India has fired missiles into Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, marking a major escalation between the two nuclear-armed powers.
The attack came amid tensions over the April 22 terrorist attack near the Pahalgam area of Indian-administered Kashmir, which killed 26 people. All but one of the victims were Indian tourists.
India blamed the massacre on a group called The Resistance Front (TRF) and accused Pakistan of supporting the attack, which Islamabad has strongly denied.
Early Wednesday morning, New Delhi time, India announced that its forces had struck nine locations in Pakistan and the Pakistan side of the disputed Kashmir region. Islamabad confirmed attacks on five locations: two in Pakistan’s Punjab province and three in Kashmir, including Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
Pakistan officials have said at least eight people were killed by the Indian strikes. According to AP, one official said a missile struck a Mosque in the city of Bahawalpur in Punjab and killed a child.
India claimed that it only struck “known terror camps” and that the attack had been “measured, responsible, and designed to be nonescalatory in nature.” But the missile strikes are the most significant Indian attacks on Pakistani territory in decades. In 2019, India launched airstrikes on an alleged training camp in Balakot, Pakistan, but that attack only targeted one location.
Islamabad is vowing it will respond and has claimed that its forces shot down five Indian fighter jets. “We were fully prepared, which is why India received an immediate and firm response,” said Information Minister Attaullah Tarar.
Pakistani officials also said India has not provided any evidence for its allegations that Islamabad was involved in the Pahalgam terrorist attack.
In response to the news of the Indian attack, President Trump said the violence was a “shame” and that he hoped it would end quickly. “I guess people knew something was going to happen based on a little bit of the past. They’ve been fighting for a long time,” he said. “I hope it ends very quickly.”
Indian officials have said they “briefed” Secretary of State Marco Rubio about the attack. Pakistani sources also reported that Rubio spoke with Pakistan’s national security advisor.
Any conflict between India and Pakistan always risks nuclear escalation since both sides have a nuclear arsenal. According to the Arms Control Association, Pakistan is believed to have about 170 nuclear warheads, and India has an estimated arsenal of 164 warheads.
Not good. Those two countries getting into a real war would not be good. With both sides having nuclear weapons this could get messing quickly.
It could instantly kill more people than both World Wars combined. 100 million people
Both India and Pakistan are quite aware of that.
This why nukes MUST be banned for everyone for all time or we get this; An accident waiting patiently to happpen and if you give it enough time ,it will..
The militant Hindu nationalist Indian government is a deep ally with Israel, with arms and money deals and a shared hatred of Muslims. It'd not surprise me the least if a limited war has been agitated with Pakistan specifically to provide news distraction from the late phase of starving, expelling, conquering and murdering Palestinians.
Few things could knock liverstreamed genocide out of the top spot of the news, and war between two nuclear powers is one. It's working; they have the top slot. "Look over there!"
I've long suspected that some of the 'bots' leaving hasbara comments all over the internet are in fact Indians, some of whom froth at the mouth at the idea of dead Muslims enough they might not even need to be paid.
And Pakistan, especially after the "soft coup" against the Khan, is very much in the US orbit, while India is BFF with Russia (and Iran) and approaching China at fast pace as result (also in terms economic, becoming "the Mexico of China" even, some say). Yes, India has sinned a lot of Zionism and Islamophobia but it's not as simplistic as you say.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-852838
The Quran and the Hadith constitute a war manual that instructs Islamists on how to carry out the jihad. Mohammad in person was a revolutionary and an expansionist. He personally led his gang to carry out attacks against innocent civilians and conquer peaceful tribes. Today there are 57 declared Muslim Countries at the United Nations, all member of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly.
People also did some killing and conquering in the name of Christianity, which is contradictory to Christianity as Jesus did not write a war manual for future generations, and their prophet, Jesus, never killed anyone or asked anyone to kill anyone.
War manual? Wow! Sounds akin to calling a group of people Amalek.
"People also did "some" killing and conquering in the name of Christianity"
really some killing not that much? Crusade wars?
Jesus said:
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household."
"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
All your statement is total falsehood . The Quran and hadiths contain very little about war and most of the time is emphasized seeking peaceful means that battles.
Making a generalized statement doesn't make a fact.
"Today there are 57 declared Muslim Countries at the United Nations, all member of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly."
so what??
The Bible is not an accurate history lesson, and no one knows what Jesus actually said.
