Instagram

An evening with Shahid Afridi and Younis Khan

Sohail Speaks Yasir's Blog Fazeer's Focus

User Tag List

View Poll Results: Why can't India and Pakistan come to the negotiating table like US - N. Korea?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • Kashmir issue must be resolved first

    8 27.59%
  • Obstinate-selfish leaders

    11 37.93%
  • People don't want peace

    6 20.69%
  • Will happen eventually!

    11 37.93%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 80 of 129
  1. #1
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    94,393
    Mentioned
    1719 Post(s)
    Tagged
    15 Thread(s)

    Why can't India and Pakistan come to the negotiating table like USA - North Korea?




    point to ponder?


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  2. #2
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    30,597
    Mentioned
    532 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Many reasons but some include

    1. USA is far superiour to North Korea and would wipe it out in an instant with little damage to herself. While India and Pakistan are neighours with a huge nuclear arsenal , potentially will destroy each other. So NK are more open to better relations.

    2. India and Pakistan armies perhaps are happy with the status quo, gives them funding and both are corrupt. NK is a puppet of China and it's aim is to remove some American navy, army from it's region, which is likely not to happen but worth a try for China.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  3. #3
    Debut
    Dec 2012
    Venue
    Indian Ocean
    Runs
    17,577
    Mentioned
    436 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    One of the reasons is because 'Pakistan' is effectively two entities: the civilian government and the army. Both are at odds with each other, and only one is in power at any given time.

  4. #4
    Debut
    Aug 2010
    Venue
    Sheffield
    Runs
    29,075
    Mentioned
    973 Post(s)
    Tagged
    12 Thread(s)
    Let's see if anything substantial comes from these summits.

    It's not like Pakistan and India are a stranger to grandiose summits and gestures, talks of a new era, which ultimately counted for nought in resolving the outstanding issues.

  5. #5
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To be honest it has very little to do with the Kashmir issue or the governments of the two countries. The people of both countries as we know want peace. The real reason is something else. I’ll leave a clue. In the case of North Korea, Kim Jong un is a powerful leader who has control over everything in his country including the army.

    I’m of the opinion that the two countries will be in good terms in the future. Pakistan should remain politically and economically stable for that. That’s very important. You need strong leaders.

  6. #6
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Varun View Post
    One of the reasons is because 'Pakistan' is effectively two entities: the civilian government and the army. Both are at odds with each other, and only one is in power at any given time.
    This. Maybe not. One entity is always in power.
    Last edited by Mr.Q; 12th June 2018 at 20:19.

  7. #7
    Debut
    Feb 2018
    Runs
    86
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Korean summit is just a facade nothing substance will come of it. Between Pakistan and India I'm not sure there will ever be peace. Both countries thrive of hating each other.

  8. #8
    Debut
    May 2016
    Runs
    7,940
    Mentioned
    176 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Pakistan is everything opposite to what India wants. The rift is too big to be resolved with a few summits and Aman Ki Asha messages.

    The rise of Hindu Nationalism in India makes it even more difficult for India to resolve all its issues with Pakistan in our life time.

    From what I know, Army is supreme in Pakistan. If Pak army has to be relevant, they need to portray India as a bitter enemy which wants to destroy Pakistan.

    I wish there was another country between India and Pakistan so that India never shares a boundary with Pak.

  9. #9
    Debut
    Mar 2018
    Runs
    41
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    1. According to the constitution in India - there is not much to negotiate with Pakistan. The constitution has been amended to claim the whole of Kashmir. Any negotiation, impossibly hard to start with would face political road blocks.

    2. Security & resource interests of India requires it to retain kashmir valley & siachen - 2 major points of contention

    3. A peace deal with India is not in the interest of Pakistan army & ISI

    4. External powers (all of them) would prefer for the conflict to continue. They all benefit out of it in some way.

  10. #10
    Debut
    Jan 2009
    Venue
    Behind you
    Runs
    4,944
    Mentioned
    211 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bond View Post
    1. According to the constitution in India - there is not much to negotiate with Pakistan. The constitution has been amended to claim the whole of Kashmir. Any negotiation, impossibly hard to start with would face political road blocks.

    2. Security & resource interests of India requires it to retain kashmir valley & siachen - 2 major points of contention

    3. A peace deal with India is not in the interest of Pakistan army & ISI

    4. External powers (all of them) would prefer for the conflict to continue. They all benefit out of it in some way.
    Pretty much the most accurate post here.

  11. #11
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dŻr
    Runs
    14,246
    Mentioned
    477 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Too much bad blood between the two Nations.
    With the rise of extremism in India and presence of ever lasting radicalism within the Pakistani society, I see no hope for the future.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  12. #12
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dŻr
    Runs
    14,246
    Mentioned
    477 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    Many reasons but some include

    1. USA is far superiour to North Korea and would wipe it out in an instant with little damage to herself. While India and Pakistan are neighours with a huge nuclear arsenal , potentially will destroy each other. So NK are more open to better relations.

    2. India and Pakistan armies perhaps are happy with the status quo, gives them funding and both are corrupt. NK is a puppet of China and it's aim is to remove some American navy, army from it's region, which is likely not to happen but worth a try for China.
    You are exaggerating the influence of Indian army here. They have absolutely no say in country's affairs, whether internal or external. It's the Netas who control everything in this country with army completely sidelined.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  13. #13
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    30,597
    Mentioned
    532 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    You are exaggerating the influence of Indian army here. They have absolutely no say in country's affairs, whether internal or external. It's the Netas who control everything in this country with army completely sidelined.
    Sure they dont have the same influence of the Pakistani army but heads of state do take the advice of army generals seriously, as advisors. When it comes to Pakistan, if the Indian army feels there is a big threat and they need more financing weapons etc, the politicians will not say no. It's not coincidence the Indian army has one of the biggest defence budgets in the world. Why would an army want to see this decrease esp an army in a corrupt nation.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  14. #14
    Debut
    Mar 2007
    Runs
    153
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The army will not allow it. This was one of sharifs main objective but could not do it due to their interference in foreign policy.

  15. #15
    Debut
    Mar 2007
    Runs
    153
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The army will not allow it. This was one of sharifs main objective but could not do it due to their interference in foreign policy.

  16. #16
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Why can't India and Pakistan come together? Let me spell it out as clearly as possible.

    1. In Pakistan the Army has the guns and can overthrow any civilian government that does not follow its foreign policy (like it did the NS government by starting the Kargil War).

    2. The Pakistani Army needs an external enemy to justify its economic dominance of the country and the continued fleecing of the Pakistani citizens. Pakistani Army generals acquire great wealth and power during and after their careers. In contrast Indian Army generals are paupers.

    3. India is the only feasible external enemy for the Pakistani Army to present to the Pakistani people.

    Comprende?

  17. #17
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    9,976
    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have to say this.

    How the hack the relationship, conflict, history between america and north Korea matches with that of India and Pakistan?

  18. #18
    Debut
    Aug 2012
    Runs
    4,110
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Why can't India and Pakistan come together? Let me spell it out as clearly as possible.

    1. In Pakistan the Army has the guns and can overthrow any civilian government that does not follow its foreign policy (like it did the NS government by starting the Kargil War).

    2. The Pakistani Army needs an external enemy to justify its economic dominance of the country and the continued fleecing of the Pakistani citizens. Pakistani Army generals acquire great wealth and power during and after their careers. In contrast Indian Army generals are paupers.

    3. India is the only feasible external enemy for the Pakistani Army to present to the Pakistani people.

    Comprende?
    So essentially its all Pak army's fault?

    What if Pak army stepped aside? There would be peace between Indian and the Pakistani civilian government?

    What do you think the Pakistani civillian government will just hand India Azad Kashmir and be subservient to India in the geopolitical sphere (i.e. Bangladesh)?

    I think not.

    As much as you want to make it a one sided affair, truth is India is not willing to negotiate, whether it is with the Pakistani army or civilian government or anyone else. India claims Kashmir as solely theirs and does not even consider it a dispute regardless what Pakistan or Kashmiris say.

    So blame Pak army all you want, but it takes two to tango.

  19. #19
    Debut
    Aug 2012
    Runs
    4,110
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by khan991 View Post
    The army will not allow it. This was one of sharifs main objective but could not do it due to their interference in foreign policy.
    Only way for peace with India (according to India) is if Pakistan hands them Azad Kashmir on a silver platter.

    Is that how Shariff was going to make peace with India?

  20. #20
    Debut
    Mar 2018
    Runs
    41
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Possible best outcomes:
    1. Maintain & honor ceasefire/status quo. Put enmity on the back burner and focus on development for a while. No support for terrorism and separatism.
    2. With #1 in place for a while, will provide political capital to goi to make loc a permanent boundary.

    India & pakistan because of the similarity in culture can be friendliest of neighbours. Pakistan has a lot more to gain from friendship with India.

  21. #21
    Debut
    Apr 2018
    Runs
    1,682
    Mentioned
    68 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There is a massive gulf in terms of power and economy between USA and NK. All together different ball game. One is a super power, other is a little annoying noisy baby.

    Whereas, its not the case in terms of India/Pakistan much to the dismay of my indian brothers.

    Also, armies of both countries would never want peace. Also, specially in the case of India, Pakistan is used as a boogeyman by their nationalistic leaders. For them ISI is responsible for everything in their country. Their whole election campaigns such as BJPs are based on an anti-Pakistan narrative. Therefore they will never let this go.

  22. #22
    Debut
    Apr 2018
    Runs
    1,682
    Mentioned
    68 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    You are exaggerating the influence of Indian army here. They have absolutely no say in country's affairs, whether internal or external. It's the Netas who control everything in this country with army completely sidelined.
    You are right, and these neetas use Pakistan as the boogeyman. Heck, BJP played on insecurities of the indian population in their campaign basing it on lack of inaction against Pakistan by the Congress govermnet. This all resulted in fake posturing, fake sir jee kal strikes.

  23. #23
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by blackanhyellow View Post
    So essentially its all Pak army's fault?

    What if Pak army stepped aside? There would be peace between Indian and the Pakistani civilian government?

    What do you think the Pakistani civillian government will just hand India Azad Kashmir and be subservient to India in the geopolitical sphere (i.e. Bangladesh)?

    I think not.

    As much as you want to make it a one sided affair, truth is India is not willing to negotiate, whether it is with the Pakistani army or civilian government or anyone else. India claims Kashmir as solely theirs and does not even consider it a dispute regardless what Pakistan or Kashmiris say.

    So blame Pak army all you want, but it takes two to tango.
    It is.

    Pakistan army enjoys the autonomy no other armies enjoy. They poke their nose in everything including the internal matters and are the major reason behind the conflicts between India and Pakistan. Like Arun Jaitley said, whenever there is progress in the relations between the two nations, something that hampers it takes place. Terror attacks, ceasefire violation...

    You seem to be completely ignorant bro. India has no intention to annexe PoK or any part of Pakistan. It is only interested in protecting its land which is on its side of the border. It is Pakistan that goes everywhere including the UN saying discuss Kashmir discuss Kashmir, which is actually their armyís stand. Why canít the two countries be happy with what theyíve got?

