General Shankar Roychoudhury, former Chief of Army Staff and a former MP as well - which is "interesting" - has written a column in The Asian Age titled "Why is Pakistan making a pass at Siachen" which concludes that, if peace is pursued, then Pakistan would end up "achieving by diplomacy what it could not by force of arms."
"The generals sat, while the lines on the map, moved from side to side.""The generals gave thanks as the other ranks held back the enemy tanks - for a while."
Both from Pink Floyd, of course.
Now, over 50 per cent of the people living in metropolitan India live in SLUMS - like the one in the picture above.
I recently lived in one for a few months - and I know the horrendous conditions there first hand - and also the FACT that there is ABUNDANT LAND all around.
Around Nude Elly - as around Mumbai - there are millions of acres of UNOWNED JUNGLES.
But these all belong to The State - the DDA in Delhi, the Forest department, or whatever. Only because of SOCIALISM.
In Mumbai, quite recently, there was a huge scandal over Army generals misappropriating apartments meant for "war widows."
Now, what is the POINT of fighting - FOR 30 YEARS - over some acres of frozen wasteland worth NOTHING?
And what is the point of our nation being such a "huge landmass" if poor people have NO LAND to live on in CITIES?
And it's 1, 2, 3, 4... What're we fighting for?
Don't ask me I don't give a damn,
The next stop is Vietnam.
What is wrong if diplomacy achieves peace?
"War is diplomacy by other means" - that's an old saying.
And, pray, what indeed is "patriotism"?
Read my recent post against a "standing army."
There is also an older one on the "exploited jawan."
