WAFF Vet Club[Click here to Join WAFF!] WAFF Moderators Forum
General Discussion
(The Den)
The World's Armed Forces Forum History, Politics, Economics and Religion Forum
Greece & Turkey Defence Forum Europe, Middle East & Africa
Defence Forum
Asia & Pacific Defence Forum
Help, Suggestions & Complaints
   
   
WAFF Debates Forum
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

July 20 2012 at 2:17 AM
No score for this post
E7  (Login uncontrolled_substance)


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
scquare
(Login scquare)
Gagah Setia (Malaysia)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 2:49 AM 

Anyway... what is a couple of Indians being killed???? After all isn't the master entitled a couple of funs over its slave??? India is drifting to the US orbit and sooner or later will do its bidding like the Japanese and Koreans. This is how the west lord over us Asians and you dont have to go far as how they can easily instigated divide-and-rule like the British did.....

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

AryanArya
(Login AryanArya)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 3:53 AM 

LOL, for the chinese anyone and everyone who is against china and close to US is a 'slave'. If India is a slave to US, what does it make of china which has even more closer economic ties with US ? Without US and its economic support, China would not even be where it is today.During the 1970s and 80s, its the US which rescued China from the $h!thole which Mao made it to be and brought it from isolation.If the chinese dont like US and its 'slaves' like Japan and Korea, why do they even beg their money and investments then ? Why do they treat their own people as slaves and have red carpet for US capitalists ? What a shameless people !

===========================================
[linked image]

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda


-------------------------------------------
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 5:11 AM 

""""""Anyway... what is a couple of Indians being killed???? After all isn't the master entitled a couple of funs over its slave??? """"""""""


unlike in china where deaths of fisherman by russians and paulus( some tiny country somewhere) goes unnoticed , india has worlds largest free media which blows any crime to kingdom come. even if a minster of parliament scracthes his arse and picks his nose in toilet its all over the media, so deaths of innocent people are taken seriously in india.



""""""""India is drifting to the US orbit and sooner or later will do its bidding like the Japanese and Koreans. This is how the west lord over us Asians and you dont have to go far as how they can easily instigated divide-and-rule like the British did.....""""""""""""""""


india is not like korea and japan and will never let usa build any sort of base in india.india however is looking forward to and is already building bases in turk or tajikistan and vietnam and mongolia.
india sees usa as future potential ally or buffer against islamic terrorists and chinese.
no more.
its only potential not present.
the reason india rejected f-35s out of hand without even competing it with typoons and rafales is not because f-35 is lesser plane but there is suspision in india for usa since usa is very buddy buddy with pakis and chinese.

and its india who gives shelter to poor helpless tibetean lamas not usa .

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 6:12 AM 

maybe some day usa will realize that for money and small time gains its very bad to make friends with terrorists and thugs.

since 1970s india is warning the world about islamic terrorism, nobody cared then.
9/11 opened many eyes.

as long as usa keeps on protecting pakis from themselves and from outside like india. ( usa and britain directly threatened india with war in 1965,1971-and put pressure in kargil war , parliament attacks etc) india and usa can never be allies.

right now usa if allied to any country in asia its pakis,chinese and arabs..koreans and japs has taken back seat.
an old proverb if u want to know what a person is like look at his friends.

its so funny when u look at it.
chinese openly says that one day they will fvk usa , just let the time come.
arabs and pakis openly say that they want nothing more then the death of usa and israel and yes india too.
even so usa ignores all that and says let death do us apart.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
scq
(Login scquare)
Gagah Setia (Malaysia)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 6:37 AM 

AryanArya: Having economic closeness with the US shows China is equal with the US and the west, in general. US fear of China is apparent, let alone master-slave relationship. Whereas, India has not been view that way by the world, rather a place where they can manipulate to the wests advantage and India happily obliged as anything against Chinese is good without logical think on its part master-slave relationship?

Moa: Death in India is taken seriously??? Pls be mindful of the Bhopal tragedy. The victims have yet to receive the righteous they demand and deserved. You dont need a base to be dominated. If you feel good about everything whenever India is associated with US, then you are becoming their puppets.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 8:07 AM 

Death in India is taken seriously??? Pls be mindful of the Bhopal tragedy. The victims have yet to receive the righteous they demand and deserved. You dont need a base to be dominated. If you feel good about everything whenever India is associated with US, then you are becoming their puppets.