    And all of you know whoís behind parties/organisations like the MML. So letís not go into that and the proxy war.

    The relations between India and Pakistan will get a lot better and we might even become good friends if Pakistan remains stable and have a government that can control the army. Itíll eventually happen although in what way the Chinese will influence it remains to be seen. Itís the people who feed the system including the army and the elected representatives should have the power to control the army.

  24. #24
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by blackanhyellow View Post
    So essentially its all Pak army's fault?

    What if Pak army stepped aside? There would be peace between Indian and the Pakistani civilian government?

    What do you think the Pakistani civillian government will just hand India Azad Kashmir and be subservient to India in the geopolitical sphere (i.e. Bangladesh)?

    I think not.

    As much as you want to make it a one sided affair, truth is India is not willing to negotiate, whether it is with the Pakistani army or civilian government or anyone else. India claims Kashmir as solely theirs and does not even consider it a dispute regardless what Pakistan or Kashmiris say.

    So blame Pak army all you want, but it takes two to tango.
    You are confusing between two things:

    1) Being subservient to India.

    2) Being pragmatic about the current situation and understanding that the part of Kashmir controlled by India will not in the foreseeable future leave India. Just like Baluchistan won't leave Pakistan.

    You can be 2) without being 1). Of course, if you think the only option to continued low-level war with India is 1) and that 2) does not exist, then you will continue with a low-level war. Your economy will not develop, your Army will continue dominating the economy, your Army generals will continue living the lives of multi-millionaires while the majority remain mired in poverty, and you will not have modern industries develop beyond soccer balls and textiles.

    For the low-level war against India, the jihadis and the Taliban are valuable assets. However, no foreign firms will invest.

    Your choice.

    And don't look down at Bangladesh. It is actually catching up with Pakistan economically and will leave it behind. Your allegation that they are somehow subservient to India is meritless, it is a relationship of give and take.
    Last edited by Napa; 13th June 2018 at 07:55.

  25. #25
    Debut
    Feb 2005
    Venue
    Cybertron, Guest of Optimus Prime
    Runs
    22,962
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Varun View Post
    One of the reasons is because 'Pakistan' is effectively two entities: the civilian government and the army. Both are at odds with each other, and only one is in power at any given time.
    Actually Pakistan is governed by a triumvirate, judiciary,army and executive. I believe thats in the constitution.

  26. #26
    Debut
    Feb 2005
    Venue
    Cybertron, Guest of Optimus Prime
    Runs
    22,962
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    The onus is on the stronger neigbour to recognise the weaker neighbours insecurities. If that can be achieved then there can be peace.

  27. #27
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Why can't India and Pakistan come together? Let me spell it out as clearly as possible.

    1. In Pakistan the Army has the guns and can overthrow any civilian government that does not follow its foreign policy (like it did the NS government by starting the Kargil War).

    2. The Pakistani Army needs an external enemy to justify its economic dominance of the country and the continued fleecing of the Pakistani citizens. Pakistani Army generals acquire great wealth and power during and after their careers. In contrast Indian Army generals are paupers.

    3. India is the only feasible external enemy for the Pakistani Army to present to the Pakistani people.

    Comprende?
    So mighty India is helpless in the face of Pakistan's military designs? You should at least acknowledge that the status quo suits India more than Pakistan otherwise you are inadvertently calling your own nation impotent.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  28. #28
    Debut
    Feb 2005
    Venue
    Cybertron, Guest of Optimus Prime
    Runs
    22,962
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    So mighty India is helpless in the face of Pakistan's military designs? You should at least acknowledge that the status quo suits India more than Pakistan otherwise you are inadvertently calling your own nation impotent.
    This. The status quo or something worse e.g. 2009-2012 is ideal for India. Peace isnt on their agenda.

  29. #29
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    I didn't vote in the poll because there's no option where you can vote because it suits India's political purpose.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  30. #30
    Debut
    Feb 2005
    Venue
    Cybertron, Guest of Optimus Prime
    Runs
    22,962
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    I didn't vote in the poll because there's no option where you can vote because it suits India's political purpose.
    we have to remember India see's it self as South Asia's policeman and major power. It also has grander ambitions of being a world power able to project force across the world. Hence its desire and to create a large Blue water navy with multiple carrier battlegroups.

    Pakistan is a hinderance to this and therefore must be contained or eliminated. Elimination is problematic so containment is the current option. That includes funding insurgents, creating political strife through various other pressure points, using the media and isolating Pakistani culturally through sport and other international forums where Pakistan can present either its image or a different point of view.

  31. #31
    Debut
    Mar 2018
    Runs
    41
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    So mighty India is helpless in the face of Pakistan's military designs? You should at least acknowledge that the status quo suits India more than Pakistan otherwise you are inadvertently calling your own nation impotent.
    India is being sensible & responsible in the face of provocation & hostility. When it will come down to using power, we know what will happen.

  32. #32
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by the Great Khan View Post
    The onus is on the stronger neigbour to recognise the weaker neighbours insecurities. If that can be achieved then there can be peace.
    Quote Originally Posted by bond View Post
    3. A peace deal with India is not in the interest of Pakistan army & ISI
    Quote Originally Posted by Varun View Post
    One of the reasons is because 'Pakistan' is effectively two entities: the civilian government and the army. Both are at odds with each other, and only one is in power at any given time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    This. Maybe not. One entity is always in power.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    So mighty India is helpless in the face of Pakistan's military designs? You should at least acknowledge that the status quo suits India more than Pakistan otherwise you are inadvertently calling your own nation impotent.
    Rishwat, you seem quite out of touch with the real world. How exactly is "mighty India" supposed to stop the Pakistani Army from sending jihadis into Kashmir? It already shells Pakistan, and the next escalation is probably a all out war between two nuclear armed neighbors. That is the only way in which to stop the bad behavior of the Pakistani Army and hopefully it won't come to that.

    The Pakistani Army/ISI provides aid and weapons to the Afghanistani Tabliban, especially the Haqqani network which kills US soldiers. Let alone India, not even the "mighty US" has been able to stop this from happening.

    So where does this leave us? India, like Pakistan, has a lot to lose from an all out war. The economy will take a serious hit and foreign investor confidence will evaporate (at least in the short term). The 7.5% growth rate will be replaced by -5% growth rates. So India chooses not to start an all out war, and the low-level war continues.

    What does India lose from the low-level war? Some amount of economic growth, maybe 7.5% instead of 8%. A few hundred soldiers dead.

    What does Pakistan lose from the low-level war? The Pakistani Army gains a lot, it maintains its dominance of Pakistan. Its generals continue their millionaire lifestyles. The Pakistani civilians however lose massively. Instead of a possible 8% growth rate the economy is stuck around 4%. Foreign investors will not invest heavily in a country which has jihadis running around. Or in a country where suicide bombers claim thousands dead.

    If Pakistani civilians can't figure out what is holding them back, unfortunately there is no hope that the country will progress.

  33. #33
    Debut
    Nov 2014
    Runs
    2,076
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Peoples who blame the Army are right, but forget one essential if not tautological factor, that the Army has obvious roots in the populace and are more legitimate representatives of the masses than the neo-feudal hacks like the Sharifs and PML-Goon.

    Those who want "peace" with an increasingly Hindutvic governement are deluded : they literally consider Pakistan and a dozen of neighbour nations as part of some fantasy map of "Akhand Bharat", and more particularly when it comes to Islam they have a complex about how it ruled them for a millenia, thus think in terms of revenge. It's not that they don't want Pakistan to prosper ; they don't want Pakistan, which is the only modern State created in the name of Islam, at all.

  34. #34
    Debut
    Mar 2007
    Runs
    153
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by blackanhyellow View Post
    Only way for peace with India (according to India) is if Pakistan hands them Azad Kashmir on a silver platter.

    Is that how Shariff was going to make peace with India?
    The army does not want kashmir to be free be cause everyone knows their importance will go down in the public eye. They create problems after problems for pak to stay relevant and justify the ludicrous amount of money they get from the country.We seriously need a few tenures of civilian govtíswithout any hurdles.

  35. #35
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enkidu_ View Post
    Peoples who blame the Army are right, but forget one essential if not tautological factor, that the Army has obvious roots in the populace and are more legitimate representatives of the masses than the neo-feudal hacks like the Sharifs and PML-Goon.
    The Army are not feudals and politicians elected by the people are feudals???


    Those who want "peace" with an increasingly Hindutvic governement are deluded : they literally consider Pakistan and a dozen of neighbour nations as part of some fantasy map of "Akhand Bharat", and more particularly when it comes to Islam they have a complex about how it ruled them for a millenia, thus think in terms of revenge. It's not that they don't want Pakistan to prosper ; they don't want Pakistan, which is the only modern State created in the name of Islam, at all.
    Yes, do keep believing that the Indians are planning to conquer Pakistan, want to destroy "the only modern State created in the name of Islam" and therefore you need to give your Army control of your country. Your future is very bright.
    Last edited by Napa; 13th June 2018 at 20:37.

  36. #36
    Debut
    Nov 2014
    Runs
    2,076
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    The Army are not feudals and politicians elected by the people are feudals???
    The Army is the only institution where the corruption is the most minimalist and thus upward social mobility the most "democratic". It's less feudal than politics in Punjab, where politicians are "elected" the same way slaves may "elect" their master's new shoes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Yes, do keep believing that the Indians are planning to conquer Pakistan, want to destroy "the only modern State created in the name of Islam" and therefore you need to give your Army control of your country. Your future is very bright.
    The rise of Hindutva/Hindu nationalism in India is a fact, and its ideological axis revolve around Hindu expansionism in what they consider their "lost lands", even more so Pakistan, which in their mind means Islam, and thus an existential foes.


  37. #37
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Venue
    Attock
    Runs
    1,733
    Mentioned
    399 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by the Great Khan View Post
    we have to remember India see's it self as South Asia's policeman and major power. It also has grander ambitions of being a world power able to project force across the world. Hence its desire and to create a large Blue water navy with multiple carrier battlegroups.

    Pakistan is a hinderance to this and therefore must be contained or eliminated. Elimination is problematic so containment is the current option. That includes funding insurgents, creating political strife through various other pressure points, using the media and isolating Pakistani culturally through sport and other international forums where Pakistan can present either its image or a different point of view.
    Which is another way of elimination. Make Pakistan so weak that it becomes easier to eliminate.

  38. #38
    Debut
    Mar 2018
    Runs
    41
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enkidu_ View Post
    The Army is the only institution where the corruption is the most minimalist and thus upward social mobility the most "democratic". It's less feudal than politics in Punjab, where politicians are "elected" the same way slaves may "elect" their master's new shoes.



    The rise of Hindutva/Hindu nationalism in India is a fact, and its ideological axis revolve around Hindu expansionism in what they consider their "lost lands", even more so Pakistan, which in their mind means Islam, and thus an existential foes.

    Akhand bharat (like one world) is just a wishful thinking. Its not a movement! Yes - but use that to advance & fulfil you propaganda. The only people who are fooled are a portion of Pakistan populace. The beneficiary is your army.

