Dialogue is the best course to combat terrorism.

My Outline was.
Introduction

Current Submits.

1.London Submit {Resulted in capture of Mullah Baradar}
2.Pakistan and Iran Dialogue{Resulted in capture of Abdul Malik Rigi JUndullah
Leader}
3.Karazai and Holbrooke Dialogue Calling Taliban as lost brethren, (resulted in
the declination of violence graph)
4.Iran And Afghanistan Dialogue(resulted in decline of North alliance activities)
5.USA And Taliban Dialogue(Back channel diplomacy Quetta Shurrah and
resulted in creation of sects in taliban)


Why Dialogue is best?
Socio-Economic benefits of Dialogue
1.Attention towards poverty(root cause of terrorism, cannot be controlled by
combat fighting).
2.Reduction in Unemployment.
3.Imparting correct "Religious thinking",(hence reducing terrorism).
4.Brain drain problem solution.
5.impart thinking that war on terrorism is not against ISLAM.

Political benefits.

1. Can Ensure thrive of democracy.
2. Answer people grievances.
3. Lessening "collateral Damage"

Combat terrorism versus Dialogue in current world

and i do not remember any more

Conclusion.

Dear you have started your essay with very powerful and impressive ideas in Current Submits. Really mind-blowing. This was the beauty of your essay. I don't know why you could not maintain same fervor and appealing approach in the rest of your essay. You know, when one goes through your initial ideas one's expectation level rises to the peak and assumes that you will be rocking in the rest of the essay in the same potential but afterward curve seems downward sloping.

Essay is the first paper of CSS and most candidates appear in this paper than any other CSS paper. Therefore, the examiner has to mark most number of essay papers. Considerting 11800+ candidates applied for CSS 2010 exam, even if 8000 appear, and considering the examiner works 8 hours daily and takes 10 minutes to check essay paper then he will check 6 paper in an our and 72 papers in a day. which means 8000 papers will be checked in 111 days. Which is too much time. Now, logically it seems impossible to mark papers consecutively without any break which means that even less than 10 minutes are taken to mark a paper or it may be 5,6 minutes. Now the fate of a candidate preparing for a year or appearing without preparation is decided in 5 minutes. Ultimately it means not hard work but luck is marked here...

__________________
Best end of life is not knowledge but action.
Don't limit yourself to what you think people are expecting!

one examiner checks all papers
impressive
marvellous
bravo hats off to him
fpsc cannot afford more examiners
dangerous luck and favourite essay
what more can i say

__________________
Reality is something you rise above.

Saleeqa I have choosen your outline for detailed analysis for this specific topic owing to the fact that its most relevant. Here I am adding my opinion about your essay. In my perception you have attempted Essay in a very good manner and have discussed the topic comprehensively.

I am coloring your mistakes in Blue to make it prominent and will make additions in the same colour.

A relevant quote is:

Wanton killing of innocent civilians is terrorism, not a war against terrorism. War against terrorism can tabled through dialogues only. Noam Chomsky

It can be used in introduction.

With these little changes your essay outline take its best shape. It can also be attempted with 200 words about different examples from history where dialogues have led to the peaceful solution. Such as Meesaq-e-Madina.

I hope you had written essay with effective language and grammar.

Best of luck for your Essay

-------------------------------

Sahil plz dont take my opinion offensive and try to grasp what I want to convey. Here goes my analysis of the outline you have made.


Well to me your essay outline needs relevance. You actually have distracted the topic and taken it to peripheries rather concentrating core issues. Still best of luck.

I just want to make you clear about the outline. You may have justified well in the description of essay but the skimming of your outline dont make to give it a reading.

-------------------------------

Irshad I have seen your comments on Saleeqa's outline. It seems quite analytical and reasonable. I have commented on same outline in my previous post and you may go through it.

But when I came across your this comment it was a surprise. Do you really think that he has written well by discussing current submits? Irshad being senior member its our responsiblity to show both sides of the coin to the beholder. If we are not giving true opinion we not only losing our worth and integrity but also failing to fulfill our responsibility. We shall guide the aspirants objectively, impartially and honestly.

Please dont feel offended I have shared what I felt after going through your comments.

please correct it like this

Achievement of Pak -army behind apparent faliure of dailogue in SAWT.

__________________
"When Allah leads you to the edge of the cliff, Trust Him Fully, only 1 of 2 things will happen either He will catch you when you fall or He will teach you how to fly"

Thanks madam for correcting my mistakes,
Lets me take it from here

Dialogue is the best way to combat terrorism.

Have i highlighted the key points right????

now tell me if you go to a shopping and a shopkeeper says madam this dress is best how he gonna prove it?????

the answer is simply by comparing with the any one available.. Am i right?

are you with me????

Now what do we have is arms doing combat business of terrorism.

Current submits that i have discussed shows the fact that after 9 years of brutal fight and mass pogroms, how is west now trying to combat terrorism?

Answer is it is through "Dialogue".

Again sorry to say am i right?

thats the reason i have discussed the submits.
again London submit was no just a submit or "talks for the sake of talks".
it meant real business and the business was to combat terrorism through Dialogue and proved prolific.
and what we have heard then was capture of MUllah baader. his capture was not a ripen fruit that was simply plucked from the tree. the London submit rouse to the ocassion and the business for which it was meant was answered. "thats what the world politics game is , needs a little acumen ". I am sure you are able to comprehend it now.

