It’s nothing but devil quoting scripture
If the aim of all action in war is to disarm the enemy, will it be possible to do so Particularly, when the enemy is continuously waging a war against us, day in and day out That those waging a war from the media rooms and the social media warriors do not lose lives is a fact They are safe and will remain safe while the real soldiers give up their lives on the borders There are voices in the c
If the aim of all action in war is to disarm the enemy, will it be possible to do so? Particularly, when the enemy is continuously waging a war against us, day in and day out? That those waging a war from the media rooms and the social media warriors do not lose lives is a fact. They are safe and will remain safe while the real soldiers give up their lives on the borders. There are voices in the country today demanding peace and calling for 'Imran Khan like statesmanship' conveniently ignoring the fact that the same Imran Khan is the presiding deity of the evil forces in Pakistan.
Not only that he did not own up the attack on Pulwama, but also denied Pakistan's hand in it or even any knowledge in it. Let us get stable a bit and review the situation. Those advising restraint on part of India today should answer this first: Mumbai, Pathankot, Uri, Pulwama… Who started it all? Since 1947, who is waging a war against India? India is only responding in kind today to protect itself and its people's lives.
India is by means an aggressor. India has every right to defend itself. Of course, war and politics are inalienable. For that matter, war is just an extension of politics. Pakistan's politics are irrevocably linked to terror and it is not treated as war when waged against India, but only as Jihad. Taking our Jihadi forces is not war by any yardstick, and it is not even politics. It is a matter of survival. Do we want to be statesmen and get killed in their hands or shall we become ordinary mortals and save ourselves? That is the real question here.
It is all very simple. If our opponent is to be made to comply with our will, we must place him in a situation which is more oppressive to him than the sacrifice which we demand. However, there will be disadvantages of this position as there is a chance that the opponent could only get worse. If, therefore, the enemy is to be reduced to submission by an act of war, he must either be positively disarmed or placed in such a position that he is threatened with it.
From this, it follows that the disarming or overthrow of the enemy, whichever we call it, must always be the aim of warfare. Imran Khan's statesmanlike view teaches him that wars will not be beneficial to any party. While it is true to say so, it should also be noted that it applies to conventional wars alone. The unconventional war that countries like Pakistan wage and countries like China bless, are different. They benefit the perpetrators and not the victims.
There is nothing glorious about victimhood and India need not be blessed with such a state of mind despite some intellectuals and liberals pronouncing it as a glorious State. But as said earlier, war is all about politics too. Pakistan needs to be taught an unforgettable lesson. Let us not crib over it. Shunning war is good. But, can Pakistan shun terror? Look who is preaching peace to us!