# Modi spoke India’s mind over CPEC



## The Eagle

*Modi spoke India’s mind over CPEC*
By Naveed Ahmad
Published: August 20, 2016






PHOTO: AFP

India is desperately pursuing her aspirations for global power status. With Washington and Moscow at its back, Delhi has recalibrated its approach towards its ‘obstructionist’ neighbours. Not only has it warned China against developing the economic corridor via Pakistan but also threatened its nuclear-armed western neighbour of dire consequences in Balochistan. Not long ago, Pakistan had arrested a senior Indian spy Kulbhushan Yadav alias Hussein Mubarak Patel carrying a valid Iranian visa.

For Narendra Modi, condemnations of India’s blatantly excessive use of force or any mention of disputed Jammu and Kashmir state are non-issues. To his chagrin, the killing of Burhan Wani on July 8 sparked protests, which led to the deaths of over 50 and left 5,000 Kashmiris wounded. The issue of Indian security forces’ heavy reliance on pellet guns caused an uproar at home and aboard.

*Inaugurating fleet tanker: CPEC will defeat enemies’ plot: PM*

Pakistan declared Burhan Wani a Kashmiri leader (whom the Indian government termed terrorist) and his death an ‘extra-judicial’ killing.

Islamabad’s support for Kashmiri resistance left Modi fuming. On August 13, the Indian Prime Minister stated, “Pakistan forgets that it bombs its own citizens using fighter planes. The time has come when Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Balochistan and K-P.” The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader further added, “What kind of life is this, inspired by terrorism? What kind of government set-up is it that is inspired by terrorism? The world will know about it, and that’s sufficient for me.” His anger soared when Pakistani premier Nawaz Sharif dedicated the Independence Day celebrations to the struggle of Kashmiris.

On August 15, the BJP leader and Gujrat’s infamous chief minister appeased his hard-line supporters and proxies elsewhere by stating, “The people of Balochistan, the people of Gilgit, the people of Azad Kashmir have thanked me in such a manner, from places that I have never been and never had a chance to meet, they have sent wishes to the people of India and thanked us. I am grateful to them.”

Modi’s first Balochistan reference, coming days after two terrorists attacks on Quetta hospitals were squarely blamed on India’s RAW intelligence agency, might not have been welcomed by the people of Balochistan but certain renegade militants and activists did appreciate his concern.

Bramdagh Bugti, grandson of Akbar Bugti, not only thanked Modi but also hoped Narendra Modi would raise this issue at international forums. He maintained: “It is too late; we can’t remain with Pakistan any longer as it has deprived us of basic rights.”

Mama Qadeer, another renegade Baloch, told the German Radio, “India supports our cause and the Baloch people appreciate it. Islamabad takes it as Indian interference. They blamed India’s RAW for the Quetta attack. They like to blame everything on RAW. The authorities even call me a RAW agent.”

None of the messages from India or its alleged proxies in Balochistan were oblique.

Delhi’s sensitivity and persistent failure to integrate Jammu and Kashmir in its federation has reached an epic level. Not only are the harsh laws there to stay in Kashmir but BJP-led coalition in the centre is also going all out to temper with the state’s special status.

*UN chief lauds Pakistan’s resolve for peaceful Kashmir settlement*

A few exceptions notwithstanding, India’s opposition parties including Congress have backed the BJP approach on Kashmir and Balochistan both. Delhi has refused to pursue a political course to lessen the tensions, signalling more intense military operations coupled with curfew and crackdown. Interestingly, the leaders of occupied Kashmir including Mehbooba Mufti, Omar Abdullah and Mohammed Yousuf Tarigami have refused to subscribe to Delhi’s approach. They don’t see Pakistan instigating the violence, which has made the BJP quite upset.

Some veteran politicians and former diplomats, in their personal capacity, pointed to Modi’s flawed explicit support for Balochisatan resistance and linked it with Kashmir. They believe that the Indian leader has strengthened the Pakistani narrative of a foreign hand in Balochistan on the one hand, and weakened Delhi’s long-held stance on Kashmir. The external affairs ministry has not yet rearticulated Modi’s outburst in sync with its long-held positions. Sushma Swraj, the Indian foreign minister, matches Modi’s profile as a hardliner.