Since the invention of Islam, Arabs have a historical track record. Egyptians were not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic. Syrians (Assyrians) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic. Moroccans, Libyans, and Tunisia (Berbers) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic. Iraqis (Kurds, Assyrians, Armenians, Azides, etc) were not Arabs nor did they speak Arabic, Libya was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic. The Sudan (tribal Africa) was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, Tunisia was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic. Question: Why are they all called "Arab" Countries, Arab States, belong to the League of “Arab” Nations, and have to live under some form of Islamic Sharia? —Please give an academic response
Are you paid or are you a hobbyist genocidal bigot?
Reading the Jerusalem Post, correct or not, feels like collaborating with genocide. I try to do my BDS homework thoroughly.
That is because India is the Country most targeted by terrorism in the name of Islam.— Think before you post.
Pakistan was created through the partition of India on the basis of religious segregation?
What happened to the birth place of Hinduism in Pakistan? It is now the Islamic Republic
What happened to the land of the Zoroaster? It is now the Islamic Republic of Iran
What happened to all the Buddhas in Afghanistan? They were all ordered destroyed by religious edict under the Taliban's Islamic Law.
What happened to the Copts who are descendants of pre-Islamic Egyptians, who spoke a late form of the Egyptian language known as Coptic? — It is now the Arab Republic of Egypt.
And What happened to the West Bank, the biblical birthplace of David, Solomon, John the Baptist, and Jesus?
What happened to pagans of Rome ? Now it's now the land of Catholics. One can go on and on about lands that no longer have their ancient religions and beliefs.
What happened to the pre-Columbian religions in Mesoamerica?
Italy has a separation of church and state. Italy is officially a secular state with a constitution guaranteeing freedom of religion. The Catholic Church was the state church until the 1948 constitution.
India is targeted because of its actions in Kashmir.
"The right to self-determination is a fundamental principle of international law, and for the people of Kashmir, it remains an unfulfilled promise. The dispute over Kashmir, one of the longest-standing conflicts in modern history, continues to be a source of tension in South Asia. Despite multiple United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions affirming the right of Kashmiris to determine their own future, India has consistently refused to implement these resolutions, delaying the self-determination process and perpetuating human suffering."
"Pakistan was created through the partition of India on the basis of religious segregation?"
Thanks to Britain.
And how did we get 57 declared Muslim States at the United Nations, all members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation???? Please be very specific
As for self determination, Israelis are the only religious and ethnic minority in the Middle East and North Africa with the full right of self determination.
One minute you're loudly touting that there are many Muslim Arab citizens of Israel who supposedly have full rights of citizenship.
The next minute you're admitting that Israel is a Jewish ethno-state (albeit one that a minority of Jews are willing to live in despite the Israeli regime offering to pay their airfare to get to Israel, transportation from Ben Gurion airport to their first destination, rent subsidies, mortgage discounts, tax reductions, and other benefits for those who are willing to move there).
Which is it going to be?
One minute you're loudly touting that there are many Muslim Arab citizens of Israel who supposedly have full rights of citizenship.
The next minute you're admitting that Israel is a Jewish ethno-state (albeit one that a minority of Jews are willing to live in despite the Israeli regime offering to pay their airfare to get to Israel, transportation from Ben Gurion airport to their first destination, rent subsidies, mortgage discounts, tax reductions, and other benefits for those who are willing to move there).
Which is it going to be?
Israel must remain a Jewish State in a sea of Islamic States with abysmal human rights.
The banner of Islam flies over 99.9% of the Middle East and North African land mass. Some people are just pisssed that it is not 100%.
All the Countries of the Middle East and North Africa with the exception of Israel are signatories to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights:
Article 19: "There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Sharia."
Article 24: "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia."
Article 25: "The Islamic Sharia is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration."
If Muslims want to adhere to Islamic law, they have a lot of countries to choose from. This is why most all Middle East Jews have immigrated to Israel.
And how did we get 57 declared Muslim States at the United Nations, all members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation???? Please be very specific
As for self determination, Israeli Jews are the only religious and ethnic minority in the Middle East and North Africa with the full right of self determination.
Many Israeli Jews (and many Jews globally) aren't a "religious minority" because they're not religious.
At least some Jews are religious but their religion isn't Judaism.
Being ruled by Zionists isn't "self-determination" for Jews any more than being ruled by Nazis was "self-determination" for white Europeans.
"Many Israeli Jews (and many Jews globally) aren't a "religious minority" because they're not religious."
"religious minority" means a minority group defined by religion.
JINOS are part of that group.
"At least some Jews are religious but their religion isn't Judaism."
???
"Being ruled by Zionists isn't "self-determination" for Jews any more than being ruled by Nazis was "self-determination" for white Europeans."
