Taking sides when good and evil is unclear

One of the things that I admitted when reflecting on where I’ve been wrong, is that my default stance is to be somewhat isolationist because international entanglements are so complex. Some critics always wonder why I use such a simple heuristic, why not evaluate on a case by case basis?

At the extreme, this is obviously what would happen. But most cases are not at the extreme. The reality is I know more about history and geography than the vast majority of people, and I just don’t feel comfortable offering definitive judgment on many issues.

In the USA today the Right is pro-Israel to a default, to such an extent that it strikes me that they are as pro-Israel as they are pro-American. At least their in their rhetorical posture. Similarly, the Left is now pro-Palestine to a very great extent.

We could conclude that both the Right and Left have thought through their positions deeply and come to a reasoned position, but the reality is that these are just tribal politics. A subset of the Right adheres to a philo-Israeli theological position that has emerged in the last few decades, and these dictate the terms for the broader Right. Similarly, a small group of activists have kept and amplified the fire of 1970s Left nationalism which aligned with Palestine, and merged with more mainstream “social justice” views so that the pro-Palestinian position is now the Left position.

This is the case with many issues. Tribal politics and coalitional affinities drive solidarity and opinions. When your enemy was the Nazis, things get much easier. But these are very rare cases. Reality is more complex.

Which gets to why I used Ilhan Omar and Sarah Palin to illustrate this post. Both are very sincere and very stupid. So they have strong unnuanced opinions on foreign affairs, even if they could barely navigate a map. They are the best models for “hash tag activists.”

69 thoughts on “Taking sides when good and evil is unclear”

    1. Someone should thank them for kicking off World War One and vastly accelerating the decline of Western civilisation.

  1. Well foreign policy is a bit weird because most Americans (myself included) lean isolationist, while there are committed career think-tankers who are very interventionist, and powerful rent-seeking military-industrial interests who gain from permanent warfare. And now we have a new group in the mix: commentators who will support the latter two groups if it means a chance for a tirade against the Orange Man.

    The end result is that we end up having interventionists anyway (who are generally pro-Israel FWIW).

  2. you are too young to remember the late 90s and early 2000s well. not isolationist at all. the ‘jacksonian’ impulse is easy to manipulate.

    1. I do remember. They made a mickey mouse story like in Vietnam and insidiously, in the middle of the night started bombing with 1000 planes and tomahawks from Mediterranean, 600x400km territory. They were cowards to bomb during the day and even bigger to send ground troops. They killed several thousands of people, destroyed infrastructure (including hospitals, schools, bridges, electricity, industry) for 100 billion of dollars and created a monstrous narco-dealer territory given to to terrorists, the bottom of human civilization, who were selling human organs which were extracted from live people.

  3. the global-left seems to be shedding a tear for the possible decimation of the kashmiri ethnostate. wait but i thought the global left dislikes ethnostates?

    kabir: “only if they are settler-colonial ethnostates.”

    ah, i get it now!

    kabir: “oh, and also hindu ethnostates.”


    fwiw, i find the indian fixation on retaining the vale and its people to be quixotic, and nearly as irrational and pakistan’s insistence of geopolitical ‘rivalry’ with a nascent superpower…

    1. Well if you gave ground here, it would only embolden various other malcontents (and future malcontents.)

      1. i doubt that it is true to the extent indians think (this is always the argument).

        the ‘giving ground’ arg is one i remember well from the early 2000s in the USA unfortunately.

        1. I agree with Razib, that;s its more of an argument (in same lines of having muslim majority state to maintain secularism in India). India’s (or any country) ability on inability to hold onto a region depends totally on its national power and not on these arguments.

    2. The left generally sides with the oppressed and not the oppresser. When a region is the most militarized place on earth and has been on lockdown for over ten days without access to communications, it is pretty clear who the oppressed are in this case.

      1. it is pretty clear who the oppressed are in this case.

        Agree with you about this case (what’s been happening in the past 10 days), but you’ve been using those terms forever. In fact those terms were used before you were born, before there was any militancy in Kashmir (late 80s).

        The Indian public’s view is that any militant in Kashmir is either on Pakistan’s payroll or has been brainwashed by Pakistan and various radical Islamic rabble-rousers. Most of our billion-plus people sincerely do not believe what you believe: that most Kashmiris are discontented and want to separate from India.

