Clashes on religious grounds began in India, there are victims

During the clashes between Hindus and Muslims in New Delhi, people died. Such a large-scale interfaith conflict has not been here for several decades.

Indian news agency PTI speaks of 17 victims. It is known that one of the dead was a policeman who was shot in the head. About 150 people were delivered to hospitals, of which at least 50 had gunshot wounds. Among the victims are representatives of the press. In addition, an excited crowd set fire to a Muslim mosque.

The outbreak of protests began after the adoption in December last year of amendments to the law on citizenship. They provide benefits for Indian citizenship to representatives of religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, but do not apply to Muslims.

The conflict entered a hot phase during a trip to the country of US President Donald Trump, the last point of which was New Delhi.

At the moment, the metropolitan police are refusing military assistance, claiming that so far they are hoping to deal with the problem on their own. But if law enforcement officers do not succeed, then the troops will have to enter.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

ISIS, HRIGIL and now HareGIL with INDIL, obscurantism on the march!

[Nychego]

The local Zhirinovsky from among the orthodox Hindus several months ago shouted, like "there are 10 times less of them (Muslims) in the country than us (Hindus). They don't understand that in case of a conflict we will simply kill them all." I think the provocations began to be expressed in a concrete result.
And to involve an army (in which the majority are Sikhs) is just to kindle a fire even more "fun".

[cost]

anti-Muslim performances in India

Now it’s not only anti-Muslim

[Catfish]

Exactly! And there it becomes more fun to live.

[Shurik70]

Muslims protested, and set fire to a mosque as a result ...
And are there really so many who want to obtain Indian citizenship, even if it comes to unrest.

[Catfish]

You know, Alexander, I don’t want to say anything bad, but wherever Muslims live, something constantly happens. An accident? In my opinion, over the past thirty years this has already turned into a pattern. Do not find?

[Shurik70]

I think the reason is the ban on pork belly.
Well, the truth is, look at the statistics - whoever eats a pork belly almost never blows himself up. An accident?

[Catfish]

Thank you for the "pork brisket", made me happy. Somehow I never compared one and the other.

[Nychego]

Quote: Rich

Now it’s not only anti-Muslim

And in India, Muslims are generally tightly connected with Christians.
In that area of ​​Mumbai (the poor neighborhoods adjacent to the Ponto Bandra, of which I only remember the Fisherman's Village), where my wife’s students live, there’s not a single Muslim temple and specialized school with him, so Muslim children study quietly in the Jesuit school and in the school at the Church of England - they and their parents think this is perfectly normal.

[DRM]

Quote: Rich

anti-Muslim performances in India

Now it’s not only anti-Muslim

Indeed, Christians always end up in the Middle East and Asia. Tens of thousands of Christians were forced to immigrate from Egypt and Syria (and these were once Christian lands) !!

[Krasnodar]

Sikhs - what side are they to Hindus or Muslims? There are 20 million of them all over the world, for India - a drop in the ocean

[Nychego]

Quote: Krasnodar

Sikhs - what side are they to Hindus or Muslims?

Sikhs are about a quarter of the Indian army's officer corps and under 20% HP. The most massive of the "fighting nations", still valued by the "White Sahibs". In the most efficient units of the Sikhs, there is an even larger share.

[Krasnodar]

I know that. They just do not take the side of Hindus or Muslims

[Nychego]

Quote: Krasnodar

they do not take the side of Hindus or Muslims

You are right, but the involvement of an army that will begin to crush everyone, with a relatively small scale of unrest, may not calm down, but only provoke and transfer unrest to other regions.
The Sikhs are also not very fond of this - the deaths of Indira and Rajiv are not forgotten. Indira is now largely legendary no worse than the grandfather who is on my ava.

[Krasnodar]

Well Duc - the daughter of an ally

[Nychego]

She is also the first woman-national leader, moreover, decisive, sometimes effective.
Plus, if Mohandas is a product of modernism, then Indira is already in many ways a postmodernist and therefore more convenient for modern PR specialists to master. Mohandas is a monument, Indira is in places a plastic material, not yet "bronzed", suitable for application to the current situation, ie. approximately what they have been doing from the IVS in the last 15 years (they will probably continue further, even after the departure of some of the main inspirers of the process, because the material is super good with a wonderful Victory in the background).

[Krasnodar]

Sikhs do not like her))

[Nychego]

Quote: Krasnodar

Sikhs do not like her))

And there was a reason.
Well, in general, for the "Golden Temple" she was hit in the head with a machine gun.

[Thrifty]

Look for someone who benefits! Look for instigators, and act harshly, even cruelly, otherwise get a Civil War!

[Po-tzan]

Quote: Thrifty

Look for someone who benefits! Look for instigators, and act harshly, even cruelly, otherwise get a Civil War!

The Indians will come here, read your comment and run to look for instigators :)

[Ham]

modi has been sowing the wind for a long time - now it will reap the storm ... flirting with the radicals never bring to good ...

[Nychego]

Quote: Ham

modi has been sowing the wind for a long time - now it will reap the storm ... flirting with the radicals never bring to good ...

I completely agree.
Modi had a few "fat years", on which he was re-elected, attributing to himself all the good things happening to the Indian economy. That's it, the "fat years" are over. The external threat did not work out (the packs were simply quickly cleaned up by the Hindus' snouts and returned to their comfortable level of conflict), internal disturbances began, turning into conflicts. Now the main thing for Modi and his party is not to allow the boiling kettle with a whistle to turn into an exploding steam boiler.

[knn54]

I think that Modi (a nationalist) simply "opened the valve", ALL discontent will now pour out on Muslims.
And speak out correctly, after all, the Knight of the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called.

[Zeev Zeev]

It will be like in 2002 in Gujarat. Two days of pogroms, 500-600 killed Muslims, then the army will enter and will shoot in all directions, both for Muslims and for Hindus.

[rocket757]

The outbreak of protests began after the adoption in December last year of amendments to the law on citizenship. They provide benefits for Indian citizenship to representatives of religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, but do not apply to Muslims.

Someone thought that someone was given more, but he was cheated .... there would be a reason, but "gurgling" there ALWAYS!

[Prahlad]

It is interesting ! I ran for the humble, waiting for the development of events!

[Nychego]

My wife’s opinion (view from Mumbai):
_______________________________
It makes sense to divide by ten, because it goes on continuously, just Western media grab a piece of an endless buchi and serve it as a separate dish.

Recent events include the demolition of an illegally built mosque and the law on non-granting citizenship to Muslims. Everything would be ok, but in parallel there was a law on universal verification and putting in order of documents. This means that if you have lost or never had a birth certificate and you are a Muslim, you will be sent as illegally residing in India, even if you are in the tenth generation living in some Rajasthan.
_______________________________

[Genry]

Quote: Nychego

This means that if you have lost or never had a birth certificate and you are a Muslim, they will send you as illegally staying in India,

This is a consequence of the last religious division of India with the creation of Muslim Pakistan. These are the constant claims of Muslims in Indian territories.

[Nychego]

Quote: Genry

This is a consequence of the last religious division of India with the creation of Muslim Pakistan. These are the constant claims of Muslims in Indian territories.

Rather, these are manifestations of the nationalist policies of religious radicals in power in India.
In recent years, there have been frequent Hindu lynching of "cow-eaters". The victims are almost always Muslims. Vigilantes often go unpunished, leading to further reprisals. World experience shows that not to punish the participants in lynching is practically to encourage them to more and more violence, but as soon as they begin to punish effectively, the "irreconcilable fighters" are blown away at once and hide under a broom.

[Genry]

Quote: Nychego

Rather, these are manifestations of the nationalist policies of religious radicals in power in India.

Radicalism?
How many non-Muslims live in Pakistan? This is a monocultural country, the territory of which was torn away from India. And how many sections of India there were before that ... Therefore, talking about radicalism in India is simply blasphemous.
Muslims peacefully go to Pakistan!

[Ros 56]

As soon as the stripes visit and immediately there begins a mess. What is it for?

[CBR600]

The outbreak of protests began after the adoption in December last year of amendments to the law on citizenship. They provide benefits for Indian citizenship to representatives of religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, but do not apply to Muslims.

- I don’t understand this, please explain. India is kind of a multicultural country. An attempt to isolate Islam led to the creation of Pakistan. Now what?

[Genry]

Quote: CBR600

I don’t understand this, please explain. India is kind of a multicultural country. An attempt to isolate Islam led to the creation of Pakistan. Now what?

Since the division has already taken place, India considers itself no longer obligated to support Muslims at home.

[CBR600]

Those. India for Hindus and all? Radically? Hinduism? Then what are such minorities from Afghanistan? But, for example, I read Shiva with Brahma, can I their citizenship ?

[Genry]

If only not for pan-Islamism.

[evgen1221]

Directly to the organized action on the day of the arrival of the dear meager guest reminds this action. Very suspiciously lately, riots on the arrival of overseas guests have arisen and upon their departure, for a long time and are tedious to be resolved.

[falx]

what the hell ...
The causes of this conflict between Hindus and Muslims lie in the division of colonial India in 1947 .. And the roots are buried even deeper, as is usually the case ...
The stumbling block that constantly fuels the conflict is the unresolved issue of Jammu and Kashmir during the section. Both sides claim this huge region, with India as a whole, and Pakistan almost entirely. Now the region is divided approximately in half. In addition, China also chopped off a piece of itself. The majority of the population of Jammu and Kashmir are Muslims. but they, in turn, want independence, do not really strive for packs ... in general, everything is very confused.
Indians with packs have fought for this region more than once. but these wars did not lead to a final solution to the conflict by force of arms. everything remained in their places, as in 1947.
they also could not agree on anything, although by the way they tried.
Extremists and nationalists on both sides constantly use this topic for their political purposes, which of course adds to the intensity, as it is now in India ...
yes, Muslims in India are openly and stupidly discriminated against, most recently with particular zeal .. In Pakistan there is no one to discriminate against, almost all Indians were expelled or killed there back in 1947 ...

by the way graters between Hindus and Sikhs are also there, but they are far from so deep. some Hindu extremists consider the Sikhs generally to be their own, but Muslims are a common enemy for them ... again, the Sikh’s enmity with Muslims has long traditions and constant stumbling blocks that regularly heat up this feud. In Pakistan, Sikhs generally shared the fate of Hindus ...

[CBR600]

Thank you for reminding. I have a somewhat reverent attitude towards India and Hinduism, and I empathize with the Hindus. British creatures tore the country, and historically, Indians respected any faiths. Now, Christians will be insecure there. Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Kashmir is actually all India. Torn apart as Yugoslavia and not in response. And again poyuzali Islam for this. And again people perish.

[pru-pavel]

These British creatures simply took power from the Muslim minority, which had long ago conquered India, who ruled India before them. After the fall of the British Empire, the Hindu majority did not want to return to the rule of the Muslim minority (for obvious reasons), and the Muslims also did not want to be under the Hindus. So they had to split up. Here, in fact, everything is historically determined

[falx]

any conflict is historically determined.

but the islanders very skillfully and consistently used mutual hostility between Muslims and Hindus (which really has long-standing roots, no one argues) to maintain control of India. and constantly deepened it. what about? divide et impera - divide and conquer!
simply to plunder the resources of India. The industrialization of Britain and its transformation into a great power took place generally at the expense of India.

The end of British rule was the mutual massacre, the hatred accumulated by the efforts of the islanders exploded like a volcano. and this is just not surprising, but natural. the unresolved conflict in Jammu and Kashmir contributes to the fact that this volcano does not subside. Historically, the islanders are responsible. for this conflict is a direct consequence of their dominion.

But on the other hand, this does not exempt modern participants in this conflict from their own responsibility. not Hindus, not Muslims. Not India, not Pakistan. This conflict only they themselves can solve, no one will do it for them. sooner or later they will have to agree.

in our century? doubtful ...

[pru-pavel]

Just a set of stamps without any specifics. Roman divide and conquer by the way meant not at all what you think.

[pru-pavel]

Of course, I will not pretend that this was nothing. But their contribution there was hardly decisive. All these processes began after the sepoy uprising and served as a reaction to prevent such rebellions. But personally, I do not see the possibility in the 20th century to remain as a single state. When the minority is the ruling, this is a problem. In Syria, the same problem, the Alawite minority rules in a Sunni country. That flashed - without any British. If in Russia mainly Muslims start to get into power and power structures, with the majority of non-Muslim population - I also think problems may happen.

[Wanderer039]

They never stopped there

[CBR600]

Quote: pru-pavel

If in Russia mainly Muslims start to get into power and power structures, with the majority of non-Muslim population - I also think problems may happen.

This happens in full, according to the laws of matriarchy or hiding behind them. The genocide of the Russian peasant in Russia is already more than 100 years old! All laws are against him, against the patriarchy. I will assume that half of these laws are implemented by those islanders. Although this is not important, it is important that this is a ready-made system for destroying the nation in its native land.