Comments by "चतुर्वेदी हर्ष" (@hershchat) on "CaspianReport"
channel.
-
24
-
13
-
10
-
Salam Khan the Muslims have destroyed much over the world. This was Mongols over Arabs (who happened to be Muslim). In general, where most new conquerors added edifices and roads and public works, Alexander left libraries behind, the British built ports and canals, the Muslims left destroyed libraries, palaces, temples, and entire settlements. They looted, pillaged, killed, plundered, denuded, destroyed, and left barren ancient and irreplaceable peoples. From Tariq ibn-Ziyad to Salah din; Nader Shah to Timor Lane, their pride was the destruction of more civilized cultures and the loot of more successful traders.
6
-
5
-
4
-
@markmh835 Well ... respectfully, not true. The Chinese people's lot has improved tremendously, BIGLY (sorry, couldn't resist) since the 1970's. Not something I can say of the average American, sir. Sure, they are an adversary. However, they do not have to be an enemy. I come from India, and so it is natural for me to be overly suspicious of China, seeing it in my own little head as the biggest thereat to a peaceful world order. HOWEVER, I need to realize that this peaceful world order was constructed in favor of the west, and to the disadvantage of the ROW. Where I will defend American agains all enemies, external and internal, I cannot pretend that ignorance is not as dangerous as an enemy armada, perhaps more so. The Chinese have educated more humans every year than the population of Western Europe. They have developed industry, with stolen patents granted, economy, and a scientific prowess in the face of systems designed to favor the West. Ideally-- IDEALLY-- we in the West accept our errors, they their perfidies, and we can all get along. THATs not gonna happen. We will fight and skirmish and speak trash ourselves to a war. What an effing shame.
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
@markmh835 I don't think anyone will say that China is perfect, or their government benign. Quite the contrary. It is, however, also true that they are demonized more in order to make is feel good about ourselves. To me, they have deep flaws and great strengths, and so do we. On the specific talking points on "freedom of speech", and I say this respectfully, I quite disagree. Having lived in both places, I can tell you this is an in principle argument, and that no real negative impact is felt on peoples daily lives if they cannot say, "Obama is a terrorist", or "The dog catcher isn't responsive". The important thing is, there be SOME systems that judiciously imposes probity and encourages order. Americans get in a lather about their freedoms, innovativeness, and hardworking. Other people are often as, if not more hardworking, and ingenious. This is just jingoism-- to pronounce an exceptionalism routed in superior qualities than the rest of God's good people. American exceptionalism is of good fortune, well nurtured. Of the temperance of our leaders and the acceptance our masses extend to weird people, such as me. It is the inheritance of modesty, combined with a generosity afforded by a fortunate turn of world events, ending in Nazi obliteration in 1939. As far as the vaunted Freedoms are concerned, these are more in principle than practiced. One, Americans by tens of millions would rather stuff themselves with nachos and drink to a stupor, than be moved to pick up one piece of litter on a NYC sidewalk. Expensive cars drive by bedraggled school children on bus stops across the country, an no one exercises the freedom to charity. The little we see of this loudly proclaimed freedom is in the shallow and deleterious spilling of partisan political venom. In that instance, a society is better of, I say, and do so respectfully, that we are better of holding our tongue, and finding occasion for civic service instead. Pay a kid at a lemonade stand and you contributed more to a brighter tomorrow, than all the panjandrum of "Pussy Rallies" by liberal women, and of Trumps ugly tribal tantrums. Brits, His Kongese, Australinas, and Indians are more informed, engage, and articulate than the vast majority of brainwashed, "who won the war" 'Muhricans. It is just a fact. Doesn't make us bad. I see Americans as the best peoples, given that our guns have more often been fired in defense of humanity than any other country's in history. We have built a country that rewards excellence. And we enjoy a populace that inclines to constitutional democracy. Therein lie our strengths. Again, we can afford ignorance and hubris, cause we are fortunate, and because our leaders and founding fathers have permitted an open and liberal society, but not for ever. China, on the other hand, has fewer permissions to screw up. But they are neither less deserving nor less capable. Respect for the adversary, and a realistic assessment of self, dear sir, is as important as it is rare.