Now i have discussed the current world politics how they are taking down the "chimera" of terrorism. I had to move to the fact that the Dialogue is best because it can counter the other Socio-Political causes Like poverty (next 25th march 2010 our President is going to seek help to eradicate the menace of poverty which is adding fuel to the already ailing situation of combat fighting against terrorism, Read Sunday Dawn 14th March 2010 for further updates) as well, which Arms fighting hitherto, failed to do so.

because, poverty and unemployment will continue to neutralize all our efforts to combat terrorism. an "empty Belly" knows no ethical or immoral activities, the only thing it is conversant with is mead.

Similarly illiteracy, will also hinder any of our step to counter the ever green issue of terrorism. because illiterate youth remains exposed to be exploited by the extremists. and also bias religious knowledge do the same job, similarly Ideological fight can only be root out by the superior idea, remember an idea can not be crushed, a best it can be hindered for a moment but it will not root out the idea rather it will incite the fence sitter to start joining, again porous boundaries , a real cause of terrorists activities, can only be counter by Dialogue and mutual understanding of the countries and people-to-people contact.

And for all of the above the History offers us example.

I think you have got my ideas now. I Believe. they were not that hard.

Does the arm fight can do the same job?

Yes or no? Answer is yours.

Usama bin ladin might be dead or dying of laughter. Because we failed to grasp the "Topic" in the paper and as well as in the real world also.We should read the history carefully,not the history that we would like it to be, but the history it is.

Again thanks for criticism.

Any more Question me here

-------------------

And once more i remembered i never used word submit i replaced it with dialogue...rest of the outline remains the same.

Outline is pertinent and appropriate to the topic of essay. I Hope if the english used in the essay would be without mistakes, this essay would earn good marks. An impressive effort noor !

Very right and let me rephrase it in another way.

Core Issues:

1. Importance of Dialogue
2. Dialogue is best to Combat Terrorism

So all the ideas should circle arround the core issues such as, How and why dialogue is the best way to deal menace of terrorism. What are the current efforts made to solve the problem through dialogue. And as per the requirement aspirants has to provide suggestions or personal opinion to deal the social problems so here How dialogues should proceed must be given some weightage.

Let me clarify it further:

In my perception essay should have following distribution.

1. Importance of Dialogue (In text and by the help of examples) 20%
2. How terrorism is dealt during last few years. (Some touches of War on Terror and its failure) 10%
3. Significance of dialogue in current circumstances. (As I have mentioned in my previous post). 20%
4. Why dialogue is best way to combat terrorism. (As discussed by Saleeqa) 40%
5. How dialogue should proceed to get its best. (Need suggestions to make dialogue a success to deal corruption) 10%

Well brother your example may sound good to the examiner of BA level but not to the CSS examiner. I hope you would have understand what I mean to say.... I want to convey that CSS examiner want you to be very logical and brief and as per your example you would be wasting your time and energies in discussing peripheries.

I am unable to grasp the meaning of your vague sentence. Business of terrorism.....? Do you really know what are you saying?

Have you gone through my previous comments? I have already said that your current submits have nothing to do with terrorism. London Summit not Submit was having economic agenda rather terrorism. If you wanted to discuss the shift in western strategy for combating terrorism then it should be dealt other way.

No brother you are not right.

London Summit had 3 agenda points and none of them was combating terrorism. plz check the link
[link]http://www.londonsummit.gov.uk/en/summit-aims/ [/link]

Plz be practical. CSS isnt the exam where you will say that you had heard. I have heard that a taxi driver said, "Whenever we recharge mobile card the 15Rs of tax goes to the personal account of president " so shall I quote it somewhere for reference? Not at all. If someone had told you that Mullah Baader was caught due to London Summit it doesnt mean to trust it blindly. Go through google and search even a single link that can endorse your point. I havent read it anywhere so I cant believe it at all.

I am short of time so cant proceed further.

The point I wanted to clarify must have been well taken at your end. So best of luck.

__________________
"When Allah leads you to the edge of the cliff, Trust Him Fully, only 1 of 2 things will happen either He will catch you when you fall or He will teach you how to fly"

I attempted 'Can women be equal to men in Pakistan?' Main theme of my essay was that : Yes women can be equal to men.. they are already traveling towards the road to equality.. True there are some injustices to women but they are few and mostly in Sindhi and tribal areas. We can not paint the picture of whole Pakistan as a women-oppressor nation based on few unfortunate events that happen now and then.

I stated that in most civilized Western nations too, women are subject to ill-treatment but they bring to light the more brighter side of picture. Same should be done by us.

I gave examples from social, economic, legal, constitutional and political points of view. Do you think I have been right in my theme? My outline and writing plus grammar is good enough.

Madam I don't see any harm in quoting live examples of the contemporary world for proving one's point. I think it was the strong point of that candidate in that paper. Frankly speaking I didn't take your comments as humiliating but these are not constructive too. I couldn't find any sound ground in your criticism specially in quoting these examples from history. Everybody has his own angle of judgment but honestly speaking I don't see it as weakness or negative point of that essay. If I were to write on this topic I must have emphasized on these points to justify the topic.