  39. #39
    Debut
    Jan 2009
    Venue
    Behind you
    Runs
    4,944
    Mentioned
    211 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bond View Post
    India is being sensible & responsible in the face of provocation & hostility. When it will come down to using power, we know what will happen.
    You're welcome to try it if you want to turn the subcontinent into non-habitable radioactive zone for the next few centuries. Both countries have nukes for a reason.

    From a superb post earlier in the thread to mindless trolling later on.
    Last edited by Abdullah719; 13th June 2018 at 23:56.

  40. #40
    Debut
    Feb 2018
    Runs
    1,254
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vajpayee and Sharif did try negotiating before but we all know what happened....

  41. #41
    Debut
    Jan 2009
    Venue
    Behind you
    Runs
    4,944
    Mentioned
    211 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BreadPakoda View Post
    Vajpayee and Sharif did try negotiating before but we all know what happened....
    So did Musharraf and Vajpayee, and so did the two govs again in 2006. Numerous ministers from us have said an agreement with India was close in 2006. Read up Musharaaf's 4 points, they are all over the internet. but then good ol Mush got himself booted, elections fiasco and Mumbai happened and years later here we are arguing with Indians who're all over our forums talking trash.
    Last edited by Pakpak; 13th June 2018 at 21:43.

  42. #42
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enkidu_ View Post
    The Army is the only institution where the corruption is the most minimalist and thus upward social mobility the most "democratic". It's less feudal than politics in Punjab, where politicians are "elected" the same way slaves may "elect" their master's new shoes.
    The Army does not need to be "corrupt". The generals get their 50 acres of land allotment and all other "benefits" by "legal" means.

    The rise of Hindutva/Hindu nationalism in India is a fact, and its ideological axis revolve around Hindu expansionism in what they consider their "lost lands", even more so Pakistan, which in their mind means Islam, and thus an existential foes.
    Congratulations, from a country of 1.3 billion people you have found 13 people who want to conquer Pakistan. If you are going to quote nonsense from a tiny fraction of Indians who believe in such stupidity, I could similarly respond by referring to Ghazwatul Hind.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazwatul_Hind

    The fact is 99% of Indians don't give 2 hoots about Pakistan and only think about it when there is a terrorist attack originating from Pakistan, like the Parliament attack or the Mumbai attack. Indians are not stupid. The vast majority are concerned about meeting their daily needs, and thinking about Pakistan is a waste of time for them.

    NS did try to improve relations with India back in 1998 which would have led to lessened tensions and conditions conducive to foreign investment and faster growth. The Army derailed his plans by starting the Kargil War.

    Buddy, it is your country. If you cannot see what is really holding back your economy, you are going to remain where you are. Keep blaming Indians if it makes you feel better, but it won't change the reality.

  43. #43
    Debut
    Jul 2016
    Runs
    2,630
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Why can't India and Pakistan come together? Let me spell it out as clearly as possible.

    1. In Pakistan the Army has the guns and can overthrow any civilian government that does not follow its foreign policy (like it did the NS government by starting the Kargil War).

    2. The Pakistani Army needs an external enemy to justify its economic dominance of the country and the continued fleecing of the Pakistani citizens. Pakistani Army generals acquire great wealth and power during and after their careers. In contrast Indian Army generals are paupers.

    3. India is the only feasible external enemy for the Pakistani Army to present to the Pakistani people.

    Comprende?
    What else you expect from a "patriotic" Indian ? We love Pak army and you hate , understandable.

  44. #44
    Debut
    Nov 2014
    Runs
    2,076
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    The Army does not need to be "corrupt". The generals get their 50 acres of land allotment and all other "benefits" by "legal" means.
    Compare with the corruption unleashed by the "civilian" govt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Congratulations, from a country of 1.3 billion people you have found 13 people who want to conquer Pakistan. If you are going to quote nonsense from a tiny fraction of Indians who believe in such stupidity, I could similarly respond by referring to Ghazwatul Hind.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazwatul_Hind

    The fact is 99% of Indians don't give 2 hoots about Pakistan and only think about it when there is a terrorist attack originating from Pakistan, like the Parliament attack or the Mumbai attack. Indians are not stupid. The vast majority are concerned about meeting their daily needs, and thinking about Pakistan is a waste of time for them.

    NS did try to improve relations with India back in 1998 which would have led to lessened tensions and conditions conducive to foreign investment and faster growth. The Army derailed his plans by starting the Kargil War.

    Buddy, it is your country. If you cannot see what is really holding back your economy, you are going to remain where you are. Keep blaming Indians if it makes you feel better, but it won't change the reality.
    You are being disingenious here. Hindu nationalism is not only about some deluded individuals, but a societal phenomenon which is translated into electoral successes as well as militantism pressuring Muslims who eat beef. It impacts the wider sociology of India. And one of the main points of Hindu nationalism is the belief that a dozen of modern nation-States, incl. Pakistan, belongs to a mystic geography called "Akhand Bharat".

    I could quote a dozen of instances of the pan-Pak references in their narratives, but the last one is with Indian actress invited to go to Pakistan because of some "anti national" role :



    Also, everything is not about the economy.

  45. #45
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by moghul View Post
    What else you expect from a "patriotic" Indian ? We love Pak army and you hate , understandable.
    You love an institution which is the cause of your economic backwardness. Pakistan's top exports are human talent, soccer balls and textiles. India's top exports are human talent, pharmaceuticals, automobiles, consulting work (IBM, Accenture, Oracle etc.), satellite launches etc.

    It is not that Pakistanis are not able to do what Indians can. It is that having your Army grab a major chunk of the economy and nurturing jihadis means your development will not proceed much beyond soccer balls.

  46. #46
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by the Great Khan View Post
    we have to remember India see's it self as South Asia's policeman and major power. It also has grander ambitions of being a world power able to project force across the world. Hence its desire and to create a large Blue water navy with multiple carrier battlegroups.

    Pakistan is a hinderance to this and therefore must be contained or eliminated. Elimination is problematic so containment is the current option. That includes funding insurgents, creating political strife through various other pressure points, using the media and isolating Pakistani culturally through sport and other international forums where Pakistan can present either its image or a different point of view.
    Again, some of you guys are showing serious lack of knowledge and awareness in your posts. Who is trying to be South Asia’s policemen? India or China? Who is using its army and navy to threaten other small countries? Who is the largest exporter of weapons? What were the Chinese doing in Doklam?

    Pakistan has never been a hindrance to India’s progress and it will never be because you’re not the centre of the earth for us . We have our own problems to worry about and our own achievements and success stories to be happy about. You guys can’t blame India for your problems. Your army destabilises your whole system and your India focused policies will never fetch you anything good. Your policies should be focused on creating a better Pakistan. Our army allegedly tried to take over the country once in the 70s, but we had a leader who had the spine to declare emergency immediately and avoid such a possibility although it was just a rumour. You don’t have a single leader who can do that effectively. There lies your problem.


    Quote Originally Posted by enkidu_ View Post
    The Army is the only institution where the corruption is the most minimalist and thus upward social mobility the most "democratic". It's less feudal than politics in Punjab, where politicians are "elected" the same way slaves may "elect" their master's new shoes.



    The rise of Hindutva/Hindu nationalism in India is a fact, and its ideological axis revolve around Hindu expansionism in what they consider their "lost lands", even more so Pakistan, which in their mind means Islam, and thus an existential foes.

    You think there is no corruption in the army because you don’t see or hear about it. Nothing comes out. That doesn’t mean there is no corruption.
    The existence of Hindu nationalism is a reality but you’re wrong if you think the Hindus here are thinking about getting back the so called ‘lost lands’ you mentioned. I’m sure 99% of people here don’t even know what this akhand Bharat is. You guys still don’t understand India .

    Quote Originally Posted by Pakpak View Post
    You're welcome to try it if you want to turn the subcontinent into non-habitable radioactive zone for the next few centuries. Both countries have nukes for a reason.

    From a superb post earlier in the thread to mindless trolling later on, another stupid, pathetic Indian troll going on my ignore list.
    Why are you getting excited about the usage of nuclear weapons?! India and Pakistan are supposed to be responsible users of nuclear weapons. Both countries follow the “we won’t use it first” policy. India won’t break that promise even if there’s a war because it doesn’t have to. If Pakistan breaks it... no, Pakistan won’t do that either for obvious reasons. Why are we discussing ‘war’ here? We shouldn’t stoop to that level man.
    Last edited by Mr.Q; 13th June 2018 at 23:27.

  47. #47
    Debut
    Nov 2014
    Runs
    2,076
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    You think there is no corruption in the army because you don’t see or hear about it. Nothing comes out. That doesn’t mean there is no corruption.
    The existence of Hindu nationalism is a reality but you’re wrong if you think the Hindus here are thinking about getting back the so called ‘lost lands’ you mentioned. I’m sure 99% of people here don’t even know what this akhand Bharat is. You guys still don’t understand India .
    I've read Ayesha Siddiqa's famous work on the subject, and it's better to have an ideological Islamic force like Pak Army control the economy than lame Indophiles like the Sharifs.

    Also you all claim that "99%" of this or that despite not even having met 1% of the said demographics, it's well known in academic circles that territorial expansion (which means direct confrontation with the national sovereignty of other States, that is, warfare) is one of the premises of Hindu nationalism.

    You have to admit it's a dangerous development for any prospective "peace".

  48. #48
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Venue
    Jurassic Park.
    Runs
    6,384
    Mentioned
    85 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why can't India and Pakistan come to the negotiating table like US - N. Korea?

    Coz India wants everything it's own way. It wants Pak to give in to all it's demands in return for roles in cheap Bollywood garbage and Cricket! It wants Pak to give our Kashmir to them as well with a big smile on our face and stop CPEC. It wants Pak to happily allow Indian terrorism in Afghanistan to flourish whilst doing absolutely nothing in return. India wants a complete submissive Pakistan which will just be an extension of their country with no foreign policy of it's own. With the rise of fundamental Hindutva their government is always under pressure to satisfy them no matter what the cost will be. Another thing is Pak-Hind are neighbours and always will be, the USA and North Korea and and never will be that. Seeing India's military spending it is none of their business what our military does or spends to safeguard our borders.
    Last edited by PakLFC; 14th June 2018 at 01:50.


    PP's own self proclaimed sharpshooter and defender of Islam and Pakistan.

  49. #49
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enkidu_ View Post
    I've read Ayesha Siddiqa's famous work on the subject, and it's better to have an ideological Islamic force like Pak Army control the economy than lame Indophiles like the Sharifs.

    Also you all claim that "99%" of this or that despite not even having met 1% of the said demographics, it's well known in academic circles that territorial expansion (which means direct confrontation with the national sovereignty of other States, that is, warfare) is one of the premises of Hindu nationalism.

    You have to admit it's a dangerous development for any prospective "peace".
    No man your army has destabilised your entire system. There is no proper political atmosphere. Itís a controlled environment which wouldnít help organic development. How many times did your army kick your government out? Itís this lack of stability that makes the politics there a dirty game and creates bad leaders. Indian politics was very similar too (and in some places it still is) but the reasons were different. If the army was so good why isnít there any progress in Pakistan? Economic progress isnít there, we know that. It had several advantages over India when it started out but still itís lagging far behind India. There isnít any progress in Pakistanís global image either. The army is hurting your global image by protecting terrorists. So your claim that a country ruled by the army would be better than a country ruled by the elected representatives of the people is not something me or anybody with some understanding of history would agree with .

