Essay
Don't know?
I sent an email to Justin at Creatd and in that email I asked, 'What I did to do to be not allowed to comment.' I am not sure how long I will not be able to comment on stories, articles and poems. I am leaving 'Insights' on everything I read and likes. I know I mentioned only a few times the new site I work for, but that was just to share my good news with everyone. I really like writing and reading here on Vocal. I am still waiting to hear about this. I Will let you know.
By Mark Grahamabout a year ago in Critique
Shakira
I am logged in and reading my notifications and when I went to read another story there was a notification by a SHAKIRA who seems to be just starting here signing in this current month and has 45 articles published already. I think Vocal should hire someone to review new 'applicants'. Here is an idea that just might work. The online writing site that I wrote for a long time ago had a short application to fill out and for the owners to check out before letting anyone write there. For right now I think Vocal only has writers sign in with a username and password. Please share what you think.
By Mark Grahamabout a year ago in Critique
When businesses read and subscribe
What do you do when you sign in and check how you did, and you notice in your notifications that there are businesses subscribed to you. I have a few and some even have been on since 2023 that even have a few articles posted. To be honest there were a few that did have some interesting articles, and I even left a comment sometimes. I no longer subscribe to them now though and skip right passed them on the list of notifications. Am I doing the right thing. I have deleted or reported when they left comments. Please comment.
By Mark Grahamabout a year ago in Critique
Biden vs. Trump: 2024 U.S. Election and Its Global Consequences
Biden vs. Trump: 2024 U.S. Election and Its Global Consequences As the world watches the countdown to the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the stakes couldn’t be higher—not just for Americans, but for global geopolitics at large. The rematch between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump is not merely a domestic showdown; it’s a referendum on the direction of global leadership in a rapidly changing world. With wars raging in Ukraine and Gaza, tensions mounting in the Indo-Pacific, and the global economy hanging by a thread, the outcome of this election will echo far beyond Washington. Domestic Divide, Global Ripple The United States remains deeply polarized. President Biden represents a traditional internationalist view, believing in alliances, multilateralism, and climate action. Trump, on the other hand, champions an "America First" doctrine that questions the value of NATO, criticizes international trade deals, and prefers bilateralism over multilateral frameworks. If Biden secures re-election, allies expect a continuation of U.S. commitments to Ukraine, NATO, the Indo-Pacific alliance against Chinese expansion, and climate agreements like the Paris Accord. However, a Trump victory could mean drastic changes. From threatening NATO withdrawal to potentially slashing aid to Ukraine, Trump 2.0 could reshape global power balances. Ukraine War and NATO's Future Perhaps no region is watching the election more closely than Europe. Biden has consistently supported Ukraine, sending military aid and rallying European allies to stand firm against Russian aggression. Trump, by contrast, has criticized the level of U.S. involvement and even suggested ending the war through rapid negotiation—an idea many view as capitulation to Russia. A second Trump term could embolden Vladimir Putin, test the resolve of NATO, and possibly fracture the transatlantic alliance that has underpinned Western security since WWII. Countries like Poland and the Baltic states are already preparing contingency plans in case U.S. support weakens under a new Trump administration. Asia and the China Equation China is another major player closely monitoring the 2024 election. Biden has kept a hard stance on Beijing, especially concerning trade, human rights, and Taiwan, but he's done so while maintaining diplomatic channels and coordinating with allies like Japan, Australia, and South Korea. Trump’s approach to