Is being ruled by Hamas "self-determination" for Palestinian Arabs?
“‘religious minority’ means a minority group defined by religion.
Being “Jewish” is no longer necessarily defined by religion. There are many Jews by ancestry who do not practice Judaism. And in point of fact, the Zionist movement was founded by an atheist (Herzl) and the founding of Israel was led by another atheist (Ben Gurion).
“‘At least some Jews are religious but their religion isn’t Judaism.’
“???”
There are ethnically Jewish Christians. There are ethnically Jewish Muslims. There are ethnically Jewish Hindus. There are ethnically Jewish Buddhists. Etc.
“Is being ruled by Hamas ‘self-determination’ for Palestinian Arabs?”
No, it isn’t — which is why the Palestinian street in Gaza was rising up against Hamas to the extent that Hamas felt the need to bait Israel into the current war after violently suppressing street protests and executing its political opponents as “Israeli spies” started looking insufficient to save it from being overthrown.
"There are ethnically Jewish Christians … Muslims … Hindus … Buddhists. Etc."
You said:
"some Jews are religious but their religion isn't Judaism".
Did you mean "some [other] Jews are religious and their religion is Judaism"?
"No, it isn't…"
It certainly isn't a democracy but Hamas are Palestinian Arabs –
perhaps we need a clear definition of 'self-determination'.
What I meant to say was:
Some Jews practice Judaism.
Some Jews practice religions other than Judaism.
Some Jews practice no religion at all.
That last group included the key leadership of the Zionist movement for the formation of Israel, and in fact many Orthodox Jews rejected the notion as sacreligious. Over time, the Israeli regime has bought off many of the Orthodox with subsidies for religious studies, exemption from the draft, etc., while co-opting Judaism when convenient, but neither Zionism nor Israel as such were every about religion, they were about ancestry.
What I meant to say was:
Some Jews practice Judaism.
Some Jews practice religions other than Judaism.
Some Jews practice no religion at all.
That last group included the key leadership of the Zionist movement for the formation of Israel, and in fact many Orthodox Jews rejected the notion as sacreligious. Over time, the Israeli regime has bought off many of the Orthodox with subsidies for religious studies, exemption from the draft, etc., while co-opting Judaism when convenient, but neither Zionism nor Israel as such were every about religion, they were about ancestry.
Forget about dictionary type definitions. Judaism involves so much history, so much literature, so much…Judaism,
that you need an encyclopedia.
But neither Jewishness nor Zionism are Judaism.
Not sure what "Jewishness" means,
but the idea of exile and return runs
like a thread through the O.T.
“‘religious minority’ means a minority group defined by religion.
Being “Jewish” is no longer necessarily defined by religion. There are many Jews by ancestry who do not practice Judaism. And in point of fact, the Zionist movement was founded by an atheist (Herzl) and the founding of Israel was led by another atheist (Ben Gurion).
“‘At least some Jews are religious but their religion isn’t Judaism.’
“???”
There are ethnically Jewish Christians. There are ethnically Jewish Muslims. There are ethnically Jewish Hindus. There are ethnically Jewish Buddhists. Etc.
“Is being ruled by Hamas ‘self-determination’ for Palestinian Arabs?”
No, it isn’t — which is why the Palestinian street in Gaza was rising up against Hamas to the extent that Hamas felt the need to bait Israel into the current war after violently suppressing street protests and executing its political opponents as “Israeli spies” started looking insufficient to save it from being overthrown.
“‘religious minority’ means a minority group defined by religion.
Being “Jewish” is no longer necessarily defined by religion. There are many Jews by ancestry who do not practice Judaism. And in point of fact, the Zionist movement was founded by an atheist (Herzl) and the founding of Israel was led by another atheist (Ben Gurion).
“‘At least some Jews are religious but their religion isn’t Judaism.’
“???”
There are ethnically Jewish Christians. There are ethnically Jewish Muslims. There are ethnically Jewish Hindus. There are ethnically Jewish Buddhists. Etc.
“Is being ruled by Hamas ‘self-determination’ for Palestinian Arabs?”
No, it isn’t — which is why the Palestinian street in Gaza was rising up against Hamas to the extent that Hamas felt the need to bait Israel into the current war after violently suppressing street protests and executing its political opponents as “Israeli spies” started looking insufficient to save it from being overthrown.
"The right to self-determination is a fundamental principle…"
No it isn't.
Regardless of this 1970 UNGAR,
UN members don't care about this right,
because by definition, they don't need it. That's why they do so little for
Tibetans, Chechenyans, Kurds, Basques, Copts etc…
"And What happened to the West Bank, the biblical birthplace of David, Solomon, John the Baptist, and Jesus?"
what happened to people that were there before David, Solomon, John the Baptist, and Jesus, and ,and,???
"But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive,"
Detueronomy 20:16
There was no independent nation in that geographical location and then, -Before Israel, there was a British mandate, not a Palestinian state .
-Before the British Mandate, there was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Ottoman Empire, there was the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, there was the Ayubid Empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Godfrey IV of Boulogne, known as Godfrey de Bouillon, conqueror of Jerusalem in 1099
-Before the Ayubid Empire, there was the Frankish and Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem, there was the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, there was the Byzantine empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Byzantine Empire, there were the Sassanids, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Sassanid Empire, there was the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Byzantine Empire, there was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Roman Empire, there was the Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Hasmonean state, there was the Seleucid, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Seleucid empire, there was the empire of Alexander the Great, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the empire of Alexander the Great, there was the Persian empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Persian Empire, there was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Babylonian Empire, there were the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was the Kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
-Before the kingdom of Israel, there was the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
History is indeed full of violence, war, and conquest. However, as we are in modern times, there is no excuse to continue it as we watch it unfold before our eyes on computers and TV screens. Sorry, but there is NO excuse for murdering innocent people. It doesn't matter if the Palestinians were there for 100 years or 10,000 years. And by the way, they have done blood tests and the Lebanese, Syrians and probably Palestinians have Canaanite DNA. That means they were there before the Jews if you are basing your morality on who was there first. (Although many jews were also once canaanites too). How immature to do so when one sees the atrocities, murder and theft going on openly.
People build nations, they definitely don't have any real estate assigned to them based on race, religion, or DNA.
I can't make an excuse of all the deaths that occur during war on purpose, by accident, or intentionally using human shields. Wars are a horror show, which is why you should not start them. I speak first hand as I am a decorated combat veteran, and not proud of what I have had to do because of fear and propaganda.
As for who what there first, if don't want you to be a hypocrite if you live in the Americas.
YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS CONCERNED WITH WHO WAS THERE FIRST. I COULD CARE LESS WHO WAS THERE FIRST. THE REAL ISSUES ARE THE ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS, OCCUPATION, WAR CRIMES, GENOCIDE AND DISPLACEMENT.
Ahimsa, meaning non-violence or non-injury, is a core principle of Hinduism and other Indian religions like Jainism and Buddhism. It's not a formal vow in the same way as in other religions, but rather a fundamental ethical guideline that guides the conduct of Hindus. Islamism in India has altered Hindu non-violent fundamentals.
Of all the moral precepts instilled in Buddhist monks the promise not to kill comes first, and the principle of non-violence is arguably more central to Buddhism than any other major religion. So why have monks been using hate speech and violence against Muslims in Burma?
The core principles of Judaism according to the Torah are to murder the neighboring tribes, down to their livestock. Focus on that, maybe.
The core principle of Zionism is ethnicity/ancestry, not Judaism.
This is a juncture for Christopher Hitchens lectures on how religious texts themselves are poisonous and any rational reading of them contains the full blueprint for atrocity. Judaism is a Bronze Age tribal religion with a foundational myth of genociding the neighbors. Netanyahu and his ministers make direct reference to ‘Amalek.’ We know now those stories are false (as backed by Israeli archeologists at the national archeological museum, who maintain a large empty room of artifacts of the Egyptian captivity and subsequent Exodus etc battles as there are none.) But the false myth is being used for today’s genocide.
The current ethnic cleansing and starvation plan of the Israelis government is referred to just this week as “Gideon’s Chariots,” a referencing to ethnic cleansing and genocide of the neighbors (including “tearing the flesh of the men” with “thorns”) in Judges 6-8. This is what the text says and we can’t wish it away. Gideon is a hero for Jews, Christians and Muslims precisely because he not only genocides the neighbors but does so in an inconvenient manner dictated by God. The entirely point of the text is to maintain this level of obedience, even and especially when committing holy mass murder. It’s folly to decouple the text from current actions. I would argue that decent, well-adjusted people are the ones not practicing their religions correctly. The call is to be a lunatic. Similarly the worst ISIS jihadists appear to have read and understood plain things plainly. I fault them for many things but not that.
This sort of bible insanity is why I am no longer a Christian although raised one. It’s nice that there are liberal interpretations of religious texts, else we’d be in a Dark Age, but usually ends up being an agreement by decent people to ignore large portions of what they are supposed to believe to be the received word of God completely. That doesn’t make much sense to me. God made whoopsies in his own text? I’ve just preferred to chuck it all; there’s a very poor baby:bathwater ratio.
Israeli citizenship through descent is voided in the 1970 Law of Return, which strips a Jewish descendant convert to any other faith of any right to be a citizen (link appended.) It has been made a matter of faith and not just genetics. The modern Zionist intent is for a nation of people who are at least performatively Jewish. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return
My attitude toward the ancient religious texts that incorporate supposed history — be they the Torah/Nevi’im/Ketuvim, the Mahabharata/Ramayana, whatever — is that they presumably center around a core of actual historical happenings, interpreted in the ways, and delivering the “lessons,” most convenient to the religious and political establishments of the times in which they were written.
Since politics is essentially sociopathic, the “lessons” that get recycled and used by political establishments, even millennia later, are the “lessons” that justify all kinds of violent behaviors so long as those violent behaviors serve the establishments, while the “lessons” that incorporate any justifiable morality are used as sweetener for the masses to help them swallow the whole thing.
For example, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s” is for the masses, not for the political establishments, which are all based on coveting all of the above.
In a military conflict between India and Pakistan, China would sympathize with Pakistan, Russia would sympathize with India. So, among other things, it will damage Russia-China relations and BRICS. By the way, Pakistan is seeking BRICS membership as well. It is not difficult to see who is interested in pouring more fuel into the fire. Highly likely the initial terror act was organized by those people who see BRICS as the threat to their domination.
That’d be the reason nuke conflict would never happen…!
India is the Country most targeted by terrorism in the name of Islam.
Then there is Israel who has had this nuclear technology for since the mid-1950s—Israel's first leader, David Ben-Gurion, initiated the nuclear project, the Dimona Facility: The Dimona nuclear complex was established, according to Foreign Policy.
1963: The Dimona reactor, the IRR-2, went critical, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. That is over 7 decades ago, and Israel never once threatened to use it or to destroy a member State.
These two polities have hundreds of nuclear missiles and, if they go to nuclear war, they will not just destroy each other but probably cause a nuclear winter worldwide. I'm flippant that such a dangerous escalation has been under the radar until the first shots were fired yesterday.
This wouldn't have happened if Trump were president.
Lmao.
You just said you're in favor of war.
It's not surprising, really.
You'll see it on TV from the comfort of your living room,
you'll strategize with your friends, analyze the mistakes,
keep score of casualties and destruction,
and who knows, maybe it'll be good for business.
No, I didn’t. I laughed at the ridiculousness of Trump.
You’re not too bright.
Trump : "This is all Biden's fault because {bulls**t}, {horses**t}, and {something Trump did in his first term he forgot he did}."
George Carlin was spot on describing the ONLY( i love to despise that stupid divide and conquer nonsensical question) race thats left of 12-14, of humanity as its spinning faster and faster down the drain oblivious and utterly self-absorbed in petty squabbles while all aboard the titanac we are also sinking, as we spin.
Good show humanity, the gods are sipping wine,blowing wind and laughing their asses off for the show silly stupid humans put on for their amusement and sport. Remember the 6th mass extinction your causing? The climate catastrophe your causing? The massive pollution your creating which is really not a nice thing to do to this place thats given you ungrateful, wasterful,disrespectful,suicidal locust so much.
Aarghhh, beam me up scotty, i have enough for my report on this mental institution. i need a head to toe disinfection shower immediately!
Especially Eris, who probably threw a golden apple at the non-existent peace meeting between Krishna and Allah.
Kallistí! Now with nukes…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nuclear_weapons_in_Japan#:~:text=The%20effect%20of%201971%20agreements,reportedly%20removed%20prior%20to%201972.
"The effect of 1971 agreements was that the U.S. would remove nuclear weapons at sites in Japan in exchange for ships with nuclear weapons being permitted to visit ports. Nuclear weapons based on Okinawa were reportedly removed prior to 1972."[11]
Questions, questions.
https://sonar21.com/mar-al-lago-will-fail-without-credibility-nothing-works/
"Japan is the most important stepping stone to China for the US. Without the American bases in Japan, the encirclement of China with American bases no longer holds. If Japan is eliminated (approx. 55,000 US soldiers), South Korea remains as number two, where the Americans have less than half the number of US soldiers stationed (24,000)."
How is it that one can posit that Japan and South Korea encircle China when most presume Russia, China, and North Korea have nuclear weapons stationed on their respective eastern coasts?