        Here’s one of the latest reports from the Valley: https://openthemagazine.com/cover-stories/in-the-mad-waters-of-kashmir/ (writer is a Kashmiri Pandit who was one of those who had to leave Kashmir the same way our Slapstick did.) Seems to indicate that there is a fair diversity of opinion in the Valley about which side to be on (Shia are cool with India, Sunni aren’t; villages are cool with India; cities aren’t.) Though the most recent authoritarian move by the govt may give everyone there pause.

        1. Most of your billion plus people are either ignorant or willing to believe the government propaganda. Macho nationalism is a powerful force.
          The Kashmir dispute goes back to 1947. It didn’t start in the 1980s. Sheikh Abdullah was dismissed from power and jailed in the 1950s. For decades all the kashmiri people were demanding was a return to the pre-1953 status and not azaadi. If India had been willing to give that to them, there would have been no militancy.
          The only way to truely know what the people think is to hold a plebiscite. Mainland Indians cannot speak for kashmiris.
          The recent abrogation of 370 has lost you even the people who were on your side before. Jailing Omar and mehbooba shows that you guys have truly lost the plot.

          1. “Most of our billion-plus people sincerely do not believe what you believe: that most Kashmiris are discontented and want to separate from India.”

            Got to agree with Kabir here. If there was a referendum in the valley, there would be a landslide to part ways with India.


          2. Not sure who you are speaking to here. I know all the historical facts, as do pretty much everyone on this blog. When I was talking about what Indians believe, I was not trying to defend them but rather stating it as a matter-of-fact.

            Now you can either think about a way out of this or you can have your moral satisfaction of typing the exact same thing in every comment, day in and day out. Macho nationalism, a very powerful force as you have conceded, will not succumb to your (dogmatic) position either.

            Militancy has to stop, completely. Pakistan has to disengage from Indian Kashmir, completely. If Kashmiris start launching Gandhian agitations rather than IEDs, the Indian public will be forced to wake up at some point. But I’m sure it strokes the egos of Imran Khan and Gen. Bajwa more to keep ranting about war and Nazis rather than take steps necessary to solve this problem. They don’t give any more of a damn about Kashmiris than most Indians do.

          3. It is long time past Indian public would take Pakistani self-righteousness at face value. Perhaps Nehruvian era was the best time for Pakistan to show some good faith and flexibility . Nehruvian accommodations were repaid with hostility to India, gifting parts of J&K to China, making an axis with China against India. Every act of friendship from India was repaid with some terrorist or military adventure. Vajpayee in Lahore was repaid with Kargil, 2008 meet was repaid with Mumbai atatck; Modi’s Lahore visit replied with Pulwama atatck. Pakistan is driven by forces over which it has no control however good the intention is.

            This policy has only been ramped up vastly in the 30 years. Added to that setting up Islamic terrorists against India . Now China and Pakistan are connected through a very good Chinese built roadway. It will be foolish for India to feed it’s enemy axis of Pakistan-China-Jihadists-Taliban-AlQueda .

            Changes in Article 370 came at the right time . Pakistani army and ISI are hoping for turning on Taliban, Jaish and other terrorist groups against India once or even before the US withdraws from Afghanistan after a military defeat at the hands of a medieval army . Time to draw the bridge over the moat whatever the protests may be after all these protests are also part of enemy tactics.

          4. The “way out” would have been for India to sit down at the negotiating table with Pakistan and with the genuine representatives of the Kashmiri people. There was a time when Kashmiri Muslims would have accepted autonomy within the Indian Constitution. As I pointed out, for a long time all the “mainstream” parties demanded was a return to the pre-1953 status. India was not even willing to give them this. It’s so convenient to blame everything on Pakistan. Introspect a bit about how you have lost the support of even the “mainstream”. When someone like Shah Faesal says that you can either be a stooge or a separatist now, you know you are in trouble.

            When Kashmiris were non-violent their tallest leader was dismissed from power and jailed. When they respond violently, they are labeled as Islamist terrorists. Anything they do isn’t good enough for you.

            Pakistan is party to the dispute and we are well within our rights to continue offering diplomatic and moral support to our Kashmiri brothers and sisters. Don’t forget many of us are ethnically Kashmiri.

          5. \Shah Faesal says that you can either be a stooge or a separatist now, \

            When the Harddtalk immediately asked him whether he is a separatist or a stooge, he hummed and hawed and said it will take sometime to decide.

