U.S. Foreign policy

[joepistole]

Without actual researching it I think the US-involvement (as a Nato member) in former Yugoslavia might count as justified involvement in a non-threat (at least to the US) situation.

In Bosnia Muslims were being slaughtered by Christians. The United States intervened because of our NATO Allies. It is hard to watch innocent people get slaughtered by their own or by anyone for that matter. But our resources are limited. And if frankly is just not worth our time and effort, because then we get blamed for being an imperialist. If we wanted to invade every country that engaged in atrocities, we would be all over the place. We would need a much larger military.

In this thread, you have Diamond Heart blaming us for not getting invovled in Kashmir. The United States cannot and should not be the one who solves all problems. If you solve some but not others, you get the Diamond Heart response, "you should have intervened here or there".

In the case of Kashmir and Pakistan, Kashmir has been a part of India since before the creation of the state of Pakistan. Pakistan was created after Indian independence for the Muslims. Frankly, I think it is silly. India treats Muslims very well from what I can see. The state pays for the Haj for every Muslim citizen.

People of the world, you need to take responsibiltiy of your own issues...e.g. Kashmir. Kashmir is an issue for India and Pakistan to resolve...not the United States. If you are Saudi and unhappy with your government. Then you need to work to change it...not go whining about foriegn powers. The United States does not have troops their to protect the royals from their subjects. It has troops in the area to protect the area from other soverign states...a policy which I disagree with, but so be it.

Casting the United States as evil is not going to solve your problems. You need to take responsibility, and solve them internally yourselves. You can blame the United States all day long, until the cows come home, and it won't solve not one of your problems.

 

[DiamondHearts]

I think that as one of the world's sole superpowers, it is somewhat our responsibility to intervene in international scenarios. There is no such thing as an atrocity that is not our business. All atrocities are the business of anyone and everyone who can do something to stop it.

What if that very superpower is the cause of these atrocities, then who do we turn to?

 

[nirakar]

Without actual researching it I think the US-involvement (as a Nato member) in former Yugoslavia might count as justified involvement in a non-threat (at least to the US) situation.

You don't know about the earlier phase when the USA (and Germany) backed the rise of Milosevic and Tudjman and the rise of ethnic based politics with the goal of breaking up Yugoslavia. The USA and Germany backed Slovenian succession which left the Serbians too large a segment of the remaining state for the other ethnicities to be comfortable.

Why did the USA and Germany do this? I can only speculate, but I think the idea might have been to make a mess in Yugoslavia so that the newly liberated from communism states of Bulgaria and Romania would not look to the Yugoslavian model as an alternative to complete embrace of capitalism including foreign ownership of whatever was worth owning in Bulgaria and Romania. Destroying Yugoslavia also would create better prices for Foreign purchasers of Yugoslav assets.

The bulk of the problem in Yugoslavia goes back to memories of the ethnic massacres during and before WW2 but if the USA and Germany had not worked for the break up of Yugoslavia the war in which you think the USA was making an altruistic intervention might not have happened at all.

 

[joepistole]

You don't know about the earlier phase when the USA (and Germany) backed the rise of Milosevic and Tudjman and the rise of ethnic based politics with the goal of breaking up Yugoslavia. The USA and Germany backed Slovenian succession which left the Serbians too large a segment of the remaining state for the other ethnicities to be comfortable.

Why did the USA and Germany do this? I can only speculate, but I think the idea might have been to make a mess in Yugoslavia so that the newly liberated from communism states of Bulgaria and Romania would not look to the Yugoslavian model as an alternative to complete embrace of capitalism including foreign ownership of whatever was worth owning in Bulgaria and Romania. Destroying Yugoslavia also would create better prices for Foreign purchasers of Yugoslav assets.

The bulk of the problem in Yugoslavia goes back to memories of the ethnic massacres during and before WW2 but if the USA and Germany had not worked for the break up of Yugoslavia the war in which you think the USA was making an altruistic intervention might not have happened at all.

You can speculate what might and might not have happened. The United States and Germany supported the independence movements that led to the break-up of Yugoslavia because the people of the area wanted Yugoslavia to break up. The people wanted independence. The United States generally believes that if people want to govern themselves, they should be allowed to do so. Genocide is not a tool that should be used to keep control over a populace.

 

[S.A.M.]

