ashdoc
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,980
- Likes
- 3,682
yeah i feel so.
consider the case of bangladesh.before it was created ie when it was east pakistan the border with it was relatively well guarded compared to at least today.
with the creation of bangladesh that country became a supposed 'friend' and the border with it began to be neglected. today only 17000 BSF personnel guard the border roughly ,actually slightly less than half the sanctioned force of 35000.actually even 35000 is not enough.
this has allowed massive amount of so called refugees to enter the country at will. there is hardly any army to guard that boundary.
the BSF have been given orders to not shoot at anybody on this border as bangladeshis are our ' friends '.
so they are helpless in stopping the influx of ' refugees'. if they try to stop them they are physically attacked and mauled and with the order not to shoot at the ' refugees ' are unable to even protect themselves.
this has allowed practically unchecked influx of bangladeshis into india.
the bordering districts of bengal have shown large increases of muslim population over the years. obviously this has been encouraged......massively so by the communist govt of west bengal to increase what it sees as a captive vote bank....though that perception has been belied in the current elections.
in assam it has been worse as here the demography has been completely changed across the state. an estimated 40% of the population is now muslim in assam. it is not impossible that the population will become majority muslim in assam in the future.this has been encouraged by both the congress and the asom gana parishad, both accusing the other of encouraging bangladeshis to come in the state and then doing exactly that when they come to power.
worse , over the years the bangladeshis that have come in recent years have been increasingly radicalised over the years and are clearly implicated in numerous acts of terrorism in india. radical outfits like HUJI have sown terror in india.
yet nothing at all is being done to stop this by the central govt.the bangladeshis in india are estimated to be some 40 million.
which brings me to the question of pakistan.
let us suppose the kashmir problem is solved to both sides satisfaction.
tensions along the border cease.
immediately our govt will declare pak to be our ' friend '.pseudointellectuals like mahesh bhatt will demand ' greater people to people interaction across the border ' and all that stuff.
the army, which at the moment maintains a strict vigil across the border wiil over the years be asked to relax it, especially if for several years there is no exchange of firing on the border. the border could be more and more open like that of bangladesh.
this will only allow the pakistanis to arrive in the numbers to escape the drudgery of extreme poverty in pakistan and take advantage of indias economic success. this obviously will be encouraged by our ' secular ' politicians to increase their vote bank. over the years these people will be given voter icards and will be 'legalised' to make them vote for pseudosecular parties just like bangladeshis have been similarly ' legalised'.
worse, these pakis will be influenced by crazed talibani ideas much more than bangladeshis and try to force their austere version of islam in the areas they settle in. they will be inculcated with ideas of hatred to hindus much more than the bangladeshis are . communal riots and bomb blasts will be a natural corrolary to all this. these people will be far more tougher than hindus and hindus will be forced go away and settle in other areas making large areas ' hindu free '. this can especially occur in bordering states like punjab rajasthan and gujrat.
all under the benign eye of the pseudoscular establishment., of course.
thus we might see a whole new picture in the country.
under these circumstances isnt it better that tensions with pak should be a permanent state of affairs ?
to be sure there will be a constant tension on the border. acts of terrorism will occur. the military budget will be kept high draining precious resources.
but surely that is better than large areas of the country becoming muslim dominated.
in fact the tensions will force us to remain on guard to protect india.otherwise it is our practise to let down our guard at the slightest hint of peace while others dont.
with peace we might reduce our miltary capabilities while pak may not do so,our politicoes will go to sleep until pak feels confident of taking on india and suddenly ' wakes ' them from their slumber.
already china has done this once, i need not remind you.
in fact tensions will force us to remain on the alert to protect ourselves.
otherwise our attitude is to relax and do nothing until it is too late.
for a nation of ' sleepers ' on national security issues it is better that constant tensions keep us burning the midnight oil.
under these circumstances i want to advance my own little mad theory-- tensions with pakistan should be a permanent state of affairs .