"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

bhopal was years ago then india was maovadi or half commie.( nehru though democrat imposed commie idiology on india like mao tse tung)
today india is a true democracy in which even ministers bedrooms let alone phones are not safe from media.
if a minister commits a crime ,media is all over him. and why not ,indian media today is worlds largest free press which alone dwarfs whole of europe.

and india being usa puppet, dude just come to india. and see public opinion.

usa = paki. in view of normal indian.... india needs to grow to counter evil paki usa axis.
thats hardly the view of puppet regime.

and btw india dosnt relly on usa or west to grow. but china does.

outsourcing is no 1 chinas reason to grow, that is factories, but in indias case its hardly 5% , unlike china which is growing on western capital , india is growing on domestic policy changes. mostly u-turns in policies of maovadis.
its india whos investing in the west like in uk and canada and korea etc. but its west whos investing in china.

india imports more, china exports more. both are growing. but in indias case even though it imports more still its growing thats remarkabale.
its like someone opened a chain from elephant and its streaching.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 8:27 AM 

but like every true indian my sincere hopes like my PM who even drove buse to pakistan is peace.
china is secondry when compare with pakistan.
china always said it wants peace like india. but suspision ,which remanins like in 1962 which was mismanagement which led to war.
if only border disputes are settled then whole of asia from russia to china to arabs to india to perisa to pakis to south east islands to far east will become an unstopable hurricane.


in this case i applaud russians who 1st worked very hard to bring both india and china together in bric. both dissagreed and later by much compulsion from russia both agreed. russia wanted a stratigic alliance from bric but because of misunderstanding from both india and china it did not work out. but its still a small step forward from otherwise hostile nations.


i still remmember many years ago when russian putin asked india to join alliance with russia and china, i didnt read further but prayed that india disagree because in case china disagree then i dont want to see india show weekness by agreeing, but both countries simuntanoiusly disagreed, but as we know later both agreed.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

WAFFer
(Login PradoTLC)
Shaheens (Pakistan)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 8:38 AM 

Qoute:

" China is the number one enemy of India"


Tell me dot heads which idiotic defence minister of shiithole country like india stated

HINT: the country;s name is in the third line..... happy.gif






Pakistan Airforce: The largest distributor of Indian airforce parts in Asia happy.gif

[linked image]

Pathankot Strike
8 F-86Fs of No 19 Squadron led by Squadron Leader Sajjad Haider struck Pathankot airfield. With carefully positioned dives and selecting each individual aircraft in their protected pens for their strafing attacks, the strike elements completed a textbook operation against Pathankot. Wing Commander M G Tawab, flying one of the two Sabres as tied escorts overhead, counted 14 wrecks burning on the airfield. Among the aircraft destroyed on the ground were nearly all of the IAFs Soviet-supplied Mig-21s till then received, none of which were seen again during the War.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFHlzP69n9c


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 8:43 AM 

lol prado dont worry , nobody disputes pakis claim on having the worlds no1 trouble makers crown. ok satisfied now ? or u also want candy.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
DAK
(Login HAIDER12)
Shaheens (Pakistan)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 8:49 AM 

Indian economy is run by Indian working abroad, mainly working in US and middle east.I see hundreds of Indian consultant working in US on L1, L2 visa which is call slave visa for poor Indian, well Indian companies take big chunk of money,feel sorry for living condition for those Indian.....
Its very sad to see US provide Indian for all type of labor visa to help Indian economy grow but Indian as usual not thankful to US. Otherwise they have option to bring East European to replace Indian labor. Even in Europe they are replacing East Eurpean and kicking out all rest of color races. Don't ask how the Indian works and how racist and how much hate Indian have against Pakistani. On any give project a Pakistani will hire a Indian, but Indian will never hire Pakistani.
Base of Indian hate is Mumbai attack, But we Pakistani can show more hate after Bangladesh and Siachin issue, but we never show narrow mindedness compare to Indian.

-

Peace

[linked image]

Capt Khurram KIA during operation in NW against Taliban
--------------------------------




 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 9:01 AM 

Indian economy is run by Indian working abroad, mainly working in US and middle east"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


lol why do u jokers even make statements which are easily disqualified as bullsh1t.
u just ask to be slapped by these nonsense comments.
read and be educated. indians working abroad dont even contribute to even 0.05% of economy and outsourcing is less then 5%. compare to china which is 80%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_development_in_India

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 9:05 AM 

see hundreds of Indian consultant working in US on L1, L2 visa which is call slave """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, Indian Americans had the highest household income of all ethnic groups in the United States.

According to the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin, there are close to 35,000 Indian American doctors.[24]

Among Indian Americans, 72.3% participate in the U.S. work force, of which 57.7% are employed in managerial and professional specialties.[25] As of 2010 66.3% of Indian Americans are employed in select professional and managerial specialties compared with the national average of 35.9%.[26]

In 2002, there were over 223,000 Asian Indian-owned firms in the U.S., employing more than 610,000 workers, and generating more than $88 billion in revenue.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login jat_sikh)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 9:09 AM 

holy mohammed on a donkey, u pakis are funny claiming most successful people in usa as slaves.
if indians who according to wikipedia are most succesful ,are slaves then what are pakis who excel in toilet cleaning and taxi driving. and who lose every time janitor award of the year to dimwit arabs.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
scq
(Login scquare)
Gagah Setia (Malaysia)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 9:48 AM 

Mao: It is pointless to discuss how India or China grows - either through export or import. The thing is this, US and the west will see both China and India as parasites sucking up all the world resources of which they wanted for themselves. The US may be critical now on China - an eventual prelude to India later...once she becomes a export powerhouse. With you 'close-economy', this would add up the tension even more. Fortunately, on the oil front, China and India have teamed up for contracts and would not allow others to play the China and India price. The same goes with politic, the US and west are trying very hard to put a wedge between these giants. Just imagine, India now spend alot of money to 'defend' the borders up north tying up valuable resources that otherwise could spend wisely - the same goes with China. Just imagine just a couple of decades ago, several divisions are station in both Russia and China - and now they have now almost no credible arm at their borders - freeing out resources for other things. It is wise to build up the army as the enemy is not your neighbour but they are looming in the west. India and China have never enter any conflict for thousand of years except one 1962 - all because some white folks draw a line on the map - ridiculous?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
scq
(Login scquare)
Gagah Setia (Malaysia)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 10:02 AM 

A lot of Indians here say China is the cheater, copy-cat, no dignity, no gentlemen and downright disgusting with regards to IP rights. Did the Chinese say they are the most intelligent human beings on earth? I dont think so but they do admit their shortfall in terms of innovation and creativity, and that the military is light years away from the US and the west. Now you have a big bad eagle plying the South China Seas, sending spy planes repeatedly from Japan and Taiwan violating your airspace, frequently violating your sea coast of China. What do you do with inferior capability and facing these humiliations??? Wait or damn - you start copying and reverse engineered equipment, steal or do whatever to ensure that you have reasonable quality and capability to defend yourself should the west again have any imperialist ventures again. If you ask me who is the biggest cheaters in the world - think of Lehman brothers, Enron, rigging of LIBOR and so many others - they are the biggest crooks and cheaters in the world - with impacts affecting ordinary citizens around the world. You know deep down, we here, have some delightful moments whenever China stand up against the US or the west, like we used to whenever soviets play rough with the US and the west. Can Indian stand up to them? Or becomes their puppets or pawns against China? It seems comments from your newspapers and the number of Indians voices here on this forum and others, your mind is already set as to which country you want to play nice.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

(Login HAIDER12)
Shaheens (Pakistan)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 11:15 AM 

Indian is the only nation on this earth who can comfortably fooled by whites for centuries and still. If white kill indian,,,,Indian will blame Indian never blame white guy......they laterally worship white people ...

-

Peace

[linked image]

Capt Khurram KIA during operation in NW against Taliban
--------------------------------




 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

WAFFer
(Login AryanArya)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 12:57 PM 

\\Having economic closeness with the US shows China is equal with the US and the west, in general. US fear of China is apparent, let alone master-slave relationship.\\


China may be equal with the West (only in GDP but not percapita) NOW after 30 years of seeking investments from west but not in the 70s, 80s and 90s when China was seeking investments from west, leaned strategicaly towards the west (in 70s and 80s) to balance soveit union. What ever India is doing now with west, China has already done that long time back.That's the reason i find it ironic when the chinese members call India 'slave' of US when the china itslef did pretty much the same thing in 70s, 80s and 90s. Even today, chinese slave their own people so that the western corporations can have profits.THAT is also 'slavery' for west.So better look at yourself and your past before you comment on others.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

\\Indian is the only nation on this earth who can comfortably fooled by whites for centuries and still. If white kill indian,,,,Indian will blame Indian never blame white guy......they laterally worship white people ..\\


says a Paki b!tch who partioned India by licking British balls and promising to be a nice slave to them. Once the British customer became old and powerless, then became a US b!tch.Oh wait, Pakistan is not only a US b!tch, but a Chinese b!tch as well and a Saudi b!tch as well.


===========================================
[linked image]

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda


-------------------------------------------
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
scq
(Login scquare)
Gagah Setia (Malaysia)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 5:03 PM 

China may be equal with the West (only in GDP but not percapita) NOW after 30 years of seeking investments from west but not in the 70s, 80s and 90s when China was seeking investments from west, leaned strategicaly towards the west (in 70s and 80s) to balance soveit union. What ever India is doing now with west, China has already done that long time back.That's the reason i find it ironic when the chinese members call India 'slave' of US when the china itslef did pretty much the same thing in 70s, 80s and 90s. Even today, chinese slave their own people so that the western corporations can have profits.THAT is also 'slavery' for west.So better look at yourself and your past before you comment on others.
==================

We are now in 2012. India can learn from history, and it is ironic that history is repeating itself. Unless India is resolved and capable to turn the table around like China did (maybe planned this way by the Chinese?) - India will become perpetual slave of the US. Can India meet up the challenge??? 2012 is much more difficult and complex time than in 70s 80s 90s.... What I am saying is bashing China and create bogeyman do not serve India interest as India has to live as a neighbor with the US. It is to easy for the US to put a wedge between them. But comments and voices from India politicians and presses already confirm that India is doing the US bidding.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

AryanArya
(Login AryanArya)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 5:27 PM 

\\We are now in 2012. India can learn from history, and it is ironic that history is repeating itself.\\


Dont know what history you are talking about while you are ignoring the history which i gave you. Your point was India is a slave to US. My response to that is that India is not doing anything different than what China did in 70, 80s and 90s. So are you suggesting that china was a slave of US in the past and not today ? Did china not benifitted from those 'slavish' days ? What is good for china then should be good for India, today ? no ? Or are you suggesting that china was wrong to be a slave of US then and India should not follow that path now ? Do provide your arguments in a coherant manner instead of jumping here and there.


----------------------------------------------------------------

\\Unless India is resolved and capable to turn the table around like China did (maybe planned this way by the Chinese?) - India will become perpetual slave of the US.\\

LOL, You mean Mao and Deng planned all this from day one ? Which chinese opium are you smoking ?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


\\What I am saying is bashing China and create bogeyman do not serve India interest as India has to live as a neighbor with the US.\\

No one cares about china if china stops claiming other people's lands as theirs. India did not care about china for 2000 years until the chinese started needling India in last decades. If you want Asian countries not to gang up with others, then the chinese need to behave as a responsible neighbour and not like a neighbourhood thug.




===========================================
[linked image]

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda


-------------------------------------------
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login MPOne)
WAFFer.

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 6:55 PM 

The tone of the Indian responses are what they are because the tone of the American posters responses are what they are, which is blindly supporting the USN version. So yes, a 'real' investigation is needed.

With all due respect, nonsense. If that were true, the only way to respond to a prejudice statement is with reciprocal prejudice. Indians are just as responsible for their "tone," i.e., prejudice, as the Americans or anyone else are.

No one is denying that one needs a investigation.

OK.

Thats what the Indian position is.

I didn't know there was an "Indian" position. I thought we were talking rather about our conversation.

The suspicion about USN version did not come out of blue. It came because of the inconsistant stories, both from the USN and the fisherman.

Again, you are being victimized by your own prejudice. Objectively, the suspicion is as to what actually happened because the stories are inconsistent. This is the point I've been trying to make. I presume neither account is accurate and that we don't know what happened so we need to find out. You, on the other hand, say we need an investigation because the US story is suspicious. There's a world of difference.

It came because of the inconsistant stories, both from the USN and the fisherman. So yes, we need investigation because the US story is 'suspect', at least as seen from the other side. As far as prejudice is concerned, in a topic like this, that is quite natural. My prejudice (if it is showing) is in response to american posters who are themselves showing their prejudice.So i dont see any problem with that. As long as the debate is civil, debatable, logical, prejudice from either side is ok, since in topics like these it may not be possibe to avoide it completely.

OK, you think that prejudging events before the facts are determined is a good thing. I disagree.

From the fisherman point of view, thats one and the same.If they did not hear it, it means they did not get it. Its up to the US to prove that their indeed was a verbal warning.

Nonsense. Not hearing a warning doesn't tell us anything at all about whether a warning was or was not given. Why is it incumbent on the US to prove it did warn them?

No, i am not denying that a flashing semaphore light is a signal.But what i was implying was even if that is true, that is only one among many warnings which the USN was supposed to give before they resort to direct firing on fisherman and we are not sure if they did that.So simply using this one account as a 'proff' of US giving 'warning' is what you called earlier 'cherry picking' evidence.

Again, nonsense. The Indians admitted they saw the signal light. That supports the US version as to the warnings were given. To say the US did not give warnings simply does not comport with the known facts. Whether they gave ALL the warnings they've said they gave is yet to be proven, but there's no question they gave warnings.


And the relevance of that is ?

Really? OK, if the US fired 1 second after the warning without waiting to determine compliance, the situation would be different than if they waited 60 seconds after the warning before opening fire. You don't see that?

We all think that we start from no such presumptions but i dont think its true. As far as myself, i only entered this topic after the US posters already presumed that its the fisherman who is at fault.

I see. You felt compelled to compound their ignorance with your own. Very impressive.

Well, if one wants to look at "that" way, one could take the argument even further and wonder, if whether that was the intention in the first place but some how it got failed ?

You think the M2 failed?

In the same breadth, presuming the fisherman and UAE police are lying also does not do it.

Ah, but the rub is I never suggested either were lying.

It could be possible that that particular fisherman was questioned by the police after he gave the interview to newspaper ? or that particular fisherman was not interviewed but others were ? There are possibilities for both of these reports to be true ! Whether its really the case is different matter.

Possible? Sure? But since the statements came out at about the same time we don't know do we? My position was that both statements cannot be true simultaneously. I still stand by that.


Nemo me impune lacesset,


[linked image]"The chief aim of all government is to preserve the freedom of the citizen. His control over his person, his property, his movements, his business, his desires should be restrained only so far as the public welfare imperatively demands. The world is in more danger of being governed too much than too little.

It is the teaching of all history that liberty can only be preserved in small areas. Local self-government is, therefore, indispensable to liberty. A centralized and distant bureaucracy is the worst of all tyranny.

Taxation can justly be levied for no purpose other than to provide revenue for the support of the government. To tax one person, class or section to provide revenue for the benefit of another is none the less robbery because done under the form of law and called taxation."

John W. Davis, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 1924. Davis was one of the greatest trial and appellate lawyers in US history. He also served as the US Ambassador to the UK.
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

AryanArya
(Login AryanArya)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 8:39 PM 

\\With all due respect, nonsense. If that were true, the only way to respond to a prejudice statement is with reciprocal prejudice. Indians are just as responsible for their "tone," i.e., prejudice, as the Americans or anyone else are. \\


While everyone are responsible for their own actions, those actions are also prompted by opposite actions. In the present case, the Indian tone would have been different (or 'normal') had the American tone would have been appropriate. It was the American posters who raised their pitch prompting the Indians in turn to raise theirs.


-------------------------------------------------------------------

\\I didn't know there was an "Indian" position. I thought we were talking rather about our conversation. \\

Our conversation is about this topic and in that context i was mentioning that 'your' position is not different from the 'Indian' postion that there needs to be a investigation to bring out facts.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

\\Objectively, the suspicion is as to what actually happened because the stories are inconsistent. This is the point I've been trying to make. I presume neither account is accurate and that we don't know what happened so we need to find out. You, on the other hand, say we need an investigation because the US story is suspicious. There's a world of difference.\\


For me it looks like just semantics rather than 'a world of difference' between what you are saying and what i am saying with respect to the need for an investigation. A story is 'inconsistant' if one side's story does not matches with other side which leads to one side being suspicous about other side's story and hence there is a need or results in asking for a investigation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

\\OK, you think that prejudging events before the facts are determined is a good thing. I disagree \\


I did not mention anythere whether its a good or a bad thing. I simply said i dont see any problem with that IF the arguments are civil, logical and debatable.Everyone prejudge events to some extent and its quite natural.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

\\Not hearing a warning doesn't tell us anything at all about whether a warning was or was not given. Why is it incumbent on the US to prove it did warn them? \\

It is incumbent on the US to prove it because it is the one which said that the verbal warning was given, not the fisherman. From the fisherman perspective, there is no verbal warning.The only way to prove the fisherman wrong is for the US to prove that they indeed gave verbal warings.


---------------------------------------------------------------------


\\The Indians admitted they saw the signal light.\\

The 'Indians' did not admit anything. One Indian fisherman, among a group of them said in a interview that the US ship flashed some lights and because of the sun light he did not understand if it was meant to be a signal. That raises many possibilities- is he referring to the semaphore light or some other light, if it is a semaphore light-how long was it flashed, was it working as it supposed to be, clear and bright enough to over come the sun light, was it flashed for the time required to be flashed as per the protocal etc. All these questions, i beleive can be part of the investigations.

------------------------------------------------------------------


\\That supports the US version as to the warnings were given. To say the US did not give warnings simply does not comport with the known facts.\\


Even that 'known fact' you are alluding to can be interpreted in many ways. So i will wait until the investigation is complete to be definitve on that.

------------------------------------------------------------------

\\Whether they gave ALL the warnings they've said they gave is yet to be proven, but there's no question they gave warnings\\

At this point we dont know if they gave 'warnings' (with a 's') but a fisherman mentioned something which can be interpreted as 'a warning'.

-----------------------------------------------------------------


\\if the US fired 1 second after the warning without waiting to determine compliance, the situation would be different than if they waited 60 seconds after the warning before opening fire. You don't see that? \\


First before i go further,can you explain what do you mean by 'compliance' in this context since there are different versions where the boat is located when it was hit.



-------------------------------------------------------------------

\\I see. You felt compelled to compound their ignorance with your own. Very impressive.\\


Prejudice does not have to lead to ignorance all the time. The US posters were prujudiced in supporting the USN version. I jumped in to present the case of the 'other side'. But as long as both sides remain civil and have quality conversation, i dont see how it can be called as 'ignorance'. It could even lead to some insights which the participants may not be aware of before they join the debate.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

\\You think the M2 failed? \\

Its not what i 'think'. I just said its one possibility which will come to the fore if one wants to divert the argument in "that" way.


------------------------------------------------------------------

\\Ah, but the rub is I never suggested either were lying.\\


I never directly said US was lying as well but somehow you interpreted my statements as such.


----------------------------------------------------------------

\\Possible? Sure? But since the statements came out at about the same time we don't know do we? My position was that both statements cannot be true simultaneously. I still stand by that.\\

We dont know when the 'statements' were given. We only know when the news reports carried those statements.Your position is forclosing all possibilities.I beleive there are possibilities for those reports to be true whether thats really the case, is a different matter.





===========================================
[linked image]

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda


-------------------------------------------
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login MPOne)
WAFFer.

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 20 2012, 9:14 PM 

While everyone are responsible for their own actions, those actions are also prompted by opposite actions. In the present case, the Indian tone would have been different (or 'normal') had the American tone would have been appropriate. It was the American posters who raised their pitch prompting the Indians in turn to raise theirs.

Well, I suppose we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this point.

Our conversation is about this topic and in that context i was mentioning that 'your' position is not different from the 'Indian' postion that there needs to be a investigation to bring out facts.

As I said, I didn't know there was an "Indian" position. I thought there was your position and my own. That's what I was talking about. I certainly don't claim to speak for all Americans here or anywhere.

For me it looks like just semantics rather than 'a world of difference' between what you are saying and what i am saying with respect to the need for an investigation. A story is 'inconsistant' if one side's story does not matches with other side which leads to one side being suspicous about other side's story and hence there is a need or results in asking for a investigation.

Again, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. To say the US story is "suspicious" makes a judgment far different than saying the two stories are simply inconsistent. I would think you could see that. The only objective thing would be to view them both with suspicion rather than one or the other.

I did not mention anythere whether its a good or a bad thing. I simply said i dont see any problem with that IF the arguments are civil, logical and debatable.Everyone prejudge events to some extent and its quite natural.

Prejudice is natural I suppose but I see rather more of a problem with it than you do.

It is incumbent on the US to prove it because it is the one which said that the verbal warning was given, not the fisherman. From the fisherman perspective, there is no verbal warning.The only way to prove the fisherman wrong is for the US to prove that they indeed gave verbal warings.

Again, you are presuming the fishermen's story is correct.


The 'Indians' did not admit anything. One Indian fisherman, among a group of them said in a interview that the US ship flashed some lights and because of the sun light he did not understand if it was meant to be a signal. That raises many possibilities- is he referring to the semaphore light or some other light, if it is a semaphore light-how long was it flashed, was it working as it supposed to be, clear and bright enough to over come the sun light, was it flashed for the time required to be flashed as per the protocal etc. All these questions, i beleive can be part of the investigations.

If the US was, in fact, flashing a signal light then, at least, a portion of their story is correct. Unless, of course, you think the Rappahonnock was simply flashing the light for fun. I presume it had a purpose.

Even that 'known fact' you are alluding to can be interpreted in many ways. So i will wait until the investigation is complete to be definitve on that.

I'm sorry, but we're getting no where. Here you admit that we have a unrefuted fact, one of the very few, but you seek to "interpret," read spin it, to support your preconceived notion.

At this point we dont know if they gave 'warnings' (with a 's') but a fisherman mentioned something which can be interpreted as 'a warning'.

The US said it gave a warning by light. Unless, again, you believe they were flashing the light for fun, it certainly supports that they did do that.

First before i go further,can you explain what do you mean by 'compliance' in this context since there are different versions where the boat is located when it was hit.

"Compliance" would mean moving away from the ship so that it did not present even a potential threat. To fire "immediately" would hardly follow logic unless the threat was imminent.

Prejudice does not have to lead to ignorance all the time. The US posters were prujudiced in supporting the USN version. I jumped in to present the case of the 'other side'. But as long as both sides remain civil and have quality conversation, i dont see how it can be called as 'ignorance'. It could even lead to some insights which the participants may not be aware of before they join the debate.

I'm sorry, I believe prejudice always represents ignorance.

Its not what i 'think'. I just said its one possibility which will come to the fore if one wants to divert the argument in "that" way.

It is possible.

I never directly said US was lying as well but somehow you interpreted my statements as such.

Again, we disagree. By calling the US story "suspicious" you imply it's false. There is no other reasonable inference.

We dont know when the 'statements' were given. We only know when the news reports carried those statements.Your position is forclosing all possibilities.I beleive there are possibilities for those reports to be true whether thats really the case, is a different matter.

There are many possibilities.


Nemo me impune lacesset,


[linked image]"The chief aim of all government is to preserve the freedom of the citizen. His control over his person, his property, his movements, his business, his desires should be restrained only so far as the public welfare imperatively demands. The world is in more danger of being governed too much than too little.

It is the teaching of all history that liberty can only be preserved in small areas. Local self-government is, therefore, indispensable to liberty. A centralized and distant bureaucracy is the worst of all tyranny.

Taxation can justly be levied for no purpose other than to provide revenue for the support of the government. To tax one person, class or section to provide revenue for the benefit of another is none the less robbery because done under the form of law and called taxation."

John W. Davis, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 1924. Davis was one of the greatest trial and appellate lawyers in US history. He also served as the US Ambassador to the UK.
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

WAFFer
(Login AryanArya)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 21 2012, 12:36 AM 

\\Well, I suppose we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this point.\\

ok

-----------------------------------------

\\As I said, I didn't know there was an "Indian" position. I thought there was your position and my own. That's what I was talking about. I certainly don't claim to speak for all Americans here or anywhere.\\


Again ok.

-----------------------------------------------------------

\\Prejudice is natural I suppose but I see rather more of a problem with it than you do.\\


We all find prejudice a problem even while practising it at some level.And thats the irony.I guss, i am looking at it in a more practical sense.


--------------------------------------------------------------


\\Again, you are presuming the fishermen's story is correct.\\


Irrespective of whether the fisherman's story is correct or not, one needs to investigate whether a verbal warning was given or not and if given , in what way was it given and in which language.