Here, this should give you everything you need:

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm

 

[nirakar]

The US government does not recognize, nor ever has, the right of the Kashmiri people to live free of occupation from India. No talk of democracy or freedom can be taken seriously when the US (the "sole protector of liberty" as they call themselves) willfully ignores the death and oppression of millions of people in Kashmir.

Kashmir deserves a thread of it's own. I had the good fortune to visit Kashmir (Srinagar, the valley, and Ladakh) in 1988.

I can hold the USA responsible for doing bad or preventing others from doing good but I am not ready to hold the USA responsible for taking a pass on many issues (like Kashmir).

The victims of the Kashmir mess are not all Muslims. Many Hindus had to flee their homes in Kashmir due to violence. Some say many Muslim Kashmiris no longer want to be part of Pakistan because Pakistan is a mess.

I am guessing that you are either Pakistani or Kashmiri.

Being basically secular and anti-religious fundamentalism and anti-utra-patriotic nationalism, I see the Partition of India and Pakistan as a disaster. I understand why the Muslims did not want to be a majority in a Hindu dominated state.

My ridiculous fantasy solution for Kashmir would be to create a new state from Pakistani, Indian and Chinese Kashmir and Punjab. The new state should be 32% Muslim, 32% Sikh, 32% Hindu and 4% Buddhist and other.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think the partition was unnecessary too. Mostly because all the religious Muslim leaders were firmly against it. It was driven by the Muslim league, most of them educated under the British and led by Jinnah, the most unreligious Muslim, who was educated at Oxford U.

The voices of the truly religious Muslims like Abul Kalam Azad and Jamat-i-Islamia were drowned out by megalomaniacs. Personally, I think Jinnah wanted to be Prime Minister or President and so did Nehru. They partitioned the country so both could have their little empires.

My fantasy is for people to wake up and realise that the world is getting smaller and create a South Asian Union and chuck out all the sectarian garbage. If Germany and England can do it, why can't we?

 

[DiamondHearts]

In Bosnia Muslims were being slaughtered by Christians. The United States intervened because of our NATO Allies. It is hard to watch innocent people get slaughtered by their own or by anyone for that matter. But our resources are limited. And if frankly is just not worth our time and effort, because then we get blamed for being an imperialist. If we wanted to invade every country that engaged in atrocities, we would be all over the place. We would need a much larger military.

Except however that America and its NATO allies allowed the massacres of Srebrenica to take place, refusing to avert the catastrophe simply because they did not want to fight the Serbs.

It was because of the unbearable pressure from worldwide condemnation and outrage at the massacres of Kosovars that America decided to do something. The Muslim countries (Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc) had already pledged that if the Western world and especially the Europeans would not control the situation, then they would be forced to do something.

In this thread, you have Diamond Heart blaming us for not getting invovled in Kashmir. The United States cannot and should not be the one who solves all problems. If you solve some but not others, you get the Diamond Heart response, "you should have intervened here or there".

Don't be so oblivious. You know what I am talking about. When the US government condemns Kashmiri guerrilla and resistance groups and gives tacit support of India's right to occupy Kashmir, it is getting involved in the conflict.

What I am opposed to is the US policy of denying legitimacy to righteous movements for self-determination of Muslim groups who are under occupation. This is a worldwide phenoma, which includes Palestine, Chechnya, Somalia, parts of Azerbaijan, East Turkestan, and Kashmir.

In the case of Kashmir and Pakistan, Kashmir has been a part of India since before the creation of the state of Pakistan. Pakistan was created after Indian independence for the Muslims. Frankly, I think it is silly. India treats Muslims very well from what I can see. The state pays for the Haj for every Muslim citizen.

You have no idea of India's treatment of Muslims. Nor do you care about Muslim independence from occupation, as can be noted by your responses in this forum.

India was ruled by the British who divided it between Muslim India [Pakistan] and Hindu India [Bharat, Hindustan (as it is known there)]. The modern nation state named "India" in the West is only part of India (South Asia). It is similar to France calling itself Europe.

Kashmir has a majority Muslim population which was forcibly annexed to India in the early years after independence. A UN plebiscite was to be enforced, but India has always prevented it. Kashmiri people have faced 60 years of occupation, rape, and murder by Indian military forces. Enough is enough.

Pakistan's right to Kashmir results from the principle of the partition of India by the British where a majority Muslim region would be given to Pakistan and a majority Hindu region be given to Hindustan. India invaded Kashmir right after independence (and also Pakistan proper), yet because of courage of Pakistani people, they were able to push the invaders back from the homeland.

People of the world, you need to take responsibiltiy of your own issues...e.g. Kashmir. Kashmir is an issue for India and Pakistan to resolve...not the United States.

Then America should stay out of the conflict, yet it has attempted to deny legitimacy and even claimed some far-fletched things such as Kashmir is a battleground for war on terror to deny Kashmiris their legitimate right of independence from oppressive Indian military.

If you are Saudi and unhappy with your government. Then you need to work to change it...not go whining about foriegn powers. The United States does not have troops their to protect the royals from their subjects. It has troops in the area to protect the area from other soverign states...a policy which I disagree with, but so be it.

Wrong. The US has consistently functioned as a security force for the royal families and dictators in many parts of the Muslim world. They are propping up corrupt leaders and preventing the will of the people to be exercised in these countries. The US in exchange gets financial benefits exclusively from these corrupt leaders. America is the single most unpopular country in all the Muslim world, this is no coincidence, but based on the collective experience of US foreign policy in this region for more than 50 years which has been diametrically opposed to the will of the people.

Casting the United States as evil is not going to solve your problems. You need to take responsibility, and solve them internally yourselves. You can blame the United States all day long, until the cows come home, and it won't solve not one of your problems.

Who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan? Who supports the corrupt kings and dictators in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Uzbekistan, UAE? Who is supplying occupation armies with equipment and money in Somalia, Palestine, Kashmir?

America is a major force of destabilization and terror for people living in these countries. The US no longer holds the high ground, they are hypocrites and their foreign policy has always resulted in the worst for people living in Muslim world. The only solution is for the US to isolate itself from the Muslim world, because it cannot be trusted to be fair any longer. Resistance to American occupation and its blatant hypocrisy is justified.

 

[S.A.M.]

Loads of gibberish there. I'm a Muslim Indian. I'm treated very well indeed. Both my parents came from very poor families and made their own lives. Most Muslims who are in a pathetic state in India are there because they refuse to get educated. The top actor is Shahrukh Khan. Watch him in public in India, he'd be lucky to have his underwear dry, if the mobs were allowed to slobber over him, I was run down myself when I got between him and a mob at a wedding. The rocket scientist President was Muslim. Show me a Hindu or Christian Shahrukh Khan or President in Pakistan.

 

[DiamondHearts]

SAM, Nirakar. I assume both of you are Indian, correct me if I am wrong.

In the end it is what the Kashmiri people desire and that is independence from India and protection from Pakistan. It is the Kashmiris who have been the victims of 60 years of Indian occupation and brutality. I do not blame Kashmiris for hating India because of what horror they faced at the hands of the Indian military.

Kashmir will now and forever be opposed to India because of what India did to them. Pakistan, on the other hand, has always looked out for Kashmir and supported its liberation, therefore in the eyes of the vast majority of Kashmiris Pakistan is their savior and India is their oppressor.

I have also visited in Kashmir in my youth, and I have in my heart and my liver a strong attachment to Kashmir which will never fade. I pray for the day when Kashmir is liberated because I have lost many people I love at the hands of the brutal Indian military.

 

[iceaura]

My fantasy is for people to wake up and realise that the world is getting smaller and create a South Asian Union and chuck out all the sectarian garbage. If Germany and England can do it, why can't we?

Germany and England had their fundie burnouts first - and England had a safety valve or two in other continents. The hope is that the Islamic world does not have to engineer a Holocaust of its own to learn these lessons about religion. That hope is not founded in observation of current trends.

Kashmir will now and forever be opposed to India because of what India did to them. Pakistan, on the other hand, has always looked out for Kashmir and supported its liberation, therefore in the eyes of the vast majority of Kashmiris Pakistan is their savior and India is their oppressor.

Pakistan has no record of benevolence towards anyone.

 

[S.A.M.]

So, no Shahrukh Khan or Abdul Kalam in Pakistan?