Though the State Department has not condemned India’s excessive use of forces in Kashmir, it has clearly distanced itself from the Indian premier’s assertions. Washington insists that Pakistan and India must resolve the Kashmir dispute bilaterally, a position that Islamabad sees as biased and hypocritical.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has been a dove when it comes to relations with India. His cosiness with Modi has been branded as ‘bromance’. The unexpectedly harsh tone of Delhi leaves him with little choice but to step back. Despite its limited leverage over Islamabad, Washington is trying to press her for a softer stance towards Delhi. The State Department has continued its mantra of do-more against terrorists, which India interprets to its convenience. The just-concluded visit of Norway’s foreign minister may offer a silver lining, only if India exercises restraint in Kashmir.

The current India-Pakistan tension can lead to both limited conflict along the Line of Control and the Working Boundary, as well as a more intense proxy war in Balochistan and elsewhere in the country. Islamabad may retaliate in the same way. The Modi government has signalled zero tolerance for China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. The strategic community there is almost sure that Pakistan will reap multi-faceted benefits in the longer term. While India is actively engaging its navy in South China Sea, it can’t afford a Chinese naval base in Gwadar, on the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz. The Indian strategic community is largely of the view that Delhi has edge over Pakistan in diplomatic, air, land, naval and missile capabilities. Delhi advised against repeating the same mistake it did in dealing Pakistan’s nuclear program. Modi’s Balochistan references are anything, but no slips of tongue.

*Naveed Ahmad is a Pakistani investigative journalist and academic with extensive reporting experience in the Middle East and North Africa. He is based in Doha and Istanbul. He tweets @naveed360*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## somebozo

Indians are passive aggressive and to trust them would always be fatal..be it political or professional life...as their culture goes moo pe ram ram baghal ma churi...

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Pulsar

The plain fact is that the *CPEC is being built in DISPUTED TERRITORY* which is against norms. 

Some have said that India has built dams and other infrastructure in the 'disputed' region of Kashmir, so what's the problem? But there's a huge difference in a third country building and using infrastructure there. So WTF is China doing in disputed territory? 

As per the UN Resolutions, Pakistan is required to withdraw ALL its forces from P0K/GB to the satisfaction of the UN after which a plebiscite is to be held. If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## HttpError

We all know after CPEC things will be very different in this region. The can try W.E they want but CPEC will get completed and then we can play the game by our rules. After CPEC Baluchistan chapter will end forever then we can completely focus on Indian Occupied Kashmir and Khalistan, Oh yes and not to forget about Afghanistan.

Funny part is future SUPA Powa has knelt down to China and crying like sissy and urging not to build CPEC. Do they even have any shame ?

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## Hell hound

come on nawaz grow a spine you are PM of a nuclear state talk to him in the tone he understand.political differences aside we will back you on this matter

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## kabooter_maila

Pulsar said:


> The plain fact is that the *CPEC is being built in DISPUTED TERRITORY* which is against norms.
> 
> Some have said that India has built dams and other infrastructure in the 'disputed' region of Kashmir, so what's the problem? But there's a huge difference in a third country building and using infrastructure there. So WTF is China doing in disputed territory?
> 
> As per the UN Resolutions, Pakistan is required to withdraw ALL its forces from P0K/GB to the satisfaction of the UN after which a plebiscite is to be held. If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?


"...and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?" Must be living in fool's paradise. One can only wonder how in world would you assume that the people of Indian occupied J&K would prefer to be Indian now if they haven't accepted being Indian despite losing more than a hundred thousand lives while fighting against three-quarter of a million Indian military forces. And why the people of Azad Kashmir would prefer India in any plebiscite? You better keep living in your paradise. The people of J&K know what to do for achieving their goal.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Jf Thunder

Pulsar said:


> The plain fact is that the *CPEC is being built in DISPUTED TERRITORY* which is against norms.
> 
> Some have said that India has built dams and other infrastructure in the 'disputed' region of Kashmir, so what's the problem? But there's a huge difference in a third country building and using infrastructure there. So WTF is China doing in disputed territory?
> 
> As per the UN Resolutions, Pakistan is required to withdraw ALL its forces from P0K/GB to the satisfaction of the UN after which a plebiscite is to be held.* If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?*


you can have CPEC then

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Moonlight

Pulsar said:


> So WTF is China doing in disputed territory?



Just getting on nerves of Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Pomegranate

India can never digest CPEC .............

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## paki_rambo

Pulsar said:


> As per the UN Resolutions, Pakistan is required to withdraw ALL its forces from P0K/GB to the satisfaction of the UN after which a plebiscite is to be held. If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?



according to UN resolution Pakistan is to withdraw troops and tribesman from the region who entered with the purpose of fighting,and that has happen long ago as no tribesman are present in the region whereas India was asked to keep minimum security personnel and they have infested the region.
if UN starts enforcing the resolution and IOK accedes to Pakistan what will happen to your dams and development projects

and its not against the norm to start a development project in a disputed region

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SrNair

It seems CPEC is some kind of elixir .
No other nation in this world trusts a foreign power like this for their own existence 
Again in Pakistan anything can happen

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Star Wars

Putting all your eggs in one basket is a bad idea, but ...Pakistan is free to do as they wish...