What say ?
consider the case of bangladesh.before it was created ie when it was east pakistan the border with it was relatively well guarded compared to at least today.
with the creation of bangladesh that country became a supposed 'friend' and the border with it began to be neglected. today only 17000 BSF personnel guard the border roughly ,actually slightly less than half the sanctioned force of 35000.actually even 35000 is not enough.
this has allowed massive amount of so called refugees to enter the country at will. there is hardly any army to guard that boundary.
the BSF have been given orders to not shoot at anybody on this border as bangladeshis are our ' friends '.
so they are helpless in stopping the influx of ' refugees'. if they try to stop them they are physically attacked and mauled and with the order not to shoot at the ' refugees ' are unable to even protect themselves.
this has allowed practically unchecked influx of bangladeshis into india.
the bordering districts of bengal have shown large increases of muslim population over the years. obviously this has been encouraged......massively so by the communist govt of west bengal to increase what it sees as a captive vote bank....though that perception has been belied in the current elections.
in assam it has been worse as here the demography has been completely changed across the state. an estimated 40% of the population is now muslim in assam. it is not impossible that the population will become majority muslim in assam in the future.this has been encouraged by both the congress and the asom gana parishad, both accusing the other of encouraging bangladeshis to come in the state and then doing exactly that when they come to power.
worse , over the years the bangladeshis that have come in recent years have been increasingly radicalised over the years and are clearly implicated in numerous acts of terrorism in india. radical outfits like HUJI have sown terror in india.
yet nothing at all is being done to stop this by the central govt.the bangladeshis in india are estimated to be some 40 million.
which brings me to the question of pakistan.
let us suppose the kashmir problem is solved to both sides satisfaction.
tensions along the border cease.
immediately our govt will declare pak to be our ' friend '.pseudointellectuals like mahesh bhatt will demand ' greater people to people interaction across the border ' and all that stuff.
the army, which at the moment maintains a strict vigil across the border wiil over the years be asked to relax it, especially if for several years there is no exchange of firing on the border. the border could be more and more open like that of bangladesh.
this will only allow the pakistanis to arrive in the numbers to escape the drudgery of extreme poverty in pakistan and take advantage of indias economic success. this obviously will be encouraged by our ' secular ' politicians to increase their vote bank. over the years these people will be given voter icards and will be 'legalised' to make them vote for pseudosecular parties just like bangladeshis have been similarly ' legalised'.
worse, these pakis will be influenced by crazed talibani ideas much more than bangladeshis and try to force their austere version of islam in the areas they settle in. they will be inculcated with ideas of hatred to hindus much more than the bangladeshis are . communal riots and bomb blasts will be a natural corrolary to all this. these people will be far more tougher than hindus and hindus will be forced go away and settle in other areas making large areas ' hindu free '. this can especially occur in bordering states like punjab rajasthan and gujrat.
all under the benign eye of the pseudoscular establishment., of course.
thus we might see a whole new picture in the country.
under these circumstances isnt it better that tensions with pak should be a permanent state of affairs ?
to be sure there will be a constant tension on the border. acts of terrorism will occur. the military budget will be kept high draining precious resources.
but surely that is better than large areas of the country becoming muslim dominated.
in fact the tensions will force us to remain on guard to protect india.otherwise it is our practise to let down our guard at the slightest hint of peace while others dont.
with peace we might reduce our miltary capabilities while pak may not do so,our politicoes will go to sleep until pak feels confident of taking on india and suddenly ' wakes ' them from their slumber.
already china has done this once, i need not remind you.
in fact tensions will force us to remain on the alert to protect ourselves.
otherwise our attitude is to relax and do nothing until it is too late.
for a nation of ' sleepers ' on national security issues it is better that constant tensions keep us burning the midnight oil.
under these circumstances i want to advance my own little mad theory-- tensions with pakistan should be a permanent state of affairs .
What say ?
