Indian General expresses willingness to use any means possible to "get the heads of our soldiers back" from Pakistanis.

[^_^ 5,021]

The Indian military may retaliate at a “time of its choosing” for the recent beheading of an Indian soldier by the Pakistani army, the chief of the Indian army said Monday, ahead of a meeting at the border of the two countries.

“The beheading of our soldiers is unacceptable,” Gen. Bikram Singh said in a press conference in New Delhi. “If provoked, we will retaliate,” he said. “We reserve the right to retaliate at a time of our choosing.” The general also said that Indian soldiers were beheaded in 2011 and 2012 at the border, but did not provide more information about those incidents.

...

On Jan. 6, Pakistan accused the Indian army of crossing the Line of Control, killing one Pakistani soldier and injuring another critically at the Churonda post in the Uri area of Kashmir. India denied the allegations, and said that three civilians in the same area were killed by the Pakistani firing. Two days later, India accused Pakistan of killing two soldiers and beheading one of them. Pakistan denied those allegations, and suggested that United Nations observers should conduct an independent investigation, which India has turned down.

General Singh did not share any precise information, despite pointed questions, about the killing of the two Indian soldiers.

...

General Singh said he intended to use any pressure possible, including “international pressure, to get the heads of our soldiers back.”

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/14/indian-army-chief-warns-could-retaliate-against-pakistan-for-beheading/

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358214018' post='5922166]

“The beheading of our soldiers is unacceptable,”

Yeah, that is a given, I would think.

[^_^ 5,021]

Yeah, that is a given, I would think.

It really isn't. This is just how the Pakistanis roll. The border is in a constant state of low-intensity conflict. The Pakistanis behead. The Indians rape. It is what it is.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358214308' post='5922178]

It really isn't. This is just how the Pakistanis roll. The border is in a constant state of low-intensity conflict. The Pakistanis behead. The Indians rape. It is what it is.

Were the beheaded soldiers caught raping, per chance?

Edited January 15, 2013 by The Patriot

[^_^ 5,021]

Were the beheaded soldiers caught raping, per chance?

In this case, probably not. They were repelling a Pakistani incursion (100 meters) is the Indian story.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Please stop using generalizations about the actions of a few individuals as if they apply to every citizen of that country. Military personnel who commit crimes and offenses in their military actions do not represent a whole country of people and their fellow citizens should not be castigated and labeled for their crimes or offenses.

[^_^ 5,021]

Please stop using generalizations about the actions of a few individuals as if they apply to every citizen of that country. Military personnel who commit crimes and offenses in their military actions do not represent a whole country of people and their fellow citizens should not be castigated and labeled for their crimes or offenses.

Readers are expected to use context in reading. The topic of conversation is clearly the military.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Please stop using generalizations about the actions of a few individuals as if they apply to every citizen of that country. Military personnel who commit crimes and offenses in their military actions do not represent a whole country of people and their fellow citizens should not be castigated and labeled for their crimes or offenses.

Interesting warning. I would be curious as to what sort of report(s) generated that concern.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358218537' post='5922340]

Readers are expected to use context in reading. The topic of conversation is clearly the military.

That was my understanding, and even there, reflected on certain incidents, without being an overly broad generalization. What is it -- One incident is unusual, two similar incidents is a coincidence, and three times is a trend.

[^_^ 5,021]

Interesting warning. I would be curious as to what sort of report(s) generated that concern.

I'm guessing this was reported: "It really isn't. This is just how the Pakistanis roll. The border is in a constant state of low-intensity conflict. The Pakistanis behead. The Indians rape. It is what it is."

I can understand that sentence befuddling our ESL readers. In that context, "the Pakistanis" and "the Indians" refers to their militaries. There is a long and well documented history of Pakistanis in uniform using beheading as a way of collecting trophies and of Indians in uniform using rape as a means of terrorizing restive populations in places like Kashmir and Nagaland.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358218920' post='5922353]

I'm guessing this was reported: "It really isn't. This is just how the Pakistanis roll. The border is in a constant state of low-intensity conflict. The Pakistanis behead. The Indians rape. It is what it is."

I can understand that sentence befuddling our ESL readers. In that context, "the Pakistanis" and "the Indians" refers to their militaries. There is a long and well documented history of Pakistanis in uniform using beheading as a way of collecting trophies and of Indians in uniform using rape as a means of terrorizing restive populations in places like Kashmir and Nagaland.

Yes, that is the post in question. The general statements were taken personally by someone from one of those backgrounds who felt their whole country had been insulted. That is why I warned against 'generalities. We have a wide variety of audiences on Visa Journey and it is good to remember not everyone will be able to connect the 'general' to the 'specific'. Thanks for offering the clarifying details.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Kathryn41

[^_^ 5,021]

Yes, that is the post in question. The general statements were taken personally by someone from one of those backgrounds who felt their whole country had been insulted.

I can appreciate the position you're in, but you'd have been better off offering a private lesson in determining context of the written word. Without the ability to use context, one is left in a position of near-constant outrage. After all, we're not writing legal documents here.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Yep - between that proverbial rock and a hard place - the most 'comfortable' route through was with a general reminder that we do have audiences of different backgrounds and from different countries, so comments that appear general may be misunderstood when viewed against the context of the thread. We can return to the regularly scheduled discussion now .

[^_^ 5,021]

Yep - between that proverbial rock and a hard place - the most 'comfortable' route through was with a general reminder that we do have audiences of different backgrounds and from different countries, so comments that appear general may be misunderstood when viewed against the context of the thread. We can return to the regularly scheduled discussion now .

Before we resume regular programming, I would like to thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt and not just removing the 'offending' comments. Hopefully this little exchange of ours proves to be a 'teachable moment' for our ESL friend who reported me. Context matters. Whether the discussion involves shorthand expressions (like it does here) or dog whistle racial comments not immediately obvious to the non-native reader, context matters.

Thanks again!