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Pulsar said:


> The plain fact is that the *CPEC is being built in DISPUTED TERRITORY* which is against norms.
> 
> Some have said that India has built dams and other infrastructure in the 'disputed' region of Kashmir, so what's the problem? But there's a huge difference in a third country building and using infrastructure there. So WTF is China doing in disputed territory?
> 
> As per the UN Resolutions, Pakistan is required to withdraw ALL its forces from P0K/GB to the satisfaction of the UN after which a plebiscite is to be held. If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?



India don't care when China protest over Indian infrastructure projects in South Tibet and you guys become sensitive when Pakistan is doing infrastructure in their soil? what kind of double standard is this?



SrNair said:


> It seems CPEC is some kind of elixir .
> No other nation in this world trusts a foreign power like this for their own existence
> Again in Pakistan anything can happen



Sour grape Indian, you guys just didn't find a trustworthy partner to massively invest as China did,even the mighty Japan just play wait and see attitude toward India regarding investment, they rather invest in South East Asia such Myanmar, Vietnam than India...LMAO. and now you turn around and accuse Pakistan of been naïve.



Star Wars said:


> Putting all your eggs in one basket is a bad idea, but ...Pakistan is free to do as they wish...



And you think Pakistan will allow Indian egg on their basket?  when CPEC is over, Pakistan basket will be full of FDI eggs exception of India

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Hellfire

The Eagle said:


> Islamabad’s support for Kashmiri resistance left Modi fuming. On August 13, the Indian Prime Minister stated, “Pakistan forgets that it bombs its own citizens using fighter planes. The time has come when Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Balochistan and K-P.” The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader further added, “What kind of life is this, inspired by terrorism? What kind of government set-up is it that is inspired by terrorism? The world will know about it, and that’s sufficient for me.” His anger soared when Pakistani premier Nawaz Sharif dedicated the Independence Day celebrations to the struggle of Kashmiris.



@The Eagle The underlined portion, another act of imprudence which led to the whole cycle of statements. It is exactly the thing that is meant to ensure a perpetuation of violence as means of state policy. A contrarian view to the claimed stance of Pakistan to be fighting for peace and security as also the welfare of the Kashmiri people.



The Eagle said:


> Delhi’s sensitivity and *persistent failure to integrate Jammu and Kashmir in its federation has reached an epic level.* Not only are the harsh laws there to stay in Kashmir but BJP-led coalition in the centre is also going all out to temper with the state’s special status.



J&K is an autonomous state under Constitution of India genius (the author not at you @The Eagle ), hence it can not be "integrated".

Another ignorant claim. Article 368 of the Constitution gives the right to India to abrogate Article 370 unilaterally. We have not done that till date!

In short, highly ignorant observations of the author.

Rest is all utter balderdash.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pomegranate

SrNair said:


> It seems CPEC is some kind of elixir .
> No other nation in this world trusts a foreign power like this for their own existence
> Again in Pakistan anything can happen


i am happy that india is worried about CPEC and they should be Pakistan is next big power in the region. india has only made enemies in the region with CPEC pakistan will make history and all the regional countires except jealous india will respect pakistan .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

Pomegranate said:


> i am happy that india is worried about CPEC and they should be Pakistan is next big power in the region. india has only made enemies in the region with CPEC pakistan will make history and all the regional countires except jealous india will respect pakistan .



Good luck with that .
Big power ?
When other nations mocks you with these sorry state of affairs in diplomacy,economy democracy of Pakistan ,big power ambition is good .
GDP of the Maharashtra ,of course we should be jealous with Pakistan's acheivement 



Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> India don't care when China protest over Indian infrastructure projects in South Tibet and you guys become sensitive when Pakistan is doing infrastructure in their soil? what kind of double standard is this?
> 
> 
> 
> Sour grape Indian, you guys just didn't find a trustworthy partner to massively invest as China did,even the mighty Japan just play wait and see attitude toward India regarding investment, they rather invest in South East Asia such Myanmar, Vietnam than India...LMAO. and now you turn around and accuse Pakistan of been naïve.
> 
> 
> 
> And you think Pakistan will allow Indian egg on their basket?  when CPEC is over, Pakistan basket will be full of FDI eggs exception of India



First of all .We are really appreaciