India responds to Pak fire with fire

Well, a breath of fresh air. Defence minister Jaitley, yesterday, said, “the cost of this adventurism would be made unaffordable” if Pak persists with its firing across the IB. Pak retorted with the ‘N’ threat. ToI has more of it here

Apparently, Pak firing started minutes after India bagged the hockey gold at the Incheon Asian Games beating Pakistan. And the firing has since then been relentless.

India’s response comes as a breath of fresh air as it used to hardly raise its voice against such Pak misadventure in the previous regime. In a faceoff, if your opposition has a measure of your response then it could be lethal for you which is exactly what had happened.

Where does this leave the ‘Aman ki Asha’ project initiated by the Jung group of news papers and promoted by the ToI India. Well, no where. Talks, although well meaning, are futile. Nothing can ever come of it. Remember, Pakistan is as much under the influence of its army (along with its secret servie ISI) as its democratically elected government, if not more. So no point talking to its “government”. But remember, both countries possess nuclear weapons. This necessitates India remain cautious and not go on an overt war with Pakistan. Its only choice is covert operations.

Burdwan blasts – Nasty politics at play again

Midnightbreakfast had in its previous posts here and here highlighted the dangers of unabated influx of migrants from across the border from Bangladesh. Campaigner Modi had raised the issue back during his campaigning days.

Some days back there was a blast in Burdwan a WB district killing suspected terrorists.

Now, check out the ruling party in WB, TMC, reaction “It is unfortunate that BJP wishes to politicize the issue. BJP seems to have developed a new-found love for India. We do not need any lessons on patriotism from BJP,” TMC spokesperson He then says, “in the past they (BJP) have insitigated communal riots to divide and rule India. This will never be accepted by the people.”

TMC then changed its stance coming around to accept the hand of militant Al Qaeda linked organisation from its earlier stand that it was a fight between criminals.

Really dont understand the connection to what has happened and what O’Brien is saying. What does he mean when he says, ‘politicise the issue’? An act of terrorism is political. Why be ‘politically correct’ while reacting to acts of terrorism? What does he mean when he said, they have instigated communal riots to divide and rule India? Terrorists dont have a religion. If a terrorist happens to belong to some community, so be it. Such a stance had cost the Congress dear in last elections as its perception nose dived and it started appearing as a party that is not serious about tackling acts of terrorism.

WB seems to be a tinderbox. More on it will follow..