Comments on: Pakistan, from Swat to Baluchistan via Waziristan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/ Perspectives on Pakistan Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:31:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Myra MacDonald http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18481 Wed, 27 May 2009 10:22:46 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18481 Seeking a civil, intelligent discussion with space for all sides of an argument is not bias. Those of you who see it as such are indeed on the wrong forum.

Nikhil, your suggestion is a good one, but you will see from the comment above how it is open to misinterpretation.

Since this discussion is now well off topic and does not apear to be leading anywhere, I am closing the comments on this post.

Myra

]]>
By: Pravin http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18479 Wed, 27 May 2009 08:41:17 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18479 I am an Indian and a regular reader of blogs on this website. This is the first time I have seen authors talking for one side of the argument. Myra always (before this article too) sounded like taking side of Pakistan, but this time she has said it herself. I hope she realizes her mistake and take corrective actions. So that she do not scare away good Indian bloggers from her articles.

]]>
By: bulletfish http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18476 Wed, 27 May 2009 07:14:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18476 Many killed as suicide bomber targets police offices in Lahore (Times, UK, 29/05/2009)

The cycle keeps going.

]]>
By: anup http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18475 Wed, 27 May 2009 07:07:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18475 Myra

“But do you want a discussion or a platform?”

—Set the ball rolling, we’re game. Set the platform for a perspective discussion & play the role of a catalyst, sort of umpire.

]]>
By: Nikhil http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18472 Wed, 27 May 2009 05:30:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18472 Myra,

You should write a disclaimer on your blog that you’ll be taking sides when Pakistanis are either unable or unwilling to make a cogent argument that will move the debate forward.

]]>
By: Aman http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18471 Wed, 27 May 2009 05:10:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18471 Myra,
We try to answer the questions to the best of our knowledge and we don’t evade answers and we have accepted mistakes which India has made in the past.
Asking difficult questions is not akin to scaring people away. If you want a forum where Indians and Pakistanis co-exist then there will be difficult questions for both sides to be answered.
we are doing our bit to the best of our knowledge and expect the same from Pakistanis. It doesn’t matter who answers the questions. If you can send us links so that we may be able to find the answers ourselves then it will be better.
Also, I have tried and failed to understand the Pakistanis claim of the necessity to sponsor terrorism and use LeT and JeD as strategic investments to keep India in check. May be you can answer that too.
On second thoughts you can send us links which give us a nuanced understanding of the view points on both sides of the border. That will make you look impartial.
Anyways, I feel its useless to waste my time here. I would rather post something where Pakistan as a topic is not involved.

Myra, your questions on china and India relationship including the 1962 war and current economic and race to dominate Indian ocean doesn’t fit the title: Pakistan: Now or Never. Its bye from me.

@ Indian friends,
I really feel its useless to keep fighting here when the host itself is biased. You can’t change their viewpoint.
Something as simple as leave terrorism and come to the talking table doesn’t get appreciated.
I suggest all of us can move our energies to India: A Billion Aspirations, we will have varied topics, occassionally seasoned with Pakistan. Let others say and do what they want, we will do what is right. May be I will check this forum once in a while but you would like to participate in building our nation rather than care about smear campaigns elsewhere. Will see you in India specific forums, I don’t want to be hyphenated with Pakistan wherever I go.

]]>
By: Myra MacDonald http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18459 Tue, 26 May 2009 23:03:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18459 Guys, you are going way off topic again.

That would be ok if it advanced the discussion, but it doesn’t. Have you considered asking why Pakistan sees a link between Siachen and Kargil rather than assuming there is no answer? Or why it sees a difference between the Shaksgam valley (ceded to China by Pakistan pending a final settlement of the Kashmir dispute) and the Saltoro ridge above Siachen?

If you frame your comment in the context of “you can’t answer this”, you won’t get an answer.

I could answer those comments, being one of the few people to have been to both sides of Siachen, with both the Indian and Pakistan armies, and listened to both sides of the argument. But do you want a discussion or a platform?

I welcome the comments that take the discussion forward, particularly from those who add links and new ideas. But here’s my problem. If I ask you to allow space for Pakistanis to feel comfortable posting on this blog, you accuse me of bias. If I were to give the Pakistan side of the argument to make sure both sides get heard, you will accuse me of bias.

So what do you want to do? We can have an intelligent discussion that allows all sides of the argument to be expressed. Or I can close posts every time the discussion strays off topic and gets repetitive.

Myra

]]>
By: Mauryan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18456 Tue, 26 May 2009 21:23:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18456 Punjabiyaar writes: “I asked exactly same question in my earlier post, lets see if anybody from Pakistan comes up with a sane answer,but I doubt if they have something on it.”

You are never going to get an honest reply from Pakistanis. They parrot only one thing all the time. May be Myra or someone “neutral” might step in and admonish us Indians for being rude towards Pakistanis on this forum and using foul language. This is the cycle I see repeated on these biased blogs.

]]>
By: punjabiyaar http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18441 Tue, 26 May 2009 18:49:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18441 Mauryan
“Pakistan cedes this barren region to China from Kashmir that it calls as a disputed territory, yet to be settled through the UN. But Pakistan fights India on Siachien. Why is that?”

I asked exactly same question in my earlier post, lets see if anybody from Pakistan comes up with a sane answer,but I doubt if they have something on it.

]]>
By: Mauryan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/22/pakistan-from-swat-to-baluchistan-via-waziristan/comment-page-2/#comment-18438 Tue, 26 May 2009 18:06:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2773#comment-18438 Babag writes: “The Kargil issue should be considered with the Siachen glacier. India occupied that area which threatened Pakistan’s interest. To me, that was a tit for tat. Timing was wrong, but it was a good idea”

Siachien is a barren glacier, just like Aksai Chin. Pakistan cedes this barren region to China from Kashmir that it calls as a disputed territory, yet to be settled through the UN. But Pakistan fights India on Siachien. Why is that? What gave Pakistan the right to cede a region that is not officially its territory yet? I just want a consistent answer. I am not asking this question from a tit-for-tat perspective. I see a double standard in Pakistan’s policy. I’d like an explanation from a Pakistani perspective.

]]>