          6. He said he is definitely not a stooge.

            This is a man who topped the IAS and was celebrated in India as a “good” Kashmiri Muslim. Great job losing him. You’re really “integrating” Kashmiris!

    3. i find the indian fixation on retaining the vale and its people to be quixotic

      Yeah, pretty much, but the situation in Kashmiri has been completely muddied by (1) Pakistan’s continuous and malevolent interference, and (2) the complete succumbing of Kashmir’s separatist movement from a national self-determination struggle to a movement for Islamic supremacy.

      Indians just don’t want to be seen as capitulating to terrorist-sponsoring Pakistan or to radical Islamism (we don’t want yet another Islamic State on our borders.) Unfortunately, it means our public will let our government get away with anything, as we have seen the past week.

    4. “fwiw, i find the indian fixation on retaining the vale and its people to be quixotic,”

      Yeah i feel the reason India is insistent on holding onto Kashmir due to the sunken loss thing. It has pumped too much resources and blood to let go of it. It has suffered wars for it. And to give it up so that it either becomes a separate hostile Islamic country or merges with its “enemy” is bitter pill which it can’t/won’t swallow.

      1. \It has pumped too much resources and blood to let go of it.\

        This is a bad principle , in investment or war or life. If something has gone bad and unlikely to recover with reasonable resources , just cut losses and quit
        Trump’s decision to pull out of Afghanistan is not a bad idea for the US, but the manner in which he does it is the worst part of it.

  4. Breaking news –
    Pakistan’s military and police said three soldiers and two civilians were killed by an “unprovoked fire” from India along the Line of Control in Kashmir, the territories surrounding the two nuclear powers.

    The Pakistani military said that its members returned fire, killed five Indian soldiers and damaged Indian bunkers along the Line of Control that divides Kashmir into Indian and Pakistani parts.

    The statement said that three Pakistani soldiers were killed when Indian forces targeted their position in Lipa, and that two civilians were killed by shells fired by India into a village in Punch.

    >> It is interesting this toponym LIPA. It is a Serbian toponym and means – Linden. There are hundreds of Serbian toponyms in this region, Tibet, Nepal and everywhere else.

    1. I was watching the map to see the place LIPA (=linden in Serbian) where was the yesterday’s incident btw Pakistan and India. I could see that one of nearby places is Guča (pronoun. Gucha), also one of Serbian toponyms from my list. Guca is a place 180km far from Belgrade where every August is conducted a folk trumpet festival known by excessive food and drinks and gypsy’s brass music. One was just finished couple days ago:


  5. Kabir

    India retains the valley because it can. Simple as that. Not because of some “secular” principles and all. Also there is this idea that people of mainland are some gullible fools who are shown some images on tv and they fall for “all is normal, Kashmir is good” stuff.

    Have you taken into account he possibiltiy, that perhaps they know about it as are still ok with the what’s going on. Just like how people in west Pakistan were completely ok what was going on east Pakistan. Evil as it may sound, that’s the world we live in.

    1. Have you actually talked to people about this? My impression is that people are either willing to believe what’s shown to them on TV or what comes out of politicians’ mouths, or that they think only terrorists are targeted, or if innocent people suffer, they deserve it because of what they did to the Kashmiri Pandits.

      We are a poor and insecure country, and there’s a general callousness built into our attitude about things like these. We are OK with police torturing people in jail, killing people in “encounters”, etc. People don’t have the imagination or the empathy to think that such things could happen to them.

      These attitudes are not unique to India. Weren’t Americans OK with wiretapping and renditions? Only radical Muslims would be targeted, right? Not Middle Americans.

      1. Bro scratch the surface of every middle class Indian, see what goes on in our watsapp groups and all. In my view people know enough to know that everything is not OK, and TV only reinforces their own pre conceived notions that “Its all for the better”

        I agree there is callousness, thats why i said people know and are still OK with it, just like innumerable other things they are OK with. I am not sure you can even compare USA with India, the social empathy Americans (still) have is unparalleled in any country. Perhaps Europeans come close second.

        1. I’m happy to stay out of the social media sewer!

          Agree about Americans having high social trust and solidarity; that’s what makes the country tick. Callous attitudes were displayed towards the kinds of people the average American would never have met. It’s similar to Indians and Kashmiris; how many of us have met Kashmiri Muslims (unless we’ve paid a visit to the state)?

      2. \Weren’t Americans OK with wiretapping and renditions? \

        The US has been very clear all along that it won’t let a comletely hostile country in the American continent north or south. It is called Monroe doctrine. That is why US almost went to a nuclear war with USSR in 1962 and the USSR withdrew missiles from Cuba. Will China allow a totally hostile neighbor? No. That is why it went to Korean war big time and lost 500000 men; but the point was made. Why is Russia dead set on screwing up Ukraine or Georgia – so that it won’t have a NATO member on it’s borders.

        Strategists in India would be wringing their hands for allowing Gilgit-baltistan fall into the hands of Pakistan and that made China-Pakistan axis possible and cut off India-Central Asia land route. Kashmir valley is a piece in the chessboard and it’s voices won’t matter , more so as many of them are Jihadist and manipulated by Pakistan

        A good article on ‘Azadi’ cries

    2. India (like most other countries) doesn’t want to lose territory. Most people are either too busy with their own lives to worry about Kashmir or they have swallowed the State line that Kashmiris have no legitimate demands and they are all Islamist terrorists. It’s very disappointing that most Indians are perfectly OK with putting a people under lockdown and depriving them of phones and internet. But hey, it’s great that they can now buy land in Kashmir and “marry” Kashmiri women!

      Brute power doesn’t equal morality. Israel can continue to Occupy Palestine for the forseeable future. India can continue to Occupy Kashmir. It doesn’t make it right.

      I really don’t care about what mainland Indians think. For me, what is important are the Kashmiri people who are being oppressed.

      1. “But hey, it’s great that they can now buy land in Kashmir and “marry” Kashmiri women!”

        By your Mughal logic, this will result in Indians becoming Kashmiri in a generation or two and we can then have a referendum over this “Greater Kashmir”. 🙂

        1. Taking the land and women of a conquered people is the first thing colonialists do. It seems many Indians aren’t even going to pretend to treat Kashmir as any thing other than a colony. They’re dreaming of Hindu settlements in the Valley and of fair Kashmiri women.

          1. I don’t think you got the reference.

            “Taking the land and women of a conquered people is the first thing colonialists do”

            Should the same parameter apply to Mughals and previous muslim rulers too or not?

          2. Mughal marriage alliances with Rajputs are not comparable with mainland Indians getting excited about having access to Kashmiri women. India was not a Mughal colony. 21st century notions of colonialism don’t apply to the pre-modern era in any case.

            Mainland Indians getting excited about Kashmiri women is more along the lines of the violence done to women in the name of nationalism that occurred during Partition (and yes it occurred on all sides).

  6. Historically many nations pine for some piece of land they once hand. Pakistan is the only country pining for a piece of land it never had.

    1. Gaza is still technically Occupied since Israel controls the airspace, the borders and even how much food gets in and out. It’s an open-air prison despite the fact that Israel does not have settlers there.

      1. sounds like this would be a ‘practical’ solution for india then. but they’ll won’t do it cuz you never know when madya pradesh will revolt.

  7. True, I actually think there was a realistic chance of the same till Nehru was alive.

    This not cutting its loses is a Indian trait, India’s banks and public organizations make massive loses but still no one would sell it . Because no one wants to be the “sell out” . So every Govt comes and pumps more good money into them, so that the whole thing doesnt collapse while they are in charge. That;s true of Kashmir as well , every Govt task is to “manage” not to “resolve” , to kick the can further down the road for some other Govt to take care.

  8. Think people who support the government’s action should read this: https://caravanmagazine.in/conflict/one-solution-gun-solution-gun-solution-kashmir-in-shock-and-anger. If the only objective of this entire exercise was to show Pakistan how impotent it is, I guess our government has succeeded. But I really don’t see how anything good can come out of this in Kashmir itself. And if the reportage is accurate, what’s being inflicted on Kashmir can’t be described as anything other than collective punishment.

    To balance out the above article, here’s one that tries to tease out what really drives the quest for azaadi in Kashmir: https://www.livemint.com/Opinion/FDhKCqbtpSU03a2YQUO9lM/What-ails-Kashmir-The-Sunni-idea-of-8216azadi8217.html

    1. It would be very useful to have a poll done on the Pandit population to ascertain where they stand on these issues.

      A lot of Indian Nationalists like to invoke their name to justify repression in Kashmir, but there seems to be quite a large portion of them who reject the “Pandits are the real victims” narrative of the Hindu-right, and are far more sympathetic to their fellow Kashmiris.