    I know the situation here better than you bro. To be very honest, Iíve never heard anyone talk about this akhand Bharat thing on the streets or anywhere other than seeing a couple of guys talking about it on tv. Iím sure people will laugh if they get to know what it is. We have better things to think about. The problem here is that you guys havenít had a chance to visit India. Itís a true plural society with great diversity. Attacking Pakistan is not in the agenda of its people or its government. Like Mr. Abid Rao once said, India will not takeover Pakistan even if Pakistan asks it to. Youíre worrying about all these Hindu nationalism and stuff unnecessarily. If me sitting here isnít worried about it, why should a Pakistani be worried about it? .


    Quote Originally Posted by PakLFC View Post
    Why can't India and Pakistan come to the negotiating table like US - N. Korea?

    Coz India wants everything it's own way. It wants Pak to give in to all it's demands in return for roles in cheap Bollywood garbage and Cricket! It wants Pak to give our Kashmir to them as well with a big smile on our face and stop CPEC. It wants Pak to happily allow Indian terrorism in Afghanistan to flourish whilst doing absolutely nothing in return. India wants a complete submissive Pakistan which will just be an extension of their country with no foreign policy of it's own. With the rise of fundamental Hindutva their government is always under pressure to satisfy them no matter what the cost will be. Another thing is Pak-Hind are neighbours and always will be, the USA and North Korea and and never will be that. Seeing India's military spending it is none of their business what our military does or spends to safeguard our borders.
    We donít want your Kashmir sir. We donít even talk about it. Weíre happy with the one we have. Youíre the ones talking about Kashmir everywhere and demand discussions on it. Poor Kashmiris think you guys are trying to support them. Theyíre the ones suffering because of all these games. Do you guys really care about the Kashmiris on the Indian side? Be honest.

  50. #50
    Debut
    Feb 2005
    Venue
    Cybertron, Guest of Optimus Prime
    Runs
    22,962
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    Again, some of you guys are showing serious lack of knowledge and awareness in your posts. Who is trying to be South Asia’s policemen? India or China? Who is using its army and navy to threaten other small countries? Who is the largest exporter of weapons? What were the Chinese doing in Doklam?

    China is thinking bigger than South Asia but has only recently upgraded its ambitions. India on the other hand has always had the ambition to become a superpower hence why it keeps butting heads with China. China isn't trying to !police" South Asia. It wants to be a world power which is a totally different ball game. Its interests in sOuth asia revolve around a few words. Stability, economics and interconnectivity. It wants to acheive super pwer status without fighting a war like the US did in WW2. Mutual economic activity in which China benefits but moves its neighbours along to benefit from their markets is what they want to do. They are not interested in policing South Asia like you want to. Its counter productive to their aims. India on the other hand well thats a whole another story. Also dont come on this forum and presume you know better than some of us on here just because you think being Indian some how magically makes you an expert on Pakistan's internal affairs. As they say in GOT "you know nothing Jon snow".

    Pakistan has never been a hindrance to India’s progress and it will never be because you’re not the centre of the earth for us .

    Your right we arent a hinderance to your goals as a economic power as long as we remain in the current status quo. But luckily for you your strategic planners are smarter and understand the potential within Pakistan and what it can become if given the right factors. Pakistan is a direct strategic threat to all of Indias interests, from links to the middle east to access to markets of the future, to the overall geopolitical environment and battle for resources, from water to minerals. Otherwise you wouldnt be sending highly trained intelligence officers over the border to cause terrorism and sectarian strife. And dont give me the "oh well its just a reaction" bakwaas. you've been doing it since the 50's way before any pakistani involvement in kashmir.

    We have our own problems to worry about and our own achievements and success stories to be happy about. You guys can’t blame India for your problems.

    We're not blaming India for all of our problems. Unlike India elections that use the word Pakistan a billion times a minute to rile up your unwashed masses, our elections hardly talk about India. Our overriding desire is to have a corruption free political system with a strong law and order system to help. Our people are willing to live poorer than india's as long as there is no corruption and they feel safe.

    Your army destabilises your whole system and your India focused policies will never fetch you anything good. Your policies should be focused on creating a better Pakistan.

    The army made a big mistake by taking over in the 60's but this whole mentality stems from a fear that we will be overwhelmed by a neighbour 7 times our size. All we hear is how India will simply run us over using cold start, or like in 98 where they will teach us a lesson. 71 was a traumatic episode that was as much a responsibility of the politicians as it was the army. India did not have to intervene in Bangladesh. It was an internal Pakistan matter. Yes refugees were coming across the border but you didnt have to start arming terrorists. You could have been more constructive. But no, all we hear is how you want revenge for a 1000 years. We see this now on the streets of India as your people take revenge everyday in some form or the other. Suffice it to say the majority of Pakistanis couldnt care less about India. It doesn't dominate our news cycles, it doesnt dominate our media or daily life. We dont have groups of zealots running around lynching people and shouting got to India etc. That happens on your streets. The army is merely a product of our society and unfortunately we are an insecure society and India knows this and plays on this fear every single day. The insecurity stems from the horrors of the partition.

    Our army allegedly tried to take over the country once in the 70s, but we had a leader who had the spine to declare emergency immediately and avoid such a possibility although it was just a rumour. You don’t have a single leader who can do that effectively. There lies your problem.

    Exactly. A single political leader who can do that. Not a military leader, a politician who can stand up for the people. That is why the army then has to intervene. Until that leader comes it is better we have our troika (judges,army, executive) running the show.



    You think there is no corruption in the army because you don’t see or hear about it. Nothing comes out. That doesn’t mean there is no corruption.

    Tell me something, do you know anybody in the PA? a single individual? I know a few. I know of others who know more. Is there corruption. Of course thee is. It is an army of a million men and women. Why wouldn't there be. There is corruption of all sorts. But the scale is manageable and overall it does not hinder the efficiency of the force. The army is now a battle hardened force that has just won the WOT and defeated a major militant group that could have caused untold damage going forward. Your troops on the LOC get a taste nearly everyday. But having said that i know officers who want a nice quiet LOC becasue escalation hurts us as much as it hurts you. They would rather exchange mithais and wave at each other then fore their weapons. Unfortunatley your racists govt has been upping the ante on the LOC ever since it took power. We have lost countless civilians and men to shelling and other stuff..

    The existence of Hindu nationalism is a reality but you’re wrong if you think the Hindus here are thinking about getting back the so called ‘lost lands’ you mentioned. I’m sure 99% of people here don’t even know what this akhand Bharat is. You guys still don’t understand India .

    It doesnt matter if the majority of your populace dont know it, your PM does and his supporters do. Therefore it is a threat to us. Your upper echelons still care about this. Remember the caste system is alive and well in your country. where a few hold the reigns while the majority suffer.


    Why are you getting excited about the usage of nuclear weapons?! India and Pakistan are supposed to be responsible users of nuclear weapons. Both countries follow the “we won’t use it first” policy. India won’t break that promise even if there’s a war because it doesn’t have to. If Pakistan breaks it... no, Pakistan won’t do that either for obvious reasons. Why are we discussing ‘war’ here? We shouldn’t stoop to that level man.

    I agree. There wont be a war because a small exchange will kill billions across the world. The world knows this and will not allow it unless madness takes over all of us. Nukes guarantee our security and yours. That is the way it should be.
    to conclude, The army has had a bad reputation for its martial law policies in the past, and it has rightly been lambasted but now we will have a third shift of power through democratic means in a row. That in itself is cause for celebration. Why then is India still harping on about the army? Shouldnt you be happy we are finally trying to emulate your system? The army will cajole, poke and maneuver but will not interfere like it has in the past. The rank and file are not interested. The job is to maintain the existent of the state without martial law and they are doing a good job now. Do generals get rich? yes they do. But if you look at it from an overall perspective ultimately it benefits the country because they generally stay in the country. Our politicians on the other hand steal from the tax payer and then invest abroad. The whole NS episode should be an eye opener for Indians. This is what we have to deal with.

    And I'll say this again, the only people who can make peace with india are those that are prepared to take all three of the troika along with it. The army, judiciary and executive. That is how Pakistan is now run.

    Instead of shouting and saying you'll send your actresses to Pakistan like our country is a swear word, perhaps you should all try and make more cultural links while understanding our unique history. Lecturing us about the PA when you really have no idea about its inner workings just betrays your arrogance and just confirms what we perceive about Indians in general.

  51. #51
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post

    The fact is 99% of Indians don't give 2 hoots about Pakistan and only think about it when there is a terrorist attack originating from Pakistan, like the Parliament attack or the Mumbai attack. Indians are not stupid. The vast majority are concerned about meeting their daily needs, and thinking about Pakistan is a waste of time for them.
    Yeah 99% of them don't care, that is why they troll Al Jazeera websites and spend all day posting 1000 word essays on Pakistani forums. Mate if you want to talk about nationalities who don't care, you could try Saudis, Chinese, Japanese, Iranians, Russians etc. You can write what you like about them here, they won't be replying.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  52. #52
    Debut
    Jan 2009
    Venue
    Behind you
    Runs
    4,944
    Mentioned
    211 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    Yeah 99% of them don't care, that is why they troll Al Jazeera websites and spend all day posting 1000 word essays on Pakistani forums. Mate if you want to talk about nationalities who don't care, you could try Saudis, Chinese, Japanese, Iranians, Russians etc. You can write what you like about them here, they won't be replying.
    Pretty much this. We keep hearing about how Indians don't care but honestly everywhere I go on anything that is a Pakistani platform Indians are there enmasse telling us how they don't care.

    Absolutely bizarre.

  53. #53
    Debut
    Oct 2015
    Venue
    Gurgaon
    Runs
    2,531
    Mentioned
    341 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    Yeah 99% of them don't care, that is why they troll Al Jazeera websites and spend all day posting 1000 word essays on Pakistani forums. Mate if you want to talk about nationalities who don't care, you could try Saudis, Chinese, Japanese, Iranians, Russians etc. You can write what you like about them here, they won't be replying.
    Unless you can prove that number of indian posters you have encountered on different forums and websites is more than 13 million (1% of India's population), his point still stands

  54. #54
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by the Great Khan View Post
    China is thinking bigger than South Asia but has only recently upgraded its ambitions. India on the other hand has always had the ambition to become a superpower hence why it keeps butting heads with China. China isn't trying to !police" South Asia. It wants to be a world power which is a totally different ball game. Its interests in sOuth asia revolve around a few words. Stability, economics and interconnectivity. It wants to acheive super pwer status without fighting a war like the US did in WW2. Mutual economic activity in which China benefits but moves its neighbours along to benefit from their markets is what they want to do. They are not interested in policing South Asia like you want to. Its counter productive to their aims. India on the other hand well thats a whole another story. Also dont come on this forum and presume you know better than some of us on here just because you think being Indian some how magically makes you an expert on Pakistan's internal affairs. As they say in GOT "you know nothing Jon snow".
    Relax!

    Do you have any idea what China is trying to do? Pretty soon China will have military bases in different parts of South Asia. The plan is clearly to bully everyone and make them submissive. They want to dominate all of us. Some of their actions are proof to this.

    China is the manufacturing hub of the world. But they realise that it's not something they can continue for very long because of several reasons. They are actively looking at other possibilities. India is the biggest threat to China as an economy and they know it very well.

    China's story will end if others stop buying things from them and stop giving them contracts for manufacturing. Manufacturing is their biggest strength. India's great strength is its service/IT sector. There is enough room for two superpowers in South East Asia because the two countries are big enough markets. China will realise this soon. Or maybe they already do.

    I didn't claim to know more than any of you guys about Pakistan's internal matters. But one thing would be very clear to any observer. The army's influence in everything. Army's permission is sought for everything. They are a major player when it comes to decision making.

    Your right we arent a hinderance to your goals as a economic power as long as we remain in the current status quo. But luckily for you your strategic planners are smarter and understand the potential within Pakistan and what it can become if given the right factors. Pakistan is a direct strategic threat to all of Indias interests, from links to the middle east to access to markets of the future, to the overall geopolitical environment and battle for resources, from water to minerals. Otherwise you wouldnt be sending highly trained intelligence officers over the border to cause terrorism and sectarian strife. And dont give me the "oh well its just a reaction" bakwaas. you've been doing it since the 50's way before any pakistani involvement in kashmir.
    You guys have a lot of ground to cover. Let's consider something as simple as the automotive sector. Foreign companies are reluctant to start ventures in Pakistan. Most youngsters there still ride around in 100cc two stroke bikes. The Mehraan, which is basically an 80s car is still a hit there. Many Japanese companies are taking advantage of you and are overcharging you.

    When you compare something like technology, the Indian IT industry is a million miles ahead. Come on man. I'm not saying that you can't compete with India. But to compete with India you need to reach certain level first. You should be trying to reach that level. And Pakistan should fix its 'talent leak' issue as well. Many young talents produced by Pakistan are trying to fly out of Pakistan. That should be prevented by creating more opportunities for them to succeed and live a good quality life in Pakistan.

    We're not blaming India for all of our problems. Unlike India elections that use the word Pakistan a billion times a minute to rile up your unwashed masses, our elections hardly talk about India. Our overriding desire is to have a corruption free political system with a strong law and order system to help. Our people are willing to live poorer than india's as long as there is no corruption and they feel safe.
    What is your solution to eradicate corruption? Allow the army to run the country? That's like asking for a tsunami to avoid coastal erosion.

    The army made a big mistake by taking over in the 60's but this whole mentality stems from a fear that we will be overwhelmed by a neighbour 7 times our size. All we hear is how India will simply run us over using cold start, or like in 98 where they will teach us a lesson. 71 was a traumatic episode that was as much a responsibility of the politicians as it was the army. India did not have to intervene in Bangladesh. It was an internal Pakistan matter. Yes refugees were coming across the border but you didnt have to start arming terrorists. You could have been more constructive. But no, all we hear is how you want revenge for a 1000 years. We see this now on the streets of India as your people take revenge everyday in some form or the other. Suffice it to say the majority of Pakistanis couldnt care less about India. It doesn't dominate our news cycles, it doesnt dominate our media or daily life. We dont have groups of zealots running around lynching people and shouting got to India etc. That happens on your streets. The army is merely a product of our society and unfortunately we are an insecure society and India knows this and plays on this fear every single day. The insecurity stems from the horrors of the partition.
    I'm assuming that you know what was happening in Eastern Pakistan or today's Bangladesh before partition? The situation was so bad that India had to intervene.

    Exactly. A single political leader who can do that. Not a military leader, a politician who can stand up for the people. That is why the army then has to intervene. Until that leader comes it is better we have our troika (judges,army, executive) running the show.
    Great leaders are not born. They're made. As long as your judges, army and executives run the show, that wont happen. I'm of the opinion that you should change that system.

    Tell me something, do you know anybody in the PA? a single individual? I know a few. I know of others who know more. Is there corruption. Of course thee is. It is an army of a million men and women. Why wouldn't there be. There is corruption of all sorts. But the scale is manageable and overall it does not hinder the efficiency of the force. The army is now a battle hardened force that has just won the WOT and defeated a major militant group that could have caused untold damage going forward. Your troops on the LOC get a taste nearly everyday. But having said that i know officers who want a nice quiet LOC becasue escalation hurts us as much as it hurts you. They would rather exchange mithais and wave at each other then fore their weapons. Unfortunatley your racists govt has been upping the ante on the LOC ever since it took power. We have lost countless civilians and men to shelling and other stuff..
    Corruption is there in every army sir. I don't have to know anyone in PA to know that. But in the case of Pakistani Army the chances are much much higher because it enjoys autonomy. It gets to decide what it wants to do.

    Our new government has a different approach to ceasefire violations. Instead of killing our army's morale by choosing to do nothing, we now hit back. I don't want to talk much more about it. We know our army's might.

    It doesnt matter if the majority of your populace dont know it, your PM does and his supporters do. Therefore it is a threat to us. Your upper echelons still care about this. Remember the caste system is alive and well in your country. where a few hold the reigns while the majority suffer.
    So you believe our Government is planning to attack Pakistan and takeover the "lost lands" .

    I agree. There wont be a war because a small exchange will kill billions across the world. The world knows this and will not allow it unless madness takes over all of us. Nukes guarantee our security and yours. That is the way it should be.
    Nukes don't guarantee anything. If a war breaks out both countries wont use it. Both countries don't go to war because that'll drag both countries down by a decade at least, allowing the external players to take advantage of us.

    to conclude, The army has had a bad reputation for its martial law policies in the past, and it has rightly been lambasted but now we will have a third shift of power through democratic means in a row. That in itself is cause for celebration. Why then is India still harping on about the army? Shouldnt you be happy we are finally trying to emulate your system? The army will cajole, poke and maneuver but will not interfere like it has in the past. The rank and file are not interested. The job is to maintain the existent of the state without martial law and they are doing a good job now. Do generals get rich? yes they do. But if you look at it from an overall perspective ultimately it benefits the country because they generally stay in the country. Our politicians on the other hand steal from the tax payer and then invest abroad. The whole NS episode should be an eye opener for Indians. This is what we have to deal with.
    We'll be very happy if you get a government that is in total control of everything. A stable Pakistan is very good news for India.

    And I'll say this again, the only people who can make peace with india are those that are prepared to take all three of the troika along with it. The army, judiciary and executive. That is how Pakistan is now run.

    Instead of shouting and saying you'll send your actresses to Pakistan like our country is a swear word, perhaps you should all try and make more cultural links while understanding our unique history. Lecturing us about the PA when you really have no idea about its inner workings just betrays your arrogance and just confirms what we perceive about Indians in general.
    How many people here support those "send them to Pakistan" slogans? Based on that logic I can say that Pakistan is a nation full of terrorists. That doesn't make much sense, does it?

    We don't consider you guys as our enemies or something. If we did, we wouldn't be here on this forum trying to clear whatever misunderstanding that is between us.
    Last edited by Mr.Q; 14th June 2018 at 13:12.

  55. #55
    Debut
    Feb 2005
    Venue
    Cybertron, Guest of Optimus Prime
    Runs
    22,962
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    Relax!

    Do you have any idea what China is trying to do? Pretty soon China will have military bases in different parts of South Asia. The plan is clearly to bully everyone and make them submissive. They want to dominate all of us. Some of their actions are proof to this.

    China is the manufacturing hub of the world. But they realise that it's not something they can continue for very long because of several reasons. They are actively looking at other possibilities. India is the biggest threat to China as an economy and they know it very well.

    China's story will end if others stop buying things from them and stop giving them contracts for manufacturing. Manufacturing is their biggest strength. India's great strength is its service/IT sector. There is enough room for two superpowers in South East Asia because the two countries are big enough markets. China will realise this soon. Or maybe they already do.

    Thanks for confirming the point I was making about a local policeman. You have clearly articulated China's wider broader strategic and economic desire and plan. As for Military bases , they have every right to considering they are practically surrounded by the US and its allies which now includes India. So counter moves from them are only understandable.

    I didn't claim to know more than any of you guys about Pakistan's internal matters. But one thing would be very clear to any observer. The army's influence in everything. Army's permission is sought for everything. They are a major player when it comes to decision making.

    Yes and nobody is denying that. I have explained why they are a major player. It is in our constitution for there to be checks and balances. The problem we have is the politicians are not sticking to their part of the bargain. The army has had to intervene because time and again national security has been put at risk due to the whims and stupidity of a politician and their idiotic desire to maintain their wealth through corrupt means. Also the fact we have a large neighbour that has a policy to cause strife within our border, and you get an insecure environment. Hence why security is then an issue.

    You guys have a lot of ground to cover. Let's consider something as simple as the automotive sector. Foreign companies are reluctant to start ventures in Pakistan. Most youngsters there still ride around in 100cc two stroke bikes. The Mehraan, which is basically an 80s car is still a hit there. Many Japanese companies are taking advantage of you and are overcharging you.

    When you compare something like technology, the Indian IT industry is a million miles ahead. Come on man. I'm not saying that you can't compete with India. But to compete with India you need to reach certain level first. You should be trying to reach that level. And Pakistan should fix its 'talent leak' issue as well. Many young talents produced by Pakistan are trying to fly out of Pakistan. That should be prevented by creating more opportunities for them to succeed and live a good quality life in Pakistan.

    Why are they not investing? security and a lack of favourable business conditions e.g. controls and managing corruption. Who's job is it to initiate these reforms? The politicians not the army. They have had over a decade to sort out the issues. It can be done very quickly but they have not done it because they are too busy lining their pockets. That is the core issue in Pakistan. Not the interference of the army as Indians are lead to believe. Also we all know what has been going on with regards to security since 2008. And who has been responsible.

    What is your solution to eradicate corruption? Allow the army to run the country? That's like asking for a tsunami to avoid coastal erosion.


    I'm assuming that you know what was happening in Eastern Pakistan or today's Bangladesh before partition? The situation was so bad that India had to intervene.

    Had to intervene? no it didnt. It intervened and actually stoked a lot of the issues. There is enough stuff that I can post to show what was going on. A planned strategy to dismember Pakistan. Its openly admitted by your current PM. Even Manekshaw said it in one of his interviews. He had months to plan his operations. The PA were not expecting an Indian operation across the border. But I'll leave this for another thread.

    Great leaders are not born. They're made. As long as your judges, army and executives run the show, that wont happen. I'm of the opinion that you should change that system.

    we shall see. They have had enough time. In one instance one family has ruled for 33 years in one province. Lets see what happens in this coming election.

    Corruption is there in every army sir. I don't have to know anyone in PA to know that. But in the case of Pakistani Army the chances are much much higher because it enjoys autonomy. It gets to decide what it wants to do.

    Yes with a limited budget that has actually decreased in real terms. It is still at the mercy of basic economics run by the politicians.

    Our new government has a different approach to ceasefire violations. Instead of killing our army's morale by choosing to do nothing, we now hit back. I don't want to talk much more about it. We know our army's might.

    Another myth sold to you by your sarkar. You have always done something. But this time because we now have SSG and LCB's embedded with our infantry units, your casualties are rising and are higher than previous encounters.

    So you believe our Government is planning to attack Pakistan and takeover the "lost lands" .

    No. I believe that your strategic planners have created a strategic plan to cut Pakistan into two and take the fertile lands of the Punjab within the nuke threshold. Thus forcing Pakistan to the negotiating table and ending the Kashmir issue by forcing us to make unbearable concessions. Its called cold start and part of your overall strategy to contain Pakistan. It is just the army's end of things. Your govt has been using other methods at the moment. It is to contain Pakistan. You may not see it put strategic planners think decades ahead. A peaceful stable Pakistan is a threat to India. That is your govts calculation. Otherwise they would be sitting in lahore sipping chai with our PM discussing rail and road links and economics.

    Nukes don't guarantee anything. If a war breaks out both countries wont use it. Both countries don't go to war because that'll drag both countries down by a decade at least, allowing the external players to take advantage of us.

    If a war breaks out we will use it. We have made this crystal clear to your top brass. We have tactical nukes ready to do the job. From Nasr to artillery based weapons. They will be provided to local commanders to sue as they see fit. This scares the hell out of the US and hence why there wont be a war until we lose our nuke capability.

    We'll be very happy if you get a government that is in total control of everything. A stable Pakistan is very good news for India.

    You mean a civilian govt that neuters the army and lets the Indian state get on with what its doing in Kashmir and on our western border. Well that will never happen. Your idea of what the pakistan govt should be doing and what pakistani's want it to do are very different. e want peace but not on your terms. We want a mutual peace that is beneficial to Pakistan, kashmiris and all of the people of the subcontinent. Not one that just gives the reigns of the region to you on a platter.

    How many people here support those "send them to Pakistan" slogans? Based on that logic I can say that Pakistan is a nation full of terrorists. That doesn't make much sense, does it?

    It doesnt need many to support the slogans. Only a few with power.and a few in India is more than most european countries. Thats more than enough.

    We don't consider you guys as our enemies or something. If we did, we wouldn't be here on this forum trying to clear whatever misunderstanding that is between us.

    You may not. But your govt does. Every strategic move it makes keeps this either at its forefront or at the back of its mind.
    regards

  56. #56
    Debut
    Jan 2015
    Venue
    Karachi, Pakistan
    Runs
    35,637
    Mentioned
    1649 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Till you have extremist murderers like Modi ruling India there can be no chance of peace prevailing.


    #Hum apko container deingaye dharnay ke liyay

  57. #57
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Venue
    Attock
    Runs
    1,733
    Mentioned
    399 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have to commend India for one thing. Their strategic planners and policy makers are lot better and competent than ours. Since the inception of India, they have been working on a strategy that is both offensive and practical in nature. The similarity between India's present conduct and the inscriptions of 4th century B.C. in Arthashastra is striking.(Henry Kissinger sheds light on this in his 'World Order').

    On the other hand Pakistan's security planners and strategists have been reactionary and defensive in nature and as a result we suffered greatly. I think the only way for Pakistan to get out of this mess is to have a proactive, aggressive and a practical approach rather than being narrow and defense oriented.

  58. #58
    Debut
    Nov 2014
    Runs
    2,076
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    No man your army has destabilised your entire system. There is no proper political atmosphere. It’s a controlled environment which wouldn’t help organic development. How many times did your army kick your government out? It’s this lack of stability that makes the politics there a dirty game and creates bad leaders. Indian politics was very similar too (and in some places it still is) but the reasons were different. If the army was so good why isn’t there any progress in Pakistan? Economic progress isn’t there, we know that. It had several advantages over India when it started out but still it’s lagging far behind India. There isn’t any progress in Pakistan’s global image either. The army is hurting your global image by protecting terrorists. So your claim that a country ruled by the army would be better than a country ruled by the elected representatives of the people is not something me or anybody with some understanding of history would agree with .
    What "several advantages" are you talking about ? Pakistan was under-developped by the British (the literacy rate was around 5% in 1947), which used the peoples of today's Pakistan as a "martial race", in its military exercices and nothing else - but when it comes to administration/education/creating a crypto middle class/..., they concentrated on Bengal and the port cities like the erstwhile 'Bombay'.

    The Mughals too didn't put much stress in modern Pakistan, apart from Lahore and few other cities, where Akbar had to move the Mughal capital from Delhi in order to curb the revolts of Dula Bhatti.

    Why do you think 'Muhajirs', mainly migrants from U.P., have become the bureaucrats of Pakistan, despite representing some 2-3% of the pop. ? Because they were from the Mughal seats of power ; the same way why Bengali Brahmins have been over represented in Indian intellectual achievements, that is, because they were from the British seats of cultural activities.

    The only "advantage" Pakistan had over India was i) less population and ii) it's geopolitics, which were taken advantages of by Field Marshal Ayub Khan, who was a military dictator, as you could guess, and who made sure to put Pakistan's economy on track, to the extent that South Korea was looking towards it. You could say that GDP growth under a dictator is flawed because it's mainly about infrastructure and not institutional building, but the economy was strong.

    If you want to have an idea of how Pakistan was at its beginning, just think that if India, instead of having states like Maharashtra, Bengal, Tamil Nadu, etc was one Uttar Pradesh or two Bihar's.

    Also, who cares about "global image".

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    I know the situation here better than you bro. To be very honest, I’ve never heard anyone talk about this akhand Bharat thing on the streets or anywhere other than seeing a couple of guys talking about it on tv. I’m sure people will laugh if they get to know what it is. We have better things to think about. The problem here is that you guys haven’t had a chance to visit India. It’s a true plural society with great diversity. Attacking Pakistan is not in the agenda of its people or its government. Like Mr. Abid Rao once said, India will not takeover Pakistan even if Pakistan asks it to. You’re worrying about all these Hindu nationalism and stuff unnecessarily. If me sitting here isn’t worried about it, why should a Pakistani be worried about it? .
    You keep talking of guys on the streets while I mention the wider ideology. A random sample, from a parliamentarian, probably more important than the man on the streets you may have interacted with (esp. listen towards the very end) :


  59. #59
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by the Great Khan View Post
    Thanks for confirming the point I was making about a local policeman. You have clearly articulated China's wider broader strategic and economic desire and plan. As for Military bases , they have every right to considering they are practically surrounded by the US and its allies which now includes India. So counter moves from them are only understandable.
    I think you are underestimating Chinaís power. They shouldnít be worried about any country declaring war on them. Their problems are diplomatic which canít be solved through military power. Chinaís intentions are very clear. Theyíre trying to intimidate others. India sent a clear message to China during the Doklam standoff. They canít bully us. And both countries share a lot in common and there are good trade relations.

    Chinaís growth is not very organic. They donít follow a very sustainable model. Thatís why theyíre looking for new opportunities. Pakistan seems to be giving the Chinese full access to their economy, which is not at all a wise thing to do. You need the major industries to be dominated by domestic players.


    Yes and nobody is denying that. I have explained why they are a major player. It is in our constitution for there to be checks and balances. The problem we have is the politicians are not sticking to their part of the bargain. The army has had to intervene because time and again national security has been put at risk due to the whims and stupidity of a politician and their idiotic desire to maintain their wealth through corrupt means. Also the fact we have a large neighbour that has a policy to cause strife within our border, and you get an insecure environment. Hence why security is then an issue.
    If the Government is not doing its job, the court should intervene. If the court intervenes the people will intervene. Asking for armyís intervention is a very dangerous thing to do. And corruption cannot completely stagnate progress. India has had some extremely corrupt leaders. But that didnít prevent us from progressing.


    Why are they not investing? security and a lack of favourable business conditions e.g. controls and managing corruption. Who's job is it to initiate these reforms? The politicians not the army. They have had over a decade to sort out the issues. It can be done very quickly but they have not done it because they are too busy lining their pockets. That is the core issue in Pakistan. Not the interference of the army as Indians are lead to believe. Also we all know what has been going on with regards to security since 2008. And who has been responsible.
    They donít invest because of political uncertainties. Nobody knows whatís going to happen tomorrow. Investment in fixed assets is very risky in such a scenario. Itíll take time to inspire confidence in those companies. One major issue I noticed is the absence of a strong middle class. Either youíre rich or youíre poor. Some of these companies point out the lack of purchasing power which makes the heavy investments not worth it. So I think some work needs to be done at the lowest levels as well. A strong middle class is the strength of ANY economy. Proper development will take time and money. You spend a large % of your money for the army, which leaves you with little money to inject into the economy and the establishment to give it a boost.

    Had to intervene? no it didnt. It intervened and actually stoked a lot of the issues. There is enough stuff that I can post to show what was going on. A planned strategy to dismember Pakistan. Its openly admitted by your current PM. Even Manekshaw said it in one of his interviews. He had months to plan his operations. The PA were not expecting an Indian operation across the border. But I'll leave this for another thread.
    OK. Weíll invite Bangladeshi members too.

    Another myth sold to you by your sarkar. You have always done something. But this time because we now have SSG and LCB's embedded with our infantry units, your casualties are rising and are higher than previous encounters.
    I donít wish to discuss this because itíll lead to provocative statements. All Iíd say is that our army has now been given the license to hit back if necessary, which they do.

    No. I believe that your strategic planners have created a strategic plan to cut Pakistan into two and take the fertile lands of the Punjab within the nuke threshold. Thus forcing Pakistan to the negotiating table and ending the Kashmir issue by forcing us to make unbearable concessions. Its called cold start and part of your overall strategy to contain Pakistan. It is just the army's end of things. Your govt has been using other methods at the moment. It is to contain Pakistan. You may not see it put strategic planners think decades ahead. A peaceful stable Pakistan is a threat to India. That is your govts calculation. Otherwise they would be sitting in lahore sipping chai with our PM discussing rail and road links and economics.
    A peaceful, stable Pakistan would be good for India. But your version of Ďstableí seems to be a country controlled by the army. We tried sitting down and having discussions with your PM only to realise that thereís not much he can do. While the discussions between the countries are going on, the Pakistani army starts firing at the border. Itís very clear that somebody in Pakistan doesnít want peace between the two countries. And that somebody is your army. You can keep denying it.
    NS was very upset with one of those Ďshowsí by your army during a meeting between the two nations.

    If a war breaks out we will use it. We have made this crystal clear to your top brass. We have tactical nukes ready to do the job. From Nasr to artillery based weapons. They will be provided to local commanders to sue as they see fit. This scares the hell out of the US and hence why there wont be a war until we lose our nuke capability.
    You seem to be one of those guys who get excited at the thought of war.
    Donít like to discuss this but since you mentioned it, a few words on the matter.
    You wonít use it because thatíll be like committing suicide. We have rapid response systems that can launch counter strikes just as when your nuclear missiles reach our land. Youíll be able to destroy some parts of India with your weapons but in response the entire Pakistan will be destroyed. This is a well known fact even among the experts in Pakistan. Now stop this chest thumping. Both countries are not going to use it.

    You mean a civilian govt that neuters the army and lets the Indian state get on with what its doing in Kashmir and on our western border. Well that will never happen. Your idea of what the pakistan govt should be doing and what pakistani's want it to do are very different. e want peace but not on your terms. We want a mutual peace that is beneficial to Pakistan, kashmiris and all of the people of the subcontinent. Not one that just gives the reigns of the region to you on a platter.
    India has made it clear that ĎKashmirí is a closed chapter. You have no rights to interfere in it. You have your share of the land and we have ours. Most of the problems in Kashmir would be over if your army stops sending terrorists across the border and stop funding the stone pelters. The valley was very silent for two weeks following demonetisation. There wasnít any high value currency to distribute.

    You may not. But your govt does. Every strategic move it makes keeps this either at its forefront or at the back of its mind.
    India realises that Pakistan is not going to take any action on its own against the terror elements within it. Hence the diplomatic approach. This would not have happened had you convicted Hafiz Saeed following the Mumbai attacks. Instead you set him free and with the support of the army and the judiciary you mentioned, let him form a political party. You said your army has no intentions to get involved in politics and has decided to stay away from all that stuff. Well you should ask someone about the games played behind the formation of MML.

  60. #60
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enkidu_ View Post
    What "several advantages" are you talking about ? Pakistan was under-developped by the British (the literacy rate was around 5% in 1947), which used the peoples of today's Pakistan as a "martial race", in its military exercices and nothing else - but when it comes to administration/education/creating a crypto middle class/..., they concentrated on Bengal and the port cities like the erstwhile 'Bombay'.

    The Mughals too didn't put much stress in modern Pakistan, apart from Lahore and few other cities, where Akbar had to move the Mughal capital from Delhi in order to curb the revolts of Dula Bhatti.

    Why do you think 'Muhajirs', mainly migrants from U.P., have become the bureaucrats of Pakistan, despite representing some 2-3% of the pop. ? Because they were from the Mughal seats of power ; the same way why Bengali Brahmins have been over represented in Indian intellectual achievements, that is, because they were from the British seats of cultural activities.

    The only "advantage" Pakistan had over India was i) less population and ii) it's geopolitics, which were taken advantages of by Field Marshal Ayub Khan, who was a military dictator, as you could guess, and who made sure to put Pakistan's economy on track, to the extent that South Korea was looking towards it. You could say that GDP growth under a dictator is flawed because it's mainly about infrastructure and not institutional building, but the economy was strong.

    If you want to have an idea of how Pakistan was at its beginning, just think that if India, instead of having states like Maharashtra, Bengal, Tamil Nadu, etc was one Uttar Pradesh or two Bihar's.

    Also, who cares about "global image".



    You keep talking of guys on the streets while I mention the wider ideology. A random sample, from a parliamentarian, probably more important than the man on the streets you may have interacted with (esp. listen towards the very end) :

    The advantage of one language, one religion and one region. And, with its small population and smaller area it was much more manageable as a country.

    India was was still a country of different regions or kingdoms separated by language, culture and religion. Uniting all these people was quite a task and it took us a while. Even today, regionalism is a problem in India. The language barrier too is a big issue. But as a country, we somehow click.

    It’s not the leaders, it’s the people who make things happen. Leaders sometimes say things to make their minions and followers happy.
    I’ve never heard anybody talk about this akhand Bharat thing.
    Last edited by Mr.Q; 14th June 2018 at 16:27.

  61. #61
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Greenstorm View Post
    I have to commend India for one thing. Their strategic planners and policy makers are lot better and competent than ours. Since the inception of India, they have been working on a strategy that is both offensive and practical in nature. The similarity between India's present conduct and the inscriptions of 4th century B.C. in Arthashastra is striking.(Henry Kissinger sheds light on this in his 'World Order').

    On the other hand Pakistan's security planners and strategists have been reactionary and defensive in nature and as a result we suffered greatly. I think the only way for Pakistan to get out of this mess is to have a proactive, aggressive and a practical approach rather than being narrow and defense oriented.
    Who are Pakistan's security planners and strategists? They seem to be the political version of the PCB in cricket. Very basic and short term vision basically. I agree, India's has been a lot better thought out and has more dynamism, Pakistan's seems to have got lost somewhere around 50 years ago.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  62. #62
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Venue
    Attock
    Runs
    1,733
    Mentioned
    399 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    Who are Pakistan's security planners and strategists? They seem to be the political version of the PCB in cricket. Very basic and short term vision basically. I agree, India's has been a lot better thought out and has more dynamism, Pakistan's seems to have got lost somewhere around 50 years ago.
    Most unfortunate thing that happened to Pakistan was the death of Quaid-e-Azam soon after country's inception. This led to a severe leadership drought as there was no one visionary and capable enough to lead the country in such situation. It was only natural that military seized power from incompetent politicians at that time and since then they have been responsible for our security planning.

    I think a person from military background will generally make strategies based on limited factors and his approach will not encompass the whole spectrum. As a result, their strategies will mostly be basic and short term as you have observed. Despite all this, our military still deserves the credit that they have managed to keep us secure in a chaotic and challenging period since our inception. But now emphasis should not be on mere survival but dominance as well.

  63. #63
    Debut
    Jan 2001
    Runs
    8,330
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by blackanhyellow View Post
    So essentially its all Pak army's fault?

    What if Pak army stepped aside? There would be peace between Indian and the Pakistani civilian government?

    What do you think the Pakistani civillian government will just hand India Azad Kashmir and be subservient to India in the geopolitical sphere (i.e. Bangladesh)?

    I think not.

    As much as you want to make it a one sided affair, truth is India is not willing to negotiate, whether it is with the Pakistani army or civilian government or anyone else. India claims Kashmir as solely theirs and does not even consider it a dispute regardless what Pakistan or Kashmiris say.

    So blame Pak army all you want, but it takes two to tango.
    This is indeed raises many valid points. There is no question that the Pakistan army has developed an enormous stake in the Pakistani economy, a point most ably demonstrated by Ayesha Siddiqa. But the army's actions and outlook cannot be understood exclusively in terms of material interests. There is an ideological dimension as well. A strong commitment to the unity of Pakistan and a patriotic ethos permeates the institution. The idea that the army is the premier unifying force and that its own strength is entwined with the nation's strength is fallacious and self-absorbed but it is not entirely driven by self-interest. It is also shaped to large extent by a distinct institutional mindset. The work of Aqil Shah that seeks to enter "the habits of mind" of the army is particularly illuminating in this regard.

    Secondly, we should not - as implied by blackanhyellow - overlook that historically when it comes to foreign policy and approaches towards India, the attitudes of civilian and military elites have often converged. This is not driven by 'irrational' desires. Seen historically, such views have emerged within a context of a sense of strategic deficit in relation to India. Indeed the army was able to emerge in the early years as the preeminent institution largely due to the fact that Pakistan lacked strategic depth, was split into two wings separated by India and begun its life with a deep sense of existential insecurity arising from troubling relations from the outset with India and Afghanistan.

    Finally, to put all the blame on the Pakistani state must rate as a somewhat jaundiced viewpoint. Both states are at fault. As Ayesha Jalal and Sugata Bose stated in their work the insistence by nationalists of singular allegiance to the nation and the idea of unitary and indivisible sovereignty has often been the root of many of South Asia's problems. It is the "irreconcilable territorial claims put forth by India and Pakistan" which is "an empirical contradiction flowing not from any ‘conceptual differences’ but a remarkable ‘conceptual similarity’ shared by the leaders of India and Pakistan on the definition of sovereignty" that lies at heart of the dispute over Kashmir.

  64. #64
    Debut
    Mar 2011
    Runs
    1,123
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The status quo has been so entrenched into the governance, systems, public that no one can comprehend what peace would be like.

    The animosity is taught to each other from day one, through education, papers, television, movies and now social media. This happens generation after generation, so who knows what peace is like? Why try and achieve or spend effort on an unknown quantity?!

    The best case scenario now is to hope that the hate doesn't grow!

  65. #65
    Debut
    Feb 2018
    Runs
    1,254
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pakpak View Post
    So did Musharraf and Vajpayee, and so did the two govs again in 2006. Numerous ministers from us have said an agreement with India was close in 2006. Read up Musharaaf's 4 points, they are all over the internet. but then good ol Mush got himself booted, elections fiasco and Mumbai happened and years later here we are arguing with Indians who're all over our forums talking trash.
    Pakistan back-stabbed India during the Samjhauta Express negotiations and then Nawaz Sharif blamed Musharraf. Then in 2008 again all efforts for peace were derailed. Don't believe me? Check the youtube videos of PCB chairman and noted media person Najam Sethi on this matter. It's obviously difficult for any Indian government to trust Pakistan.

  66. #66
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Runs
    10,394
    Mentioned
    377 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    We can't because our politicians won't have any agenda to fool voters. We are third world countries and we will remain like that because we have no shortage of 'parhe likhe jaahils' in each countries who support these politicians.

  67. #67
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    94,393
    Mentioned
    1719 Post(s)
    Tagged
    15 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bhaag Viru Bhaag View Post
    We can't because our politicians won't have any agenda to fool voters. We are third world countries and we will remain like that because we have no shortage of 'parhe likhe jaahils' in each countries who support these politicians.
    So true. Problem seems to be more educated you are, more likely you are to cause more mayhem


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  68. #68
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    Yeah 99% of them don't care, that is why they troll Al Jazeera websites and spend all day posting 1000 word essays on Pakistani forums. Mate if you want to talk about nationalities who don't care, you could try Saudis, Chinese, Japanese, Iranians, Russians etc. You can write what you like about them here, they won't be replying.
    I said 99%. The remaining 1% equals 13 million. Get over your delusions about India, not even 1% of 1% (that would be 130,000) of Indians post to internet forums.

  69. #69
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    4,178
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bhaag Viru Bhaag View Post
    We can't because our politicians won't have any agenda to fool voters. We are third world countries and we will remain like that because we have no shortage of 'parhe likhe jaahils' in each countries who support these politicians.
    You are blaming the politicians, but that is being naive. The biggest beneficiaries of the Indo-Pak hostility are not the politicians, it is the Pak Army generals who live lives of multi-millionaires. Politicians may get some benefit from the hostility, but the entire reason given by the Pak Army for its dominance of Pakistan is that it needs to save the country from India.

  70. #70
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    4,283
    Mentioned
    430 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Why can't India and Pakistan come together? Let me spell it out as clearly as possible.

    1. In Pakistan the Army has the guns and can overthrow any civilian government that does not follow its foreign policy (like it did the NS government by starting the Kargil War).

    2. The Pakistani Army needs an external enemy to justify its economic dominance of the country and the continued fleecing of the Pakistani citizens. Pakistani Army generals acquire great wealth and power during and after their careers. In contrast Indian Army generals are paupers.

    3. India is the only feasible external enemy for the Pakistani Army to present to the Pakistani people.

    Comprende?
    Truer words were never spoken on this forum perhaps but I will add one more to the list - Religion. The diametrically opposite religious beliefs that the majority on each side follow makes it just a pipe-dream to have any sort of peace to prevail. Especially when Islam has no track record of peacefully co-existing with religions who are Idol worshipers. This is a big no-no for them. It is one bridge they aint going to cross.