I've seen Kashmiri Pundits in Mumbai. One of them used to come every year throughout my childhood to sell Kashmiri goods house to house. He always brought us gifts. Now he lives in a refugee camp, with 100,000 other Kashmiri Pundits many of whom have also lost relatives at the hands of militants imported from Afghanistan after the mujahideen escapade in the 1980s; in fact, that is when the slaughter in Kashmir began. There is more than one type of Kashmiri. Kicking out all the Pundits and demanding a referendum is like kicking out all the Palestinians and demanding a referendum in Jerusalem.

And just to keep it relevant to this thread, I blame US foreign policy for Sajjad Afghani and Harakat ul Ansar

 

[DiamondHearts]

So, no Shahrukh Khan or Abdul Kalam in Pakistan?

I've seen Kashmiri Pundits in Mumbai. One of them used to come every year throughout my childhood to sell Kashmiri goods house to house. He always brought us gifts. Now he lives in a refugee camp, with 100,000 other Kashmiri Pundits. There is more than one type of Kashmiri.

You cannot deny the unfair treatment of Muslims by bringing examples of a few successful Muslims in India. This is like comparing African American experience in America by using Barrack Obama or Colin Powell. Still the vast majority of African Americans have problems in education, literacy, and jobs, and so do Indian Muslims.

Concerning India, we have already discussed this topic in a previous thread. If you remember I gave several examples which include discrimination against Urdu language, defamation of Muslim heritage of India, declaring Muslim monuments such as Taj Mahal, Red Fort, etc (which had Islamic religious significance) to simply nationalistic symbols, discrimination in work (Hindus not serving Muslim customers or allowing Muslim rickshaw drivers to take them), creation of Muslim ghettos, and the wide suspicion of Hindus that Muslims are agents of Pakistan (hence having to prove they are more anti-Pakistani than Hindus even).

In some regions of India such as Gujurat and neighboring provinces, discrimination against Muslims is a major problem which has even resulted in massacres by Hindu fanatics of more than 3,000 Muslim women and children (raping and burning them alive).

In Kashmir, the bloodbath and injustices continue weekly. Young men are kidnapped from their villages and found dead. Women are taken to Indian barracks and never seen again. Whole villages live in terror from Indian military brutality. In Kashmir for every 4 Kashmiris, there is 1 Indian soldier, this is how bad this situation is. Peaceful protests are violently broken up witth he deaths of hundreds of people, popular leaders are killed, Mosques are desecrated. This situation must end.

 

[S.A.M.]

Heh, I am a Muslim from India, I've travelled to the main Muslim centers and I come from a very active Muslim community on one side of the family. The biggest problem we are facing today is over educated daughters and under educated sons. The kidnappings of young men by the fundies in Afghanistan/Pakistan is also well known, same guys keep planting bombs around the country. There have been several in Mumbai, where I come from, where innocent civilians have died. Same guys setting off bombs in Pakistan too, so its incredible that you should support it.

If the Urdu language is dying its because everyone is getting an English education except for those who are getting no education. Sadia Dehlvi and Jagjit Singh can only do so much. Most of the Urdu Shairi is written by Hindu poets today, so the idea that Indians are doing anything to suppress it is ludicrous. My grandmother was educated in Anjuman-e-Islam, I was educated in an English school. At least I can read and speak Urdu, but its only because I taught myself.

 

[nirakar]

SAM, Nirakar. I assume both of you are Indian, correct me if I am wrong.

I am from the USA. My most recent immigrant ancestor came to the USA about 1890.

"Nirakar" is a Sanskrit word and I did briefly live in India.

On my travels, while I was in Srinagar saw a protest against the Indian control which included brick throwing. In Ladakh a few weeks later I saw a Buddhist protest against Christian missionaries.

I fell in love with call to prayer while at Nagin lake. I hope they never bought better loudspeakers because I think I like a little distortion in the call to prayer.

I dislike injustice, hypocrisy and disinformation. If somebody is being unfair to Muslims I will be on the same side as you if I understand the situation correctly.

You might be more pro Muslim than you are anti-injustice. I don't think Kashmir is as clear a situation as you make it out to be. Yes, in theory Muslim majority Kashmir should have been on the Pakistani side of the partition. Maybe Kashmir should have remained independent. My guess is that Muslim Kashmiris good choose now between being in India, being in Pakistan, or being an independent state that has peacefull borders and trade with both India and Pakistan, Muslim Kashmiris would choose independence from both Pakistan and India.

