India should attack Pakistan in future

"I would say to my critics to enter with me into the sufferings, not only of the people of India but of those, whether engaged in the war or not, of the whole world. I cannot look at this butchery going on in the world with indifference. I have an unchangeable faith that it is beneath the dignity of men to resort to mutual slaughter. I have no doubt that there is a way out." -M. K. Gandhi [1] When the long campaign of nonviolence finally achieved its goal of independence from England, a power struggle and religious conflict almost immediately began between the Muslims and the Hindus. Pakistan was separated off to form a separate country for the Islamic population, and many hundreds of thousands died in the chaos. Gandhi himself, heartbroken over the bloodshed and hatred, was assassinated by radical Hindus. Since that time, there has been little peace between the two countries. The modern nations of India and Pakistan were literally born at war with each other; Kashmir is just another excuse to fight, one they've used for generations now. You trot out your list of things that Pakistan is doing and has done to India, and I agree that they are morally reprehensible things. You then say that India is justified in attacking Pakistan and trying to conquer them, as this will bring good government and peace and prosperity to everyone, and everyone lives happily ever after. I find it difficult to believe that you actually think Pakistan is alone to blame for the constant warfare. I am not Pakistani, but I'm sure they have their list of atrocities India has committed aginst them over the last half century. The attack was not for "no reason," as you suggest; these things never are. People don't just randomly decide to go out and wage war. They had what seemed to them full sufficient reason, just as your reasons seem sufficient to you to justify killing more people over a quarrel that has been dead and buried in bodies for fifty years. I also marvel at the naivety necessary to think instigating a nuclear war is going to benefit anyone. Both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons, and were either side to attempt a war of conquest as you suggest, undoubtedly those weapons would be used. BAD. Not "Happy happy, democracy and prosperity," we're talking ruin, unbelievable slaughter, and the end of both countries. All that, very very possible, were the leaders of either country foolish enough to be swayed by the line of thinking you propound. All that, over a worthless valley in the Himalayas that has had all the good wrung out of it by constant war and hate and squabbling and poverty and misery. Enough. Either both countries should give Kashmir its independence as part of a serious attempt to learn to live in peace, or one should freely give up their right to it in the interests of peace. India, by any rational analysis, should just walk away from the situation and come to terms with Pakistan. India has enough problems, what with chronic drought, famine, and Marxist revolutionaries threatening to split the country apart, without fighting over Kashmir. On a friendlier note, I'm glad to see my opponent returned to finish the debate. It appeared for a while there that he was yet another new debater who showed up only long enough to start a debate and then vanished, never to be seen again. I am quite happy to be proved wrong on this point. Friends, a vote for Con is a vote against irrational violence; A vote for Pro, for endless cycles of revenge. I leave the decision to your consciences. C. [1] section437, http://www.mkgandhi.org...