China was more confrontational and unilateral. If reelected, Trump might escalate trade wars, withdraw from multilateral Asia-Pacific frameworks, and pursue unpredictable policies regarding Taiwan, which could increase regional instability. For nations in Southeast Asia, the choice between Biden’s steady hand and Trump’s unpredictability isn’t just about ideology—it’s about survival in a region caught between two superpowers. The Middle East and U.S. Influence The ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and shifting Arab alliances add another layer to global anxieties. Biden’s administration has attempted to balance support for Israel while advocating for humanitarian pauses in Gaza. Trump, however, moved the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and cut funding to Palestinian agencies, showing a much more one-sided approach. Middle Eastern countries are recalibrating their foreign policies, sensing the possibility of a less engaged or more transactional U.S. under Trump. Biden’s attempts at rebuilding the Iran nuclear deal may vanish if Trump returns, possibly leading to a new era of military brinkmanship. Climate Change: Progress or Regression One of the starkest differences between the two candidates lies in climate policy. Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement on his first day in office, investing billions in green energy. Trump, a climate skeptic, had pulled the U.S. out of the agreement during his term and rolled back numerous environmental regulations. A Trump win in 2024 could derail global climate momentum. Many developing nations depend on U.S. leadership and funding to meet their green energy targets. Without American participation, the fight against climate change risks becoming fragmented and ineffective. The Global South’s Perspective From Africa to Latin America, the election is viewed through a lens of opportunity and caution. Under Biden, there's been a modest effort to re-engage with these regions through climate investment, pandemic aid, and trade incentives. Trump’s past term largely overlooked the Global South, focusing instead on reducing foreign aid and tightening immigration policies. Another Trump presidency might deepen global inequalities, as poorer nations could lose vital American support in health, infrastructure, and trade. The Battle for Democracy At the heart of the 2024 election is a deeper ideological battle: democracy vs. authoritarianism. Biden has positioned himself as a defender of democratic norms at home and abroad. Trump, facing multiple legal challenges and known for undermining democratic institutions, is seen by many as a threat to the rule of law. For authoritarian regimes in China, Russia, or North Korea, a Trump victory might signal a green light for bolder moves. For democracies around the world, it could weaken the U.S.'s moral authority as a beacon of freedom. --- Conclusion: One Election, Global Stakes Whether it’s the balance of power in Europe, peace in Asia, or the fate of the climate, the 2024 U.S. election is a global event. The world isn’t just watching—it’s holding its breath. The outcome will shape diploma
By Md Shoriful Islamabout a year ago in Critique
5 countries that have the most and largest community organisations in the world
Based on the available information, it's challenging to definitively rank countries solely by the number of community organizations with a detailed count for each. However, we can identify countries with a significant presence of such organizations based on available data regarding registered nonprofits and charitable giving. Here are five countries known to have a large and active community organization sector:
By Moharif Yuliantoabout a year ago in Critique
For Glue: The Underdog Tale of a Forgotten Horse
The first time they tried to load him onto the trailer, he didn’t move. Rusty was a shell of what he'd once been — skin stretched tight over a weary frame, eyes dulled from years of labor and abandonment. Once a proud plow horse on a small Midwest farm, he'd been replaced by machines and left to wither behind a broken fence and an empty barn. For months, no one came. Then someone did.
By zaid ahmadabout a year ago in Critique
Will Operation Sindoor lead the Pak-India to a full scale War?
### Introduction On May 7, 2025, the Indian Armed Forces launched "Operation Sindoor," a significant military operation targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK). This operation was a direct response to the brutal terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 22, 2025, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians, including 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen. The operation, characterized by precision strikes on nine terror camps, marked one of India’s most expansive retaliatory actions in recent years, drawing global attention and sparking a range of reactions from international stakeholders. This article provides a comprehensive examination of Operation Sindoor, covering its background, execution, strategic significance, international responses, and broader implications. ### Background and Context The Pahalgam terror attack was a pivotal event that set the stage for Operation Sindoor. On April 22, 2025, terrorists associated with the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), operating under the guise of The Resistance Front (TRF), attacked tourists in the scenic town of Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir’s Anantnag district. The attackers selectively targeted Hindu men, killing 26 civilians, including an Indian Navy officer and a newlywed groom, Lieutenant Vinay Narwal. The attack was particularly gruesome, with reports of husbands being killed in front of their wives, leaving behind haunting images of grieving widows, one of whom was photographed beside her husband’s body, her sindoor (red vermilion worn by married Hindu women) symbolizing the profound loss. This image, widely circulated on social media, became a powerful symbol of the tragedy and fueled public outrage in India. Indian investigations quickly established links between the attackers and Pakistan-based terrorist organizations, particularly LeT and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). The government accused Pakistan of harboring terrorists and failing to take action against the perpetrators despite international pressure. In the weeks following the attack, India implemented a series of diplomatic measures against Pakistan, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, closing the Attari land border crossing, downgrading diplomatic ties, and canceling most visa categories for Pakistani citizens. These steps signaled India’s intent to respond decisively to what it described as Pakistan’s complicity in cross-border terrorism. On April 29, 2025, Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a high-level meeting with India’s top defense officials, granting the armed forces “complete operational freedom” to determine the mode, targets, and timing of a response to the Pahalgam attack. The decision to launch Operation Sindoor was informed by intelligence reports indicating that Pakistan-based terrorist groups were planning further attacks against India. The operation’s codename, “Sindoor,” was a poignant reference to the red vermilion worn by Hindu women, symbolizing the personal losses endured by the victims’ families, particularly the widows of Pahalgam, and underscoring India’s resolve to deliver justice. ### Planning and Preparation Operation Sindoor was meticulously planned to ensure precision, minimize collateral damage, and avoid escalation with Pakistan’s military. The Indian Armed Forces, comprising the Army, Navy, and Air Force, coordinated a tri-service operation executed from Indian territory. The planning phase, which began shortly after the Pahalgam attack, involved identifying 21 potential terrorist targets, of which nine were selected for the strikes based on credible intelligence about their role in planning and executing attacks against India. These targets were associated with banned terrorist organizations, including Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), and Hizbul Mujahideen. The operation was overseen by senior military and civilian officials, with Prime Minister Modi and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval closely monitoring developments. According to reports, operation officers were sequestered in South Block, the seat of India’s defense and external affairs ministries, for four days leading up to May 5, when the operation was finalized and approved. The Indian Air Force issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) on May 6, announcing large-scale military drills along the India-Pakistan border, which was later revealed to be a cover for the impending strikes. The selection of targets was guided by a commitment to avoid civilian casualties and damage to non-military infrastructure. The nine targets included four sites in Pakistan—Mehmoona Joya Camp and Sarjal Camp in Sialkot, Markaz Taiba in Muridke, and Markaz Subhan in Bahawalpur—and five in PoJK, including Markaz Abbas in Kotli, Syedna Bilal Camp in Muzaffarabad, and Shwawai Nalla Camp. These locations were known strongholds of LeT and JeM, with some, like the Muridke facility, having been used to train terrorists involved in major attacks, including the 2008 Mumbai attacks. ### Execution of Operation Sindoor Operation Sindoor commenced in the early hours of May 7, 2025, with strikes conducted between 1:05 AM and 1:30 AM. The operation involved 24 precision missile strikes, executed using advanced weaponry, including loitering munitions and special precision munitions, designed to minimize collateral damage. The Indian Air Force, supported by drones and special forces, targeted the nine terror camps with pinpoint accuracy, destroying infrastructure and eliminating key terrorist operatives. The strikes were described as “focused, measured, and non-escalatory” by the Indian Ministry of Defence, with no Pakistani military facilities targeted to avoid provoking a broader conflict. According to Indian sources, over 80 terrorists were killed, including at least 70 confirmed casualties, and more than 60 were injured. Among the casualties were 10 family members and four aides of JeM chief Maulana Masood Azhar, significantly degrading the operational capabilities of JeM and LeT. The Mehmoona Joya Terrorist Camp in Sialkot and the LeT headquarters in Muridke were among the key facilities destroyed. The operation was completed in just 25 minutes, showcasing the Indian military’s efficiency and coordination. Videos released during a subsequent press briefing showed multiple hits on the targeted sites, with explosions and thick smoke clouds visible, confirming the destruction of terrorist infrastructure. The Indian Army announced the operation’s success on social media platform X at 1:51 AM, posting, “#PahalgamTerrorAttack Justice is Served. Jai Hind!” This message was echoed by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, who wrote, “Bharat Mata ki Jai,” reflecting national pride in the operation. ### Strategic and Symbolic Significance Operation Sindoor was not only a military operation but also a strategic and symbolic statement. Strategically, it aimed to dismantle terrorist infrastructure, deter future attacks, and signal India’s zero-tolerance policy toward cross-border terrorism. By targeting key LeT and JeM facilities, India disrupted the operational networks responsible for planning attacks, including the Pahalgam massacre. The operation’s precision and restraint underscored India’s ability to conduct high-impact military actions without escalating into a full-scale conflict with Pakistan, a nuclear-armed neighbor. Symbolically, the codename “Sindoor” carried deep emotional resonance. It humanized the victims of the Pahalgam attack, particularly the women who lost their husbands, and served as a reminder of the personal toll of terrorism. The operation was framed as a tribute to the 26 victims and a means of delivering closure to their families. For instance, Aishanya Dwivedi, who lost her husband in the Pahalgam attack, described the operation as a “personal tribute” to the victims, while the family of Lieutenant Vinay Narwal saw it as a fitting response to their loss. The operation also reinforced India’s sovereignty and right to self-defense, as articulated by Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri during a press briefing. Misri emphasized that the strikes were a response to Pakistan’s failure to act against terrorist groups operating from its soil, citing the case of Sajid Mir, a key planner of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, who continued to enjoy impunity in Pakistan. The operation’s timing, two weeks after the Pahalgam attack, demonstrated India’s resolve to act swiftly and decisively when faced with credible threats. ### International Reactions Operation Sindoor elicited a range of reactions from the international community, reflecting the complex geopolitics of the India-Pakistan rivalry. The United States, through President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, expressed concern over the escalation but urged de-escalation and a peaceful resolution. Trump described the situation as a “shame” and hoped it would “end very quickly,” while Rubio confirmed ongoing engagement with Indian and Pakistani leaders. The U.S. media, including The New York Times, framed the strikes as a “calibrated counter-terror measure,” aligning with India’s narrative. European nations, including France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom, expressed solidarity with India, condemning the Pahalgam attack and supporting India’s right to respond to terrorism. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar briefed his counterparts in these countries, thanking them for their support. Japan’s Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya also condemned the Pahalgam attack and was briefed on the operation. Russia and Saudi Arabia were among the countries India reached out to, with senior officials briefed on the strikes. The Indian embassy in Washington emphasized that India had “credible leads” and “technical inputs” pointing to Pakistan’s involvement in the Pahalgam attack, justifying the operation as a necessary deterrent. Conversely, Pakistan condemned the strikes as an “act of war,” claiming 26 civilian deaths and 46 injuries, though India disputed these figures, asserting that no civilian infrastructure was targeted. Pakistan’s National Security Council, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, authorized the military to retaliate “at a time, place, and manner of its choosing,” invoking Article 51 of the UN Charter. Azerbaijan expressed solidarity with Pakistan, condemning the strikes and calling for restraint, while China’s state-run Global Times faced criticism from the Indian embassy in Beijing for spreading “disinformation” about the operation. The United Nations, through Secretary-General António Guterres, expressed concern about the military operations and called for “maximum military restraint” to avoid a broader confrontation. The UN’s stance reflected the global community’s apprehension about the potential for escalation between two nuclear-armed neighbors. ### Domestic Reactions and Security Measures In India, Operation Sindoor was met with widespread bipartisan support and public approval. Political leaders across party lines, including Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, lauded the armed forces for their courage and precision. Singh emphasized that the operation targeted only those responsible for killing innocent civilians, while Gandhi described it as a moment of pride for the nation. Senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor praised the strikes as “calibrated, calculated, and precise,” advocating for restraint to prevent further escalation. The operation prompted heightened security measures across India, particularly in states bordering Pakistan. Rajasthan Chief Minister Bhajanlal Sharma canceled police leaves and directed officials to strengthen security in border areas. Union Home Minister Amit Shah held a review meeting with chief ministers and lieutenant governors of states bordering Pakistan and Nepal, discussing preparedness for mock drills under “Operation Abhyaas,” a nationwide safety initiative. The Indian Air Force placed air defense units along the India-Pakistan border on high alert, anticipating potential Pakistani retaliation. Civil aviation was significantly disrupted, with 18 airports, including those in Srinagar, Leh, Jammu, and Amritsar, shut down and over 200 domestic and international flights canceled. Airlines like SpiceJet and IndiGo issued advisories, with cancellations extending until May 10 in some cases. These measures reflected the government’s caution in the face of heightened tensions. ### Pakistan’s Response and Escalation Pakistan’s response to Operation Sindoor was swift and aggressive. Within hours of the strikes, Pakistani troops violated the ceasefire, resorting to heavy artillery fire and shelling along the Line of Control (LoC) in the Bhimber Gali sector of Jammu and Kashmir’s Poonch-Rajouri area and the Karnah area of Kupwara district. Indian officials reported 15 Indian deaths and 43 injuries due to Pakistani shelling, while Pakistan claimed seven deaths and 38 injuries along the LoC. The Indian Army responded in a “calibrated manner,” but the exchanges marked the worst fighting between the two nations in over two decades. Pakistan’s military spokesperson, the Director General of Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), confirmed Indian strikes on three locations—Bahawalpur, Kotli, and Muzaffarabad—and vowed a response. The Pakistani government’s rhetoric, including Prime Minister Sharif’s description of the strikes as an “act of war,” raised fears of a prolonged conflict. Former Pakistani minister Bilawal Bhutto criticized India’s actions, accusing it of issuing “belligerent threats” in the preceding weeks. ### Media Coverage and Public Sentiment Operation Sindoor garnered extensive coverage in both Indian and international media. Indian outlets, including The Times of India, The Hindu, India Today, and NDTV, provided detailed updates, emphasizing the operation’s precision and success. Exclusive visuals of destroyed terror camps, such as the LeT headquarters in Muridke, were broadcast by India Today, reinforcing the narrative of a decisive blow against terrorism. The Hindu BusinessLine described the operation as a “swift and strategic response,” while The Indian Express noted its scale as the most expansive since the 2019 Balakot airstrikes. International media coverage varied. U.S. and British publications, such as The New York Times, highlighted the operation’s counter-terror focus but underscored the risk of escalation. Al Jazeera reported Pakistan’s claims of civilian casualties, while Reuters noted Islamabad’s vow to retaliate. Social media platforms, particularly X, were abuzz with reactions, with Indian users posting patriotic slogans like “Jai Hind” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai,” while some Pakistani users condemned the strikes. Posts on X also revealed planning details, with one user claiming that the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) had identified 21 targets, nine of which were struck. Public sentiment in India was overwhelmingly supportive, with citizens viewing the operation as a necessary response to the Pahalgam attack. However, some voices, including a post on X by @xlntgson, expressed concern about the potential for a protracted conflict and the loss of innocent lives, highlighting the human cost of such operations. ### Implications and Future Prospects Operation Sindoor has significant implications for India-Pakistan relations and regional stability. The operation has heightened tensions, with Pakistan’s retaliatory shelling and threats of further action raising the specter of a broader conflict. The nuclear capabilities of both nations amplify the stakes, prompting international calls for restraint. The UN’s warning about the unaffordability of a military confrontation underscores the need for diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the situation. For India, the operation reinforces its stance against terrorism and its willingness to take unilateral action when necessary. However, it also places India under scrutiny to manage the fallout and prevent escalation. The government’s outreach to global powers, including the U.S., Russia, and Saudi Arabia, reflects an effort to build international support and counter Pakistan’s narrative of victimization. Pakistan faces a dilemma: while its government has vowed to respond, any significant retaliation risks further Indian action and international isolation, given India’s evidence of Pakistan’s links to terrorism. Pakistan’s claims of civilian casualties may garner sympathy from allies like Azerbaijan and China, but they are unlikely to shift the broader international consensus, which has largely supported India’s right to self-defense. The operation also highlights the ongoing challenge of terrorism in South Asia. While Operation Sindoor disrupted key terrorist networks, the persistence of groups like LeT and JeM suggests that long-term solutions require addressing the root causes of terrorism, including state sponsorship and radicalization. Diplomatic engagement, though currently strained, remains essential to prevent further violence. ### Conclusion Operation Sindoor stands as a testament to India’s resolve to combat terrorism and deliver justice for the victims of the Pahalgam attack. Executed with precision and restraint, the operation targeted nine terror camps, disrupted terrorist networks, and sent a clear message to Pakistan about the consequences of supporting cross-border terrorism. The codename “Sindoor” encapsulated the emotional weight of the operation, honoring the personal losses endured by the victims’ families. However, the operation has also escalated tensions, with Pakistan’s retaliatory actions and threats of further response raising the risk of a wider conflict. The international community’s cautious response underscores the need for de-escalation and diplomacy to prevent a crisis between two nuclear-armed neighbors. As India and Pakistan navigate the aftermath, Operation Sindoor will likely be remembered as a pivotal moment in their fraught relationship, highlighting both the urgency of countering terrorism and the challenges of maintaining peace in a volatile region.[](https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/pahalgam-terror-attack-operation-sindoor-launch-live-updates-may-7-2025/article69543511.ece)[](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/operation-sindoor-full-list-of-9-terror-sites-targeted-by-indian-army-in-pakistan-pok/articleshow/120947736.cms)[](https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-pakistan-tension-live-updates-operation-sindoor-pahalgam-terror-attack-jammu-and-kashmir-military-strike-latest-news-bahawalpur-8348396)
By Fahad Ghaniabout a year ago in Critique
Pakistan's Response to Indian Air Strikes
Pakistan's Response to Indian Air Strikes. The recent Indian air strikes inside Pakistan have sharply escalated tensions between the two nuclear-armed rivals which is called "operation Sindoor". In response to the Pulwama attack, in which a Pakistan-based militant group killed 40 Indian soldiers, India launched an operation in Balakot that it claimed targeted terrorist camps. The region was on edge as Pakistan denied significant damage and promised to respond. The big question now is how Pakistan will react—whether through diplomacy, limited military action, or something more severe.
By Notsomeoneyouknowabout a year ago in Critique
Cardinals choosing the next pope have been offered a dossier on candidates – with a subtext. Content Warning. AI-Generated.
Cardinals Choosing the Next Pope Have Been Offered a Dossier on Candidates – With a Subtext May 7, 2025 As speculation mounts about who will succeed Pope Francis, an intriguing development has emerged behind the scenes: cardinals preparing for a future conclave are quietly being offered dossiers detailing the strengths, weaknesses, and past actions of potential papal candidates. But these documents aren’t just dry summaries – they come with a subtle subtext that could shape the future direction of the Catholic Church.
By Rasel Ahmedabout a year ago in Critique
From Human Error to Algorithmic Error... Consciousness?. AI-Generated.
Abstract This article analyzes error as an epistemic and ethical phenomenon across two distinct domains: the human and the algorithmic. It argues that error, far from being a failure, constitutes a structural condition of cognitive systems and may be indicative of consciousness. It problematizes the dissolution of responsibility in contemporary algorithmic environments and proposes a reflection on the place of judgment, punishment, and consciousness in an automated world.
By Felipe Camacho Oteroabout a year ago in Critique