That is just a guess and not even an educated guess.

 

[S.A.M.]

Germany and England had their fundie burnouts first - and England had a safety valve or two in other continents. The hope is that the Islamic world does not have to engineer a Holocaust of its own to learn these lessons about religion. That hope is not founded in observation of current trends.
.

I would not give up on Muslims so easily. Especially not the South Asian ones.

 

[John99]

Without actual researching it I think the US-involvement (as a Nato member) in former Yugoslavia might count as justified involvement in a non-threat (at least to the US) situation.

NO. It sure seems like it is better to do nothing.

 

[DiamondHearts]

Heh, I am a Muslim from India, I've travelled to the main Muslim centers and I come from a very active Muslim community on one side of the family. The biggest problem we are facing today is over educated daughters and under educated sons.

I respect your heritage and family. Muslims in South Asia have a multitude of problems, but we need to stand together for justice and fairness, and help further the cause of Muslims in South Asia and worldwide.

The kidnappings of young men by the fundies in Afghanistan/Pakistan is also well known, same guys keep planting bombs around the country. There have been several in Mumbai, where I come from, where innocent civilians have died. Same guys setting off bombs in Pakistan too, so its incredible that you should support it.

SAM, you are making the same exact mistake which Republicans make in evaluating situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those who legitimately fight against Indian military and government are benevolent, those who kill innocents are wrong. You cannot put all of these individuals together with the criminals, there are brave, courageous revolutionaries in Kashmir fighting for the rights of their people. We would be lucky to be even half the individuals they are.

If the Urdu language is dying its because everyone is getting an English education except for those who are getting no education. Sadia Dehlvi and Jagjit Singh can only do so much. Most of the Urdu Shairi is written by Hindu poets today, so the idea that Indians are doing anything to suppress it is ludicrous. My grandmother was educated in Anjuman-e-Islam, I was educated in an English school. At least I can read and speak Urdu, but its only because I taught myself.

In Pakistan, Urdu language is flourishing. Punjab, which is not a traditional center of Urdu language, has become the center of renaissance of Urdu poets and philosophers. Learning Urdu and adopting South Asian Islamic culture is a necessity because it is the link between the Muslims of today to the great Muslims of the past. The Muslims are a strong group which has accomplished many great things in this land, we are as much a part of South Asia as the Hindus. It is only because they want to sideline us that Muslims are in the grave state which they are in India. "Muslims" like Shahrukh Khan and Abul Kalam promote Hindu culture, Hindu icons, and Hindu ideology, but they ignore Islamic culture, why is this.

India [South Asia] is both Hindu and Muslim, and become the vast majority of Hindus could not and will not accept this is why Pakistan was created.

I dislike injustice, hypocrisy and disinformation. If somebody is being unfair to Muslims I will be on the same side as you if I understand the situation correctly.

Then stand up for the rights of downtrodden and oppressed of Kashmir.

You might be more pro Muslim than you are anti-injustice.

Who are you to say where I stand?

I don't think Kashmir is as clear a situation as you make it out to be. Yes, in theory Muslim majority Kashmir should have been on the Pakistani side of the partition. Maybe Kashmir should have remained independent. My guess is that Muslim Kashmiris good choose now between being in India, being in Pakistan, or being an independent state that has peacefull borders and trade with both India and Pakistan, Muslim Kashmiris would choose independence from both Pakistan and India.

That is just a guess and not even an educated guess.

The mere fact is that for nearly 60 years, Muslims of Kashmir have faced oppression and injustice at the hands of brutal Indian military. The situation has gone too far and now the people of Kashmir will never, even in 100 years, look at India the same again. India is a tyrant, oppressor, rapist, and murderer to the Kashmiri people, and so it is this way to me.

I stand for the rights of Kashmiri people to live free from tyranny of India, and I might have to stand alone in this forum, but I know they prayers of Kashmiri and Muslim people are with me in this. God will liberate Kashmir one day, and this day will be the greatest day in the history of the Muslims of South Asia.

 

[S.A.M.]

What a load of BS, there was no militancy in Kashmir before the mujahideens poured in from Afghanistan. And like I said, Muslim culture in India is upto the Muslims. Earlier, Indian cinema and songs were Urdu, now we have English. The times they are a changing.

 

[John99]

SAM, do you live near the fence?