"Pakistan vs India: a story" Topic

Have a good one. Sleep well. 😉

I did watch a hiatory of kashmir video and if what was presented is true the whole situation won't be resolving anytime soon.

No Striker, sad to say but I think you're right.

Dal,
I was referring to this incident. I thought I'd remembered others…
link

While guns are not banned in Australia, to an American it's pretty close.

link

I was referring to this incident. I thought I'd remembered others…

OK, mate. Thanks for the links. What our ABC (who have been caught doctoring several stories to fit their anti-cop, anti-ADF agendum, the last one in March) ( link ) doesn't mention was that the woman abused the shop staff and that she was arrested for refusing to identify herself when asked. So she was arrested, taken to the cop shop to be charged and was then released on her own recognisance. No doubt she'd received her fine in the mail or faced a magistrate later- and not just for not wearing a mask

Is that much different from what would happen in the US, if someone was being abusive to shop staff and then police?

As for gun laws, mate, you and I both know the NRA was telling huge porkies and claiming all sorts of BS. The biggest was that private firearms were banned and nobody was allowed to own or handle firearms.

As to the clip- if that was CBC's "look" then they need to see an optometrist. While the facts are essentially correct, the way they are presented slants the story (how unusual for gossip mongers). Civvies can own semi-automatic rifles if they have good reason, such as protecting stock or because they are professional hunters. Collectors (OK, the average two-year vetting process would pee off most of youse Yanks, and the security required for their storage area is a bit over the top) can and do own a fully functioning Vickers MMG and at least one, an old army mate, gets to fire it on a military range (civvie ones aren't up to it). I have no issue with requiring a license, weapons safety training and a valid reason for owning firearms. I've seen what happens when yahoos with few brains get hold of weapons. A few years ago my foster brother-in-law's son, Bailey, was killed because his mates had been drinking and a rifle "accidentally" went off ( link ). But my attitude dates from well before that, based on my own observations on shooting trips when I was young.

I'll be blunt. 95% of civvies shouldn't be allowed within 300km of a loaded firearm. The same goes for half the RAN and RAAF I know. I, and all but a few gun nuts here, are happy with the firearms requirements. One nutjob with a gun is 100 too many.

PS There was another "accident" last week, and a 9yo boy was killed. link

Have a good one. Sleep well. 😉

I did me best, 35th.

the whole situation won't be resolving anytime soon.

Like in A'stan many places in the Mid East and Africa. Religious, tribal, ethnic, warlord/mullah, etc. affiliations, etc. go back centuries in many cases. But still remain in the 21st Century. And nothing will change until they want to change it themselves. I'd think it would be a safe bet, that much of this turmoil, dissension, etc., etc. will still be going on in the 22d Century.

No matter what they are their own worst enemy …

Pakistan is Strategically Indispensable to Washington

link

Armand

It is in a good location. Strategically located near A'stn and China. But like China, the Paks are not friends of the USA …

The Pakistanis are historically not friendly with nations that have brutally invaded them, whatever the "justification". 🤷And they're the ones who define "justification".
Long memories, and "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Of course, the term "Pakistan" itself is a remnant of colonialism. "Here's a great idea!" Said the linear descendants of all the Chamberlains et al who had skirmished with Wily Johnnie Pathan for generations. "Let's combine all the Mohammedan tribes into one nation, and all the Hindoo tribes into another! Sikhs? Why? Oh, and make the border completely arbitrary too."

As Clemenza explained to Michael, "Ah, this happens every 5 or 10 years. It gets rid of the bad blood."

American foreign policy changes every 4 years, sometimes radically. We're damn fools to think we can influence a part of the world that holds grudges for generations. Very consistent grudges, that don't change every 4 years.

Oooos. Too late to edit!
But I was mainly talking about Afghanistan above. 😱🤷🙄
Slaps forehead. Duh!

If you are talking about Afghanistan, the Afghans hate everybody. When they can't kill foreigners in the country, they have always killed each other. Especially true of the mountain groups. Just seems to be an inherently violent area.

Combining the Muslims into one nation and the Hindus into another was the idea of the Muslims. Everyone else was against the idea. And whether they joined India or Pakistan was often the decision of the local ruler. Boundaries were the existing ones of the various Indian States.

Afghanistan, however, wasn't part of either, because it wasn't part of the British Empire to begin with.

But blame colonialism anyway, because why not ?

History versus mythology? History nearly always loses, Dagwood. BTW, have you ever had a look at which quasi-empires have the greater number of colonies/overseas possessions, these days?

If you are talking about Afghanistan, the Afghans hate everybody.

Which is why I think that reading all the Flashman novels should be required reading for ALL State Department hangers on.
Those, and Byron Farwell's "Queen Victoria's Little Wars". Heck, all of his books.
Dealing with Afghanistan requires a heavy dose of cynicism. Optimism should disqualify any prospective dupes. Send them to nice countries, like Belgium or Canada.

😂 John, I was going to say the "Flashman" books as well. Fraser actually had good knowledge of that area and people and his books are fun to read, if you don't want straight history.

Actually, Fraser was very strict about following "history" as closely as possible.
With the possible exception of "being the only one to charge in the right direction at Chillianwallah."
At the time, he was in Mississippi. 🙄
But Fraser addressed that by noting the Old Soldier's age.
Usually the only anomaly is his presence.

Tim Powers is another example of a writer trying to be as scrupulous as possible regarding historical integrity.

Arguing the historical accuracy of Flashman is a more pleasant task than the usual topics on this Board. 🙄

My point being, it's entertaining history, as opposed to a straight history book.

Have to say "Flashman at the Charge" was my favorite.