---------------------------------------------------------------

\\If the US was, in fact, flashing a signal light then, at least, a portion of their story is correct. Unless, of course, you think the Rappahonnock was simply flashing the light for fun. I presume it had a purpose.\\


The fisherman never used the word 'signal light'. He simply said some light and even that was not a direct quote from him but a indirect quote attributed to him in the media report.The USN is not claiming that "only a portion of their story is correct". They are claiming that their entire story is correct which is difficult to establish at this point just by that quotes attributed to that fisherman.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

\\I'm sorry, but we're getting no where. Here you admit that we have a unrefuted fact, one of the very few, but you seek to "interpret," read spin it, to support your preconceived notion. \\

I dont think that we can term that information as 'unrefuted fact' in the sense you are implying it to be. There are more details within that piece of information which needs to be filled before it can be termed as 'unrefuted fact'.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

\\The US said it gave a warning by light. Unless, again, you believe they were flashing the light for fun, it certainly supports that they did do that. \\


The point is the US simply said they gave 'warning by light' without giving details of it. As they say, the devil is in the details. Unless we have details of those 'warning', (how, for how much time, at what distance) it is difficult to coorborate the fisherman version with the US version.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

\\"Compliance" would mean moving away from the ship so that it did not present even a potential threat. To fire "immediately" would hardly follow logic unless the threat was imminent.\\

When you use If one of the word compliance, you are already presuming the USN version to be correct.If the fsherman's account is true, the firing took place when the boat is already moving in a different direction. So the 'complaince' factor is a moot point here. Assuming that the fisherman's story is true, then what prompted the ship to fire at it when it is moving a different direction ? Is the visibility low ? or they could not find the boat ? or some thing else ? Hence my original question about relevance about debating about 'firing immediately' thing. In this case, the compliance and firing are related to the location of the boat with respect to the ship which itself is disputed.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

\\I'm sorry, I believe prejudice always represents ignorance.\\


On a broader level, i agree. But in the context of this thread 'prejudice' is nothing more than 'supporting their view point' which is not ignorant as long as one is mature enough to modify or change their initial opinion as and when new insights are found during the course of the debate.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

\\Again, we disagree. By calling the US story "suspicious" you imply it's false. There is no other reasonable inference.\\


Again you are misinterpreting. I said the US story is 'suspicious' from a fisherman point of view and used it in the context of 'cautious distrust' of something. Cautious distrust does not automatically imply 'false'.




===========================================
[linked image]

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda


-------------------------------------------
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login MPOne)
WAFFer.

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 23 2012, 7:23 PM 

Again you are misinterpreting.

No, I'm afraid, I'm not. You presume the US story is false based upon the Indians' story. I'm not misinterpreting anything.

I said the US story is 'suspicious' from a fisherman point of view and used it in the context of 'cautious distrust' of something.

Which, again, presumes the Indians' story is the true.

Cautious distrust does not automatically imply 'false'.

Well, I guess we'll have to disagree. If you say someone's story is "suspicious," you are very much implying that it is false.


Nemo me impune lacesset,


[linked image]"The chief aim of all government is to preserve the freedom of the citizen. His control over his person, his property, his movements, his business, his desires should be restrained only so far as the public welfare imperatively demands. The world is in more danger of being governed too much than too little.

It is the teaching of all history that liberty can only be preserved in small areas. Local self-government is, therefore, indispensable to liberty. A centralized and distant bureaucracy is the worst of all tyranny.

Taxation can justly be levied for no purpose other than to provide revenue for the support of the government. To tax one person, class or section to provide revenue for the benefit of another is none the less robbery because done under the form of law and called taxation."

John W. Davis, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 1924. Davis was one of the greatest trial and appellate lawyers in US history. He also served as the US Ambassador to the UK.
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

AryanArya
(Login AryanArya)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 23 2012, 9:54 PM 

\\No, I'm afraid, I'm not. You presume the US story is false based upon the Indians' story. I'm not misinterpreting anything. \\


If you are interpreting 'from the fisherman point of view' as 'based on Indians story', then yes. But for me they imply different things.


-----------------------------------------------------------

\\Well, I guess we'll have to disagree. If you say someone's story is "suspicious," you are very much implying that it is false. \\


Yes, we have to disagree again because suspicious in my view means 'cautious distrust' and 'cautious distrust' is more naunced thing rather than the automatically imnplying it to be false.


===========================================
[linked image]

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda


-------------------------------------------
[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

PUNIT
(Login ssssshhhh...)
Satyameva Jayate (India)

Re: US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2

No score for this post
July 23 2012, 10:27 PM 

all discussion aside. why this malaysian chimpazee so excited.

[linked image]
tale it in the way u want chimp !!

********************************************

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Current Topic - US ship fire on Indian boat killed 1 and injured two - PART 2  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
WAFF recommends these sites

Indian Defence Analysis      [Definitive Lapse of Reason]