    Sydney Bangalore Manchester Centurion Durban Jo'burg Mohali Colombo Dhaka Adelaide Kolkata

  71. #71
    Debut
    Nov 2014
    Runs
    2,076
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Many also miss that North and South Koreas are basically that, Koreans, they're of the same ethnicity.

    Pakistan and India host dozens of ethnic groups, and only one - Punjabis - are found in appreciable numbers in both groups (I'm not talking of few Sindhi migrants or those 'Pathans' with diluted Pashtun blood). But the thing is : Punjabis not only make 2-3% at best of India (even if over represented in Bollywood, the Army or cricket), but actually there's no "common Punjabi identity" ; a Muslim farmer from Pak Punjab, a Sikh one from Indian Punjab and a upper/middle class Punjabi (generally a Hindu Khatri) from New Delhi don't feel to belong to "one nation", for the reason that they don't share the religion.

    So that's why the comparison with South-North Korea is obsolete. If in Pak Punjab Lahore and Sialkot were separated it would have been a better analogy.

    US played that card here.
    Last edited by enkidu_; 16th June 2018 at 17:36.

  72. #72
    Debut
    Nov 2015
    Venue
    Karachi
    Runs
    11,692
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fairly close poll so far.

    India and Pakistan have met at the negotiating table many times before and will do so again.

  73. #73
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Runs
    10,394
    Mentioned
    377 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Why can't India and Pakistan come together? Let me spell it out as clearly as possible.

    1. In Pakistan the Army has the guns and can overthrow any civilian government that does not follow its foreign policy (like it did the NS government by starting the Kargil War).

    2. The Pakistani Army needs an external enemy to justify its economic dominance of the country and the continued fleecing of the Pakistani citizens. Pakistani Army generals acquire great wealth and power during and after their careers. In contrast Indian Army generals are paupers.

    3. India is the only feasible external enemy for the Pakistani Army to present to the Pakistani people.

    Comprende?
    Your 3rd point is pretty funny. How many enemies do we have? Why are we so obessed with Pakistan? Why do our politicians bring Pakistan during elections?

    Just replace India with Pakistan, Army with Politicians and Pakistan with India in your 3rd point and speak loudly.

  74. #74
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    I said 99%. The remaining 1% equals 13 million. Get over your delusions about India, not even 1% of 1% (that would be 130,000) of Indians post to internet forums.
    That's because a big majority of Indians are too poor to be online as you yourself have said. Like I said, you don't see other nationalities here like Chinese, Russians, Saudis etc, but I see you ignored that part. Not that I mind, but when you come out with rubbish like 99% of Indians don't give a hoot about Pakistan I am going to have to show you some home truths, otherwise of course you guys are valued members, you just need to learn some manners.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  75. #75
    Debut
    Nov 2017
    Runs
    2,035
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Narendra Modi Is Not An 'Advocate Of Peace Talks,' Says Pervez Musharraf, Claims Pakistan-US Ties Are At 'Lowest Ebb'

    Islamabad: Pakistan and India were on the path of peace and reconciliation under his regime, former Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf has said while claiming that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was not an "advocate of peace talks".

    The former president and chief of All Pakistan Muslim League (APML) in an interview with Voice of America claimed that when he was in power, India and Pakistan were on the "path of reconciliation", but that is not the case anymore, the Express Tribune reported.

    "At the time, I spoke to both the prime ministers, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh, they were both from different political parties but we wanted to move forward from the disputes,” he said.

    The 74-year-old retired general, who is facing high treason charges, has been living in Dubai since last year when he was allowed to leave Pakistan for medical treatment.

    Musharraf claimed that a four-point initiation of peace was strategised by the former president and was put in implementation by the leadership of both countries.

    The four points of contention included Siachen and Kashmir as well, he said.

    "We were working on my strategy because both sides wanted to have peace. This is not the case anymore. They want to undo us," he claimed.

    "Incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants to enforce supremacy in India and isn't an advocate of peace talks," he alleged.

    He alleged that there exists an "inherent bias" towards India's treatment as both possess nuclear arms, but no questions are raised on India.

    "Nobody asks India to control their assets. Pakistan became a nuclear state because India posed an undeniable existential threat,” he said.

    "The US should have stopped them, we have been loyal to them throughout,” he said.

    He said that Pak-US relations have suffered quite a blow and are currently at "the lowest ebb".

    Answering a question as to why there are strenuous relations between the two countries, Musharraf said, "US has supported India very openly from the Cold War era. And now again, the US is aligning itself with India against Pakistan, this affects us directly. We would like the UN to examine India's role in Afghanistan. A one-sided approach to the problem is negative.”

    https://www.firstpost.com/world/nare...b-4483789.html

  76. #76
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    "The US should have stopped them, we have been loyal to them throughout,” he said.

    Thank god he's gone, he's and absolute fool if he thinks you can have that approach in the modern world.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  77. #77
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    12,983
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    To bring someone to the negotiating table you need leverage and at the moment Pakistan has no leverage over India whatsoever.

    Economically India can afford the status quo, politically it relishes the status quo because it doesnít want a change in the LoC. Moreover the world doesnít care - not only does America, the EU, the UN etc not care but other than the odd token statement the Arab world and China donít care either. Even the opposition parties in India donít care as this is the one issue that unites politicians across the divide in India.

    The status quo is Indiaís desired solution therefore in their minds whatís the point in negotiating over something that you already have?

    Itís no accident that India was at its most vulnerable re Kashmir & Pakistan in the late 80s and early 90s when Kashmiri militancy was at its peak and economically India was a basket case. Neither of those factors are now relevant - in a post 9/11 world supporting cross border terrorists at the levels that we saw in the 80s and 90s is no longer feasible and economically India isnít going bankrupt anytime soon (in fact weíre seeing quite the opposite).

  78. #78
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Venue
    Jurassic Park.
    Runs
    6,384
    Mentioned
    85 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    No man your army has destabilised your entire system. There is no proper political atmosphere. Itís a controlled environment which wouldnít help organic development. How many times did your army kick your government out? Itís this lack of stability that makes the politics there a dirty game and creates bad leaders. Indian politics was very similar too (and in some places it still is) but the reasons were different. If the army was so good why isnít there any progress in Pakistan? Economic progress isnít there, we know that. It had several advantages over India when it started out but still itís lagging far behind India. There isnít any progress in Pakistanís global image either. The army is hurting your global image by protecting terrorists. So your claim that a country ruled by the army would be better than a country ruled by the elected representatives of the people is not something me or anybody with some understanding of history would agree with .

    I know the situation here better than you bro. To be very honest, Iíve never heard anyone talk about this akhand Bharat thing on the streets or anywhere other than seeing a couple of guys talking about it on tv. Iím sure people will laugh if they get to know what it is. We have better things to think about. The problem here is that you guys havenít had a chance to visit India. Itís a true plural society with great diversity. Attacking Pakistan is not in the agenda of its people or its government. Like Mr. Abid Rao once said, India will not takeover Pakistan even if Pakistan asks it to. Youíre worrying about all these Hindu nationalism and stuff unnecessarily. If me sitting here isnít worried about it, why should a Pakistani be worried about it? .




    We donít want your Kashmir sir. We donít even talk about it. Weíre happy with the one we have. Youíre the ones talking about Kashmir everywhere and demand discussions on it. Poor Kashmiris think you guys are trying to support them. Theyíre the ones suffering because of all these games. Do you guys really care about the Kashmiris on the Indian side? Be honest.
    Of course you want it!! That is why you keep crying about it calling it "PoK". We demand a discussion because it remains an outstanding issue. We care about justice as well as the Kashmiri people who die with Pakistani flags. Pak will let go of Kashmir if the people vote to remain with India after an honest referendum. There is no other way.


    PP's own self proclaimed sharpshooter and defender of Islam and Pakistan.

  79. #79
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    545
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by PakLFC View Post
    Of course you want it!! That is why you keep crying about it calling it "PoK". We demand a discussion because it remains an outstanding issue. We care about justice as well as the Kashmiri people who die with Pakistani flags. Pak will let go of Kashmir if the people vote to remain with India after an honest referendum. There is no other way.
    It is PoK. It’s a part of Pakistan and we have no problems with it. You have to understand that what we see today is a post partition situation. It’s not like India attacked some other country and annexed some part of Kashmir. It’s been a part of India since partition. The China - Tibet issue is a more serious matter and comes under unlawful occupation but you guys seem to have absolutely no issues with it.

    What are Pakistan flag bearers doing in India? They are free to move to Pakistan if they wish. India (or any nation) only cares about people who want peace. Recently the NDA (National Defence Academy) conducted an entrance exam there in the valley and the attendance was very good. So don’t paint the whole Kashmir ‘pro-Pakistan’. India offers far better facilities and options. There are many successful individuals from Kashmir and Kashmiri merchants are doing good business in different parts of India. It’s the situation in the valley that’s worrying everyone.

    You can’t demand a discussion on J&K because you have no business in the internal matters of our country. The fact is that Kashmir cannot exist as an independent state. Both countries know this very well. If India let go of Kashmir it’ll basically be a part of Pakistan. It’s very clear why Pakistan is so interested in it. An unstable Kashmir is not good for Kashmiris or for India but it’s good for Pakistan’s agenda. That’s why I asked you whether you really care about the Kashmiris in India or not. We saw what happened to the Ramzan ceasefire agreement.
    Last edited by Mr.Q; 18th June 2018 at 10:30.

  80. #80
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,749
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Q View Post
    It is PoK. It’s a part of Pakistan and we have no problems with it. You have to understand that what we see today is a post partition situation. It’s not like India attacked some other country and annexed some part of Kashmir. It’s been a part of India since partition. The China - Tibet issue is a more serious matter and comes under unlawful occupation but you guys seem to have absolutely no issues with it.

    What are Pakistan flag bearers doing in India? They are free to move to Pakistan if they wish. India (or any nation) only cares about people who want peace. Recently the NDA (National Defence Academy) conducted an entrance exam there in the valley and the attendance was very good. So don’t paint the whole Kashmir ‘pro-Pakistan’. India offers far better facilities and options. There are many successful individuals from Kashmir and Kashmiri merchants are doing good business in different parts of India. It’s the situation in the valley that’s worrying everyone.

    You can’t demand a discussion on J&K because you have no business in the internal matters of our country. The fact is that Kashmir cannot exist as an independent state. Both countries know this very well. If India let go of Kashmir it’ll basically be a part of Pakistan. It’s very clear why Pakistan is so interested in it. An unstable Kashmir is not good for Kashmiris or for India but it’s good for Pakistan’s agenda. That’s why I asked you whether you really care about the Kashmiris in India or not. We saw what happened to the Ramzan ceasefire agreement.

    If you truly believed in the integrity of India you would never accept Pakistan in the first place. If you do, then you should have no problem recognising that Kashmir in it's entirety should be Pakistan and that is why you get the majority of Kashmiris bearing Pakistan flags.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •