As the dust and debris of war settles down and the din of the juvenile media on both sides hopefully becomes less jaring, some questions are still staring at the nation which remain unanswered.

Where are the terrorists? Can you sleep in the room if you are told there is a snake present?

The country is waiting for the PM's war cry and promise to be fulfilled - we will find them even till the end of the earth?

Who all should take moral responsibility for the debacle and therefore step down? Home Minister, Lt Governor, NSA?

What's the true assessment and audit of the three-day war just concluded?

Why a special session of the Parliament not being called to present the profit and loss of the war i.e. real damage inflicted on the enemy as also damage suffered by India.

If not for the nation to know, the government needs to assess the same for future strategy.

Very crucial question: Why is a third-party intervention at a neutral venue being agreed to by India?

Why are we agreeing to engage in a dialogue now, if it was suspended for more than ten years at the behest of the PM?

Doesn't the bilateral issue get out of control and the same being internationalised?

Or can we lobby worldwide to have the world opinion on conduct over Kashmir in India's favour, once and for all?

So in that context what's the realistic outcome of the war?

In the wake of the solidarity displayed for the country by the Muslims of India, including those of Kashmir, what will be the stand of the government on Muslims of India vis a vis Hindutva?

What is the durability of deterrence effected by the three-day war against perpetrators of terrorism? 

And finally, how much will the principle - terror and talks, terror and trade, water and blood can't go hand in hand - hold good in practice?

Rajiv Chandoke