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Turkey, under Erdogan, is a maximalist, uncompromising, nationalist, even irredentist state. While some of its self assertion is natural, even long-due, a lot of it is national politics dressed in the ugly garb of jingoism. This jingoism fits poorly within a multi cultural Europe and a federated NATO. This jingoism is his way of consolidating power, of appearing more Turkish than opposition, of winning over the mullahs and the uneducated rural poor. I’m so doing, he is leading a leading Europian power astray. This antagonizes NATO. Given their natural regional enemies— Russia included— to antagonize the “west”. Worse yet, he is now expanding jaqat monies, in Kashmir, against India. This opens up a front against a traditional ally. This cements his Muslim nationalism. Except, Islam is a pan-state nation. This Islamist platform will ultimately weaken Turkey, and drain a nation that needs allies of all alliances. Erdogan, like Trump in the US, is being foolish.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@captainalex157 dear Captain, allow me a passionate response, and know that I do so respectfully. Nothing below is against you.
I think it is unfair to say, “Indians are playing both sides”.
When the Americans enable Pakistan to go nuclear, and then they put sanctions on them for proliferation, that’s two faced. When the US sanctions Modi, and then fetes him in the US, that’s snake tongued. In 1971, the US dispatched the 7th fleet to help Pakistan against India, when Russia came to India’s aid. In 2021, the Yanks demanded that India oppose Russia, and join their Quad against China. 🖕🏽
The Chinese PM visited India in 1962 and, from the rampart of the Red Fort, declared to all world that the Chinese and the Indians were brothers. A week later, they had attacked India across the Himalayan frontier.
India faces a duplicitous world of super powers, with the only certainty being that the big boys are happy to take advantage of the smaller players.
The US spews ideals to get its way, and then turns and forgets its high talk. Ask Japan, Korea, Pakistan, Turkey, Germany, or Britain. Russia and Ukraine were BOTH duped by the IS after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Iraq was dismantled so Pappy Bush could be avenged. The whole world was blatantly lied to about weapons of mass destruction. Gaddaffi got a chainsaw proctology after he was promised reintegration in the world community in exchange for eschewing nukes. Houthis in Yemen we’re just this year abandoned, because we need Saudi oil. The JCPOA was a fake out. What country walked away from South Asian countries coming together against China in the TPP “partnership”? What became of the redline assured the civilians of Damascus? The Kurds were just traded away to keep the Turks happy.
The US, it’s people great and amazing, has a succubus for a government. It’s rich to hear others, cautious of US duplicity, called “playing both sides”.
India has to be wise and prudent in its dealings with such a duplicitous partner. “Playing both sides” screams prejudice and ignorance on your part.
Why do white countries get F35A and, while they demand it not buy the Su27, India is denied that plane? Why no patriot shield for India, even though they are to forego S400 system?
You’ll likely respond by claiming “real politik”, and having to break eggs to make omelettes, and blame the rest of the world depending on poor US. BS. That would be two faced. Let’s use the same standard for a country of 100 million starving people, as we do for the land of milk and honey, and 100 million obese bastards.
The biggest and most diverse democracy in the world, Indians could give the retards crying, “big steal” a lesson in elections.
I respect your hope that the anti China alliance will be unequivocal, but the US needs to earn the faith that it’s leaders have whored out.
That’s just the truth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shirvan, I am sorry. “Islam“ has been bad for the world. The Arabs and the Persians, the Turks and Egyptians are great peoples. Islam wasted their vigor and has infused millions with hatred and blind radicalism. Sure, some progress was made during Islamic times. But, that was NOT Islamic progress. The Prophet Md. (PUBH— I don’t want some crazy immam to ask that I be killed) was a leader of people. He was also a Muslim. Leaders as great as him are unique in history. BUT there have been others, among native Americans and Armenians and the Masai and the Budol. Great leaders don’t have to father religions. And they don’t have to be defended as “perfect”. Nor should Md.
Humanity benefits from lawgivers. We all owe respects to the great Arabic Rusool.
Islam’s failings shouldn’t attach to the great Md. (PUBH). Limited to his time, and viewed pragmatically, the scion of Quereish is brilliant. A military leader, unified of tribes, and lawgiver.
Islam is not however his greatest donative. Islam isn’t great. At its best, it is a base doctrine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't think anyone will say that China is perfect, or their government benign. Quite the contrary. It is, however, also true that they are demonized more in order to make us feel good about ourselves. To me, they have deep flaws and great strengths, and so do we, Americans. And Indians. On the specific talking points on "freedom of speech", and I say this respectfully, I quite disagree. Having lived in both places, I can tell you this is an in principle argument, and that no real negative impact is felt on peoples daily lives if they cannot say, "Obama is a terrorist", or "The dog catcher isn't responsive". The important thing is, there be SOME systems that judiciously impose probity and encourages order. Americans get in a lather about their freedoms, innovativeness, and hardwork-ethic. Other people are often as, if not more, hardworking, and equally as ingenious. This is just jingoism-- to pronounce an exceptionalism routed in superior qualities than the rest of God's good people. American exceptionalism is of a good fortune, well nurtured. Of the temperance of our leaders and the acceptance our masses extend to weird people, such as me. It is the inheritance of modesty, combined with a generosity afforded by a fortunate turn of world events, ending in Nazi obliteration in 1939. As far as the vaunted Freedoms are concerned, these are more in principle than practiced. One, Americans by tens of millions would rather stuff themselves with nachos and drink to a stupor, than be moved to pick up one piece of litter on a NYC sidewalk. Expensive cars drive by bedraggled school children on bus stops across the country, an no one exercises the freedom to charity. Second, the little we see of this loudly proclaimed freedom is in the shallow and deleterious spilling of partisan political venom. In that instance, a society is better of, I say, and do so respectfully, that we are better of holding our tongue, and finding occasion for civic service instead. Pay a kid at a lemonade stand and you contributed more to a brighter tomorrow, than all the panjandrum of "Pussy Rallies" by liberal women, and of Trumps ugly tribal tantrums. Brits, His Kongese, Australinas, and Indians are more informed, engage, and articulate than the vast majority of brainwashed, "who won the war" 'Muhricans. It is just a fact. Doesn't make us bad. I see Americans as the best peoples, given that our guns have more often been fired in defense of humanity than any other country's in history. We have built a country that rewards excellence. And we enjoy a populace that inclines to constitutional democracy. Therein lie our strengths. Again, we can afford ignorance and hubris, cause we are fortunate, and because our leaders and founding fathers have permitted an open and liberal society, but not for ever. China, on the other hand, has fewer permissions to screw up. But they are neither less deserving nor less capable. Respect for the adversary, and a realistic assessment of self, dear sir, is as important as it is rare.
1
-
1
-
It is not clear what ends the Quad is seeking. The likely outcome of this posturing could be a detente, where the US trades Indian or Japanese interests for its own. Say, China buys 3 trillion in US oil over the next decade.
The weak link in this alliance has always been the US, because any of the other three, who have real economic and territorial exposure, can (and likely will) be abandoned by the US to extract Chinese favors.
To assure against this risk of opportunism, the US needs to make strategic commitments to the alliance. As in, give these nations full access to US armament, AND let them indigenize the technology (make spare parts and alter software locally).
Neither of these states can take on China without US security guarantee, and Japan and India have irreconcilable enmity with China. Australia too is threatened by economic exploitation by China. Therefore, there isn’t a real probability of these countries turning for China, or on the US. It is US that is the least reliable partner, the “weak link” in the chain.
1