Posted:
Originally posted by: Gur.N.cool
I have gone through all the pages here. You guys had a pretty good debate.
@Gauri i'm amazed at all the information that you know about topic. Believe me I had read that article (that you posted) as well, few days ago on google😆.
Ok back to topic
The attack on the Golden temple wasn't justified. I agree that terrorism had to be rooted out of Punjab at that time, but the manner in which the operations was carried out was not appropriate.
Looking at the situation, IG should have opted for something else rather than attacking Golden Temple.
like what?
The militants aim was to get support from the people of Punjab for creating Khalistan, and IG actions on the Golden Temple did just that. Sikhs were upset that such a horrific thing happened. Since Sikhs are the minority, off course they would feel betrayed by the government's actions in handling this case. And this led to greater militancy in the state in the latter years.
But yes, the militancy in Punjab had to be ended. The militants weren't right at all in their actions by hiding in the Golden Temple.then how is her action not justified?
@the topic starter. Well the majority of the sikhs have no sympathy for these terrorists/Bhindranwala. But there are still some odd people who want a seaprate country in the name of Khalistan.
I don't think the common public of Punjab want's this but some Punjabi NRI's are taking interest in this becuase there are some Gurdwaras here which promote Khalistan, so some teenagers might fall for it.
if indian punjabis dont want it then the NRI are in minority and serious i think we have had enough of this separt country and all. we saw wht has happened to pak and bangladesh so we dont want any more parts of our country getting in that state now.
1984 thing was an old debate. right now the debate is all abt taliban and its relavance to the scenario then.
Anupamaa
