I have already talked to my friend, who is economist in NABARD, you should also think of that.
AW as I see, India can easily deal with Pakistan and truth is that US is more vulnerable than India to internation terrorism which is getting shelter in Pakistan.
Why the heck should I worry, when they are happy in sheltering the terrorist.
I have nothing to say more. Its US who is giving shelter to Pak and its Pak who is preparing human bombs, where and when these bombs will explode no body knows.
But will the US have hands in those tragedies?? You decide.
[ February 17, 2004: Message edited by: R K Singh ]

[Arjun Shastry]

{
....of war could be enough to damage India's economy and destroy their software industry
}
I doubt about that.During Dec 2001 when Indian Govt was talking about War with Pakistan,business was as usual,Even the offshore one!Software industry is fraction in terms of total economy and man power.Even closing all IT shops abruptly won't have disaster effect as closing manufacturing one.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

You all need to seriously get over yourselves.

This is my thinking, words given by Joe that common Americans least bother about its foreign policy.
Another clue I got when Thomas asked for the link for A. Q. Khan news.
AW I might be very much wrong and I wish I am wrong.

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by R K Singh:

This is my thinking, words given by Joe that common Americans least bother about its foreign policy.
Another clue I got when Thomas asked for the link for A. Q. Khan news.
AW I might be very much wrong and I wish I am wrong.

Your wish is granted.

[Mark Fletcher]

Paul Stevens: The fairy godmother of Miscellaneous Drivel

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
Your wish is granted.

I wish, I wished world peace

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by R K Singh:
Another clue I got when Thomas asked for the link for A. Q. Khan news.

When did I do that?

[Terimaki Tojay]

Some assorted comments:
The fact is that since its inception, Pak has been hostile towards India and, believe it or not, is our enemy.
Apparantly, US has interests in Pak and so it is helping Pak. US has absolutely no regards about what India's problems are with US approach towards Pak. US's sole concern is its own benefit. (Note: I'm not saying this is wrong. Just stating the facts.) So when some Americans say something like, "We can't attack Pak because then Indian cities will be ruined", my reply to them is, "BS".
US has a history of poking its nose in others business. From Vietnam to Iraq. Call it "liberation", "propogation of capitalism", or whatever.
US attacked Iraq on the suspision that Iraq was helping Al Quaida. So, theoretically, India has the right to attack US because US is helping Pak. The difference is, of course, that US is a super power while India is almost nothing as compared to that. There is no need to imagine what will happen if India starts supporting Cuba.
So what I want to say to Americans is that stop professing your love for "values", "world peace", or "humanitarian aid". US is morally as bankrupt (or millionair ) as anybody else.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
When did I do that?

where is the thread where an article from washigtonpost.com was being discussed ??
and you did nothing wrong. You(as my memory serves) asked only for link, thats all.
[ February 17, 2004: Message edited by: R K Singh ]

[Terimaki Tojay]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

Pakistan needs to be controlled and urged into a direction more to our liking.

Well, from the "tone" of your message, Jason, it seems like you think of other countries as puppies of the US who need to be controlled and urged into a direction more to our liking :roll:
This the same arrogance (which probably comes with the status of super power) that can be seen in US govt. foreign policies.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Terimaki Tojay:

Well, from the "tone" of your message, Jason, it seems like you think of other countries as puppies of the US who need to be controlled and urged into a direction more to our liking :roll:
This the same arrogance (which probably comes with the status of super power) that can be seen in US govt. foreign policies.

I feel I must direct your attention to this document.

[Terimaki Tojay]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

I feel I must direct your attention to this document.

I am sorry, but I didn't understand what's wrong with my post. How can I avoid writing "you" when I am replying to you
Comon, Jason. You were not happy with the tone of the article that I refered to and now when I pointed out the tone of your message, you don't like it?
If that's not the case, then I am missing something. Can you please be kind enough and let me know the exact problem?