Nh Provider Agreement: Fill & Download for Free

A2A:Objectively speaking not every conflict was an overwhelming victory for India.In 1947, the first Indo-Pak war happened over Kashmir. It ended in a ceasefire with Pakistan gaining roughly one-third of Kashmir and India possessing the remaining two-thirds. There was no overwhelming victory for any side. In actuality, the fortunes of both sides were see-sawing with the change in seasons - Pakistan gaining territory in winter and India reclaiming it in summer.In 1965, both India and Pakistan claimed victory. But I am inclined to give this one to India by virtue of attainment of objectives. Pakistan invaded and India managed to defend itself successfully. But then again, the Tashkent agreement did not contain a no-war pact or any renunciation of guerrilla warfare in Kashmir. Besides after signing the agreement, Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri died mysteriously in Tashkent. So Pakistan did get something after all.In 1971, it is well known that India was the victor and the fact is not disputed by Pakistan either.In 1999, it was not a war. In fact, the then Indian Prime Minister Shri Atal Vajpayee, forcibly restricted the conflict to the Kargil sector at the cost of the lives of many soldiers. It was again agreed that India was the victor.So only the 1971 war and the 1999 conflict need be considered to answer the question.In 1971, the intelligence input from Pakistan generals who defected were a great asset. The Indian intelligence body RAW was quite active then, unlike its atrophied versions in recent times. Besides the timing of the conflict was so arranged so that the Himalayan passes would be closed by snow due to winter preventing any Chinese military intervention.Despite all the military buildup and preparation, it was Pakistan that attacked and drew first blood. The main reason for defeat was the lack of coordination between the higher echelons of the Pakistani military and the lower level soldiers.The Pakistani commanders were less than stellar. This can be seen by how the Pakistan Air Force failed to attack the Indian Navy ships during their operation in Karachi port but misidentified PNS Zulfiqar and attacked their own warship, inflicting major damages and killing several officers on board. Casualties inflicted to Pakistan Army's I Corps and II Corps were very high and many soldiers perished due to lack of operational planning and lack of coordination within the army's formations. Ultimately it did not matter how brave or motivated their soldiers were.The other most important advantage was the geographical separation between the Eastern and Western fronts. It was easy to isolate East Pakistan with a naval blockade. Besides the Pakistan Air Force relied heavily on East Pakistan for technical support and the war had cut them off.[1] The PAF was solely focussed on aerial combat and did not actively involve itself in deep penetration strikes, para-dropping behind enemy lines, feints to draw enemy fighters away from the actual target or reconnaissance.The USSR ‘took care’ of the noble USA and its allies long enough for the war to end. An UN resolution for ceasefire was vetoed by USSR as well. Had the war gone on longer the result might have been a little different.There are a lot more issues but these are the major ones.In 1999, it was a conflict and not a war.But nonetheless, it does not hurt to have a quick look. But before we see the reasons for Indian victory, the state of affairs need to be described.The terrain is mountainous and even the best roads, such as National Highway 1D from Leh to Srinagar, are only two lanes. The high altitude, which affected the ability of aircraft to carry loads, made control of NH 1D (the actual stretch of the highway which was under Pakistani fire) a priority for India. From their observation posts, the Pakistani forces had a clear line-of-sight to lay down indirect artillery fire on NH 1D, inflicting heavy casualties on the Indians. This highway was the main logistical and supply route.The reason Pakistan lost was once again a lack of clear planning and strategy. The entire plan was kept top secret and the soldiers were kept in the dark. The same mistake as in 1971.It was not a full fledged attempt and the number of infiltrators, including those providing logistical backup, has been put at approximately 5,000 at the height of the conflict.[2] This figure includes troops from Pakistan-administered Kashmir who provided additional artillery support.The most important aspect of this was that India had the freedom to launch a full-scale counter-offensive while Pakistan could not - atleast not without admitting to violating agreements and pacts. It went to the point that the dead bodies of fallen soldiers were not taken back.[3]The intruders on the heights were an amalgam of professional soldiers and mercenaries. They included the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 12th battalions of the Pakistan Army's Northern Light Infantry (NLI). Among them were many Mujaheddin and members of Pakistan's the Special Services Group (SSG).The most distressing piece of information is the one that no one writes about. For all the planning and the following failure, Gen. Musharraf got to rule the country while the brave Indian and Pakistani soldiers died for his delusions of grandeur. He destroyed any hope of a normal working relation between India and Pakistan, fueled hatred on both sides of the border, drove up the sale of arms in the sub-continent and profited off of it all.Answered your question, I have.Footnotes[1] Indo-Pakistan War of 1971[2] 1999 Kargil Conflict[3] Pak refuses to take back bodies of its officers

Thanks for A2A.Of Course Coimbatore will become a Best City/Smart City in the near future.Few Reasons/Upcoming Improvements:Coimbatore airport expansionDrawing the attention of Pon Radhakrishnan to the lackadaisical way the Coimbatore airport expansion project proposal was progressing, the ICCIC President said though the project was proposed in 2002, it was only recently that administrative orders were issued for 612.97 acres of land. But it was only after the state government released funds for land acquisition, the AAI could kick start the work.He said because of the delay in completion of airport expansion, the city could not be linked with more international destinations. This made foreign visitors reluctant to come to Coimbatore to clinch business deals and industrialists from here had to go to either Singapore or Dubai for this purpose. He also pleaded for including Coimbatore in the Asian Air Transport Agreement so that more international carriers operated flights to the city.Connecting Highways:Seizing upon the visit of the minister, holding responsibilities in the key ministry of road transport and highways, Nandakumar pointed out that despite the strategic location of Coimbatore with many National Highways criss-crossing it, it suffered for want of a bypass road linking them. He urged the minister to take up the by pass road linking Coimbatore-Tiruchi road with Coimbatore-Sathyamangalam, Coimbatore- Avinashi and Coimbatore-Udhagamandalam sections of the national highways and the execution of Western bypass road connecting Neelambur with Mettupalayam road.The other road works he mentioned in the memorandum included four laning of Dindigul-Coimbatore-Sathyamangalam section of NH 209, 4/6 laning of Chengapalli-Walayar section of NH 47, 4 laning of Karur-Coimbatore stretch of NH 67 and improvement to Coimbatore-Udhagamandalam road.Few Key PointsThe city ranked first in available talent pool among 10 challenger cities, including Ahmedabad and Kolkata and second in cost effectiveness. Coimbatore hosts companies such as Cognizant, Wipro, Infosys, Robert Bosch, TCS, IBM and KGISL.Life At CoimbatoreLife at Coimbatore is actually heavenly.Most of the people who go outstation tend to miss their city but when they come to Coimbatore they just refuse to leave Coimbatore.If you are a Coimbatorian you will never be happy with any other city in the world even if it has luxurious lifestyle.You can enjoy the Climate,Food,Friendliness of people. 100kms drive to Coimbatore , Pollachi ,Valparai other hill stations can be visited during weekends.Of course we do have 2 malls and 1 mall under construction.You can enjoy your early morning walk at Race Course.Morning BreakFast at Famous Annapoorna.Movie at TheCinemas-Brooks.Lunch you have variety of options.Evening relax in RS Puram/VOC Stadium and enjoy the Falooda/Kulfi/Shawarma/Snacks.BLISSFUL.Cost of Living when compared to other Metropolitan cities Coimbatore has a very low cost of living You can satisfy you hunger for a day using 150 rupees.Rent and Transportation are also nominal .So you can lead a happy life at Coimbatore.Climate is very pleasant in Coimbatore. It has many Hills nearby so which obviously makes a Weekend getaway for those who work tirelessly the whole week.Pollution also is controlled as many working people prefer to commute by the Company transport.All companies mostly provide buses for employees.People are kind and helping you can get hep from any people.They are willing to help you out at any point of time.

While our OP has made a reasonable request, a clear, short answer here is extremely hard. I attempt it, not because I am best to do it, but only because I, an old libertarian, sympathize with our young libertarian friend here. I have been hoping a more erudite libertarian would provide one to educate us all, but I have yet to see one to my satisfaction, so I ask our community to aid me in this construction.Thus, I start this as an incentive for others’ contributions. I am open to friendly amendments, clarifications, etc. Extra points for brevity, clarity, and coherence. :)To start a libertarian taxonomy, we need to include at least a touchstone of what libertarians are not.Statists: “Rulers have the right to threaten violence on us to control what we do, how we interact, and to take the stuff we create, even if it means that they may hurt us if we disobey them.”Authoritarians: “Rulers should control what we do and how we interact, and should take the stuff we create for their purposes — even if they have to hurt us to do so — because rulers are somehow better people than we are (e.g., wiser, kinder, more prescient, more knowledgable, more powerful, more altruistic, more sane).”Monarchist statists: “…. as long as they share a bloodline to a particular, historic family.”Theist statists: “…. as long as they align with god(s).”Democratic statists: “…. as long as they are elected by a majority of the people.”Republican statists: “… as long as they are elected by a majority of the thoughtful representatives of the people.”…..American LibertariansWorking generally from the most statist to the least ruler privledge, the following are the various categories of American libertarians (the left erroneously calls this “right-libertarians”), who generally believe in varying levels of individual ownership of one’s body, labor, and property.Civil (Social) libertarians: “Rulers may not restrict how we live our lives individually or interpersonally, but may use violence to restrict how we trade with each other.”Fiscal (Laissez faire) libertarians: “Rulers may not restrict how we trade with one another, but may use violence to preserve shared, core cultural norms.”Fiscally Conservative, Socially Liberal libertarians (FCSL): “I generally think we need a government that controls us, but I agree with rightists on more fiscal restraint and with leftists on more allowing people to choose their own personal lifestyle.”Classical liberal libertarians: “Rulers should use their violent power to protect our body, labor, and property from the aggression of others, and should also provide a last-gasp social safety net.”Bleeding heart libertarians: Like classical liberals, but also rulers should use their violence to protect and advance historic victim classes, broadly defined, even more.Minarchist libertarians: “Rulers should use their violence only to protect our body, labor, and property from the aggression of others.”Paleolibertarians: Like minarchists, but “rulers should also maintain clear borders to protect society from (immigration of) non-libertarians, non-contributors, and poor values.”Neolibertarians: Like minarchists, but “rulers should also use their violent power to export liberty to other oppressed peoples across the world.”Geolibertarians: Rulers should use their violence to act our stewards of ecological resources, which is the only property that remains community owned.Propertarian libertarians: Rulers should use their violence only to enforce contracts and to protect private property.Anarcho-Capitalist libertarians: Propertarian protections and functions (police, fire, roads) should be voluntarily contracted through competing companies.Voluntaryist libertarians: One may join or leave whichever governing body one wants, a commune, an AnCap group, or none at all.Panarchist libertarians: Like voluntaryists, but emphasizing that moving is not necessarily required to join a different jurisdictions.Left-LibertariansA number of “left libertarians” groups replace individual rulers with “the community” as ruler, owning property, labor, and people to varying degrees and expressing its rule usually via direct democracy.I am still unable explain the differences. Please utilize StefanC’: What are the different left libertarian ideologies?These groups include:Georgist (a.k.a. Geoism/Geolibertarians)Left communistsAnarcho-communistsCollectivist anarchistsNeo-proudhonian MutualistsTuckerite MutualistsIndividualist anarchistsAnarcho-syndicalistLibertarian municipalist (a.k.a. Radical democracrats)Anarcho-primitivistWhile not specifically asked for, I list some of the rationales…Consequentialist (Practical, Pragmatic) libertarians: Rulers may initiate violence only when the consequences are clearly in the utilitarian interests of “society”.Objectivist libertarians: The emphasis is that individual self-interest is the highest good.Authority libertarians (e.g, Constitutional libertarians): Locke, Hayek, Rothbard, The Constitution, Jesus, etc. tell us we should be free.Deontological (Christian, Natural Rights) libertarians: A higher power imbues humans with certain unalienable rights that not even rulers may abrogate.Deontological (Argumentation ethics, Ethical, Natural Rights) libertarians: Regardless of any authority, humans enjoy universal human rights that, were any human, even a ruler, to abrogate, it would produce a logical inconsistency.Libertine libertarians: “I wants to do whats I wants, and no one can tell me any different!”Communitarian libertarians: Community is only logically possible when humans have freedom to choose to work together, thus any community must be based on human freedom, voluntary choice, toleration of differences, respect for diversity, freedom of association, and individual consent.Some of the above strains (especially Minarchist and AnCap) differentiate themselves on the degree to which they are talking specifically about rulers.Thin libertarians: “Libertarianism only applies to the ethics of initiation of violence. All other issues are matters of personal preference to be worked out by individual and social agreements.”Thick libertarians: “The tolerance and diversity that libertarianism implies should be reflected in personal values and lifestyle that libertarians take with them into their personal and social relationships.”Finally, a number of libertarians define themselves in how they see achieving freedom.Free State Project libertarians: Aggregate in one region (e.g., NH in the US) and evolve governance towards individual freedom.Agorist libertarians: Use self-sufficiency, crypto-currenciences, and P2P trades to avoid whatever rulers are out there.Monarchist libertarians: A single figure-head ruler who benefits from legitimacy heads a minimal state that offers his subjects freedom to conduct their own lives and business.Green Field libertarians: Create or buy an island or another unpopulated region where one can start a society without a ruling class.Constitutional libertarians: Strengthen or follow written constraints on rulers violating our universal human rights.Libertarian Party libertarians: Use the political process to introduce libertarian policies via the current form of governance.Freedom Caucus libertarians: Infiltrate a political party (in the US, the Republican Party) and introduce libertarian themes into its political platform.Collapsitarian libertarians: Prepare for the inevitable collapse of the ever growing parasitic state by building community, work together to survive the aftermath chaos, and build a new society based on the agorism, trade, sound money, voluntary interactions that you practiced before the collapse.(Generally the American libertarians I am mostly describing here reject the initiation of violence, so I leave out insurrection and other direct action plans that mostly apply to the socialist libertarians.)See related:What is libertarian ethics, starting from first principles?An illustration of libertarian ethicsWhat do all libertarians agree on?The opposite of libertarianism?Why is liberty so important for libertarians?Simple explanations of libertarianismAre Left vs Right a good way to categorise political views?Should libertarians infiltrate the Republican Party or support the Libertarian Party?How might a libertarian society be achieved?→ Essays on <The Different Branches of Libertarianism> by Dennis→ Return to the <Table of Contents> for Dennis’ Libertarian Essays