      How many though? 20%? 80%? Somebody reputable needs to get on this. Similar polling helped dispel the nationalist myth of, “Kashmiris are fine with India, its just a few troublemakers who are upset”.

    2. I’ve mentioned this before, but many KPs support Kashmir’s special status.

      It’s a matter of racism mattering more than religious identity. Many KPs support things like Kashmir’s special status to ensure that the masses of dark and dirty people from the Plains won’t adversely affect pristine heavenly Kashmir.

      1. “It’s a matter of racism mattering more than religious identity. Many KPs support things like Kashmir’s special status to ensure that the masses of dark and dirty people from the Plains won’t adversely affect pristine heavenly Kashmir.”

        Racism in the sub-continent seems pretty misplaced.
        Most Kashmiris look Indian.
        Sure, the frequency of European looking phenotype in Kashmiris might be higher. Say 20% of the population instead of 5% for rest of north India.
        (all numbers out of my ass)
        But majority of Kashmiris look Indian with a slightly longer nose.

        Just last weekend, I was at this kebab restaurant in Bangalore and talking to the proprietor. Swear to god, I had assumed he was a Mallu. Thin wiry look with dark-ish skin.
        Later he tells me he’s from Kashmir and has been in the city for 8 years or so.

        Farooq Abdullah looks as north Indian as the next guy. Omar Abdullah just happens to be half-Irish.

          1. Lawrence was a gay, but this does not mean that he was not married (as Elton John, for e.g.). During his post in India in 1928, he got married a young girl, Akbar Jehan, whom he met in Lahore where officers usually spent weekends and relaxed. She was from a good family and was a Shia Muslim. It was the Shia practice to have short-term marriages that are very quick to arrange and dissolve.

            It is interesting that the name of the place where was his post is Miran Shah which is now Pakistan’s north-west frontier. I said already that probably all toponyms which contain MIR are of Serbian origin. I looked at the map to check and found several other Serbian toponyms around Miran Shah – Mast, Baka, Razmak, Mir Ali Mirali, etc. Miran means ‘peaceful’. Lahore is also a Serbian toponym and means ‘breeze’.

          2. PS. Speaking about toponyms….maybe is a good place to say…

            Just found that Ladakh river is also a Serbian toponym. So as Shyok river and Drass Valley and river. The first two names are unchanged, the third name was slightly changed.

          3. PPS…Omar just opened a sack without the bottom…

            Ladakh means a ‘(small) shade’. There are several variations of the name ‘shade’ in Serbian, this one is more used colloquially and in poetry.

  9. I find the Pakistani breast-beating and wailing about this really off-putting especially given the zero f**ks given towards the Uyghurs. Not to mention the mass indifference to human rights abuses, targeted killings and disappearances of inconvenient Baloch and Pathans who are collectively written off as Indian agents. It’s not even about the people, a deal could have been made with India to let any Kashmiri who wanted to become Pakistani leave to migrate.

    The Punjabi population is happy to go along with keeping India as enemy number one. They hope the army stays firmly in charge, playing its sick games, so they too can partake in Pakistan’s only viable industry, benefiting from real estate appreciation in army housing societies. We truly are a degraded, contemptible and utterly ridiculous people.

    1. Pakistanis care deeply about the Uighurs, as they do for most of the Muslim diaspora in distress. Too much, in my opinion. “The Ummah” has done very little for Pakistan. Pak just can’t express this publicly, as China owns half of Pakistan (if not more). So you get people pretending not to know what’s happening.

      Pak army abuses against Baloch and Pathans (most of which is perpetrated by Baloch and Pathan soldiers) are bad. But its a drop in the bucket compared to what India has done in J&K.

      As for Kashmiris leaving their land and migrating to Pakistan, here’s another scenario. How about India gives Gujarat to Pakistan, and all the Hindus who aren’t happy can migrate to India? Get real.

      1. Pakistanis care deeply about the Uighurs, as they do for most of the Muslim diaspora in distress.

        why should i believe you as opposed zack? does zack having a ponytail mean ppl in pakistan don’t identify him as one of their own and just lie to his face? (he just went to pakistan, so i asked him what they were saying, thought).

        1. Christ, between Zack’s ponytail and me being an atheist, we are really pushing the boundaries for acceptable Pakistani representation.

