Was killing Indra right?

[Arsh1469]

Do you think killing her was right? Because of the killing a Genocide happened but if she wasn't killed she would not pay for her actions. Is killing her justified? Is it worth not killing her to save thousands of lives? Is assassinating someone right? Is killing an unarmed person right? 

Thoughts

[GurjantGnostic]

5 hours ago, Arsh1469 said:

Do you think killing her was right? Because of the killing a Genocide happened but if she wasn't killed she would not pay for her actions. Is killing her justified? Is it worth not killing her to save thousands of lives? Is assassinating someone right? Is killing an unarmed person right? 

Thoughts

Who is to say genocide wasn't  already on the books?

I think it served as one of the best warnings in history to the corrupt. 

Killing her was justified a thousand times over. 

Assinating people can be right or wrong and whether they are armed makes no difference. 

[Arsh1469]

2 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Who is to say genocide wasn't  already on the books?

I think it served as one of the best warnings in history to the corrupt. 

Killing her was justified a thousand times over. 

Assinating people can be right or wrong and whether they are armed makes no difference. 

Killing an unarmed person in war which you could say was happening in punjab is  a war crime. Some may argue it is unjustified due to the person unable to defend themselves.

I agree with you Nehru her father I believe also attacked the Golden Temple and his is completely unjustifiable.

[Arsh1469]

2 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Who is to say genocide wasn't  already on the books?

I think it served as one of the best warnings in history to the corrupt. 

Killing her was justified a thousand times over. 

Assinating people can be right or wrong and whether they are armed makes no difference. 

The Government had no reason to go after Bhindranwale as he didn't commit any terrorist action. They should have gone after Babbar Khalsa or something. Operation Bluestar wasn't an attack on bhindranwale it was an attack on the Skh community and Sant Ji was used as the reason for the attack.

[GurjantGnostic]

2 hours ago, Arsh1469 said:

Killing an unarmed person in war which you could say was happening in punjab is  a war crime. Some may argue it is unjustified due to the person unable to defend themselves.

I agree with you Nehru her father I believe also attacked the Golden Temple and his is completely unjustifiable.

You can kill unarmed people in war. You just have rules of engagement and loac to follow which means you should take them prisoner and treat them humanely according to the geneva convention and things resulting from it. Our Shaheeds and the Sikh Paanth were in no position to take get prisoner. She was a viable enemy combatant. In fact a shot caller, a prime target, guilty and sentenced. 

Mouth and pen are weapons. She was in fact armed when served justuce. 

[GurjantGnostic]

6 hours ago, Arsh1469 said:

The Government had no reason to go after Bhindranwale as he didn't commit any terrorist action. They should have gone after Babbar Khalsa or something. Operation Bluestar wasn't an attack on bhindranwale it was an attack on the Skh community and Sant Ji was used as the reason for the attack.

They should have simply met at the bargaining table and signed Anandpur resolution. 1984 was not the beginning of the genocide. All Sikh organizations are faultless for exercising their right to resist. 

Armed resistance, when forced upon you, is neither a war crime nor terrorism. It's one of the few jewels in americanism, we consider that your patriotic duty. 

If you want to see how to most ethically, and successfully wage an asymetrical and irregular war against all odds, that's Sikh history. From foundation, to 1984 to what comes next. 

[GurjantGnostic]

Killing non combatants is a war crime. India commit the war crime. India uses terrorism. 

[paapiman]

16 hours ago, Arsh1469 said:

Is assassinating someone right? Is killing an unarmed person right? 

Assassination of an unarmed EVIL person, like a Rapist, Pedo, Serial killer, Mass Murderer, etc, is completely in line with Gurmat.

Obviously, we must try to bring evil people to justice, using the rule of the law. But, if all peaceful means fail, it is completely justified (from a Sikh perspective) to pick up arms.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

16 hours ago, Arsh1469 said:

Is killing her justified? Is it worth not killing her to save thousands of lives?

The Assassins of Indira Gandhi probably did not know that large scale killing of innocent Sikh civilians will take place after her assassination.

Indira Gandhi's assassination was completely justified. She was a threat to Humanity.

Did you know that she was also involved in a massacre of Hindu Saints in the 1960's?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[dalsingh101]

I think when information started filtering back to Shaheeds Satwant and Beant Singh, they were in shock at the civilian casualties. Had the army just killed Sant Bhindranwale and his followers without all the extras, I don't think they would have done it?   

[GurjantGnostic]

2 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

I think when information started filtering back to Shaheeds Satwant and Beant Singh, they were in shock at the civilian casualties. Had the army just killed Sant Bhindranwale and his followers without all the extras, I don't think they would have done it?   

Hard to say if the attack on Harminder Sahib was enough for them, it is for me. Everything else is just more reason. 

[Premi]

What say, if the assassination was botched ?

That she : a) made a decent recovery

b) got severely disabled by it

Would consequences for Sikhs been the same ? 

[GurjantGnostic]

On 1/2/2022 at 2:23 AM, Premi said:

What say, if the assassination was botched ?

That she : a) made a decent recovery

b) got severely disabled by it

Would consequences for Sikhs been the same ? 

Probably worse.