          Conspiracies are often a way of shielding oneself from guilt. Paks did it after the Bengal war. Doesn’t mean they didn’t care about Bengalis, it was just to horrifying to believe the army actually did what it did. Helps you sleep at night if you can brush it off as a Western/Indian conspiracy.

      2. No.one cares about the Ughyurs, I am surprised PAF hasn’t been volunteered to bomb them yet. Even that wouldn’t raise a peep.

        Pakistan sending militants over to Kashmir as revenge for losing Bangladesh made a bad situation far worse and for what? There is zero likelihood of Kashmiris getting independence, the best they could have hoped for was some degree of autonomy. Now even that is gone. They will be made an example of by the BJP base who want their government to give the unruly a thorough dose of fire and sword.

        1. The Kashmir insurgency is out of Pak’s hands now, its entirely local. Any support they give to Kashmir is demanded by the Kashmiris, they aren’t being nefariously manipulated by the evil Pak-army.

        2. I don’t think the BJP’s goal is strictly punitive…that may be what a lot of the base wants, but the powers that be would prefer a resolution to the Kashmir affair more than anything else.

          That said, violence has consequences. As the recent annulments would indicate, the deal the Kashmiris can get is going to be worse than what they could have got a generation ago. They have successfully hemorrhaged whatever trust and goodwill a sixth of humanity had for them.

    2. Pakistanis are concerned about Kashmir because it is a disputed territory with India. We don’t have a similar territorial dispute with China about Xinjiang. Many Pakistanis are ethnically Kashmiri and naturally concerned about our people across the LOC. Of course, there is no denying the fact that the Pakistani State doesn’t want to get on the wrong side of China so there is not much discussion about human rights abuses there.

      Kashmiris leaving their own homeland to become Pakistanis would just give India what it wants. India cannot have the land without the Kashmiri people.

    3. \let any Kashmiri who wanted to become Pakistani leave to migrate\

      That would be a sensible solution for all concerned.
      That would be asking a cynical, ethnocentric regime too much.
      During Bangladesh war , the Biharis stood for United Pakistan against a hostile population and stuck their neck out. But Pakistan refused to take them after 1971. If a regime can leave it’s most loyal citizens to the wolves , it’s treachery is bottomless.

      1. “This would be a sensible solution for all concerned”

        Here is another sensible solution. Hindus can all go back to the real Aryavarta (the Kazakh Steppe) where their forefathers originated. Pakistanis, as true sons of the IVC, will rule India as is their birthright. Those south-indian groups who carry IVC haplogroups can stay. The rest of you barbarian steppe invaders have to leave our land.

        1. If a number of Hindus think Kazakhstan is their homeland and Kazakh gov is behind that movement, then it is a sensible solution.

          Anyhow Aryavarta as a concept in history lies within India. So the whole argument is moot.

          1. All r1a to come back to Serbia. All 180 million ‘one-nationals’
            (Russia also will give some space)

  10. // Many KPs support things like Kashmir’s special status to ensure that the masses of dark and dirty people from the Plains won’t adversely affect pristine heavenly Kashmir //

    The pristine heavenly environs they left en masse on trucks carrying whatever little they could gather in the middle of the night?

    I have lost count of the number of Kashmiri Pandit men and women I know who have married Gujratis, Tamils, Bengalis, Punjabis, Maharashtrians, Andhraites etc including in my own family. Heck! I even know KPs married to Iranian, Pakistani (Sunni) Muslim [both now live in Pune], Dutch, Swiss and African-Americans…

    So much for racism.

    1. Yeah, that sounded like a really wacky view to me. KPs, like Sindhis, are quite non-parochial in my experience (perhaps owing to the similar natures of their “emigrations”.)

      For an example of ultra-parochialism, we needn’t look too far beyond Bombay and its now departed supremo.

  11. An article in Madras Courier about Pakistan by one Shrenik Rao


    This Shrenik Rao wrote an article in an Israeli newspaper some years ago , which was quoted by Imran Khan few days back as a proof of Hindu-Nazi


    Imran Khan is too stupid to realize he is quoting something from a country he does not recognize i.e. Israel quoting someone Hindu who is supposed to be Hindu-nazi .

    Now that Hindu whom he was approvingly quoted has done a turnaround , perhaps miffed that Taliban Khan used his old article to demonize India


Comments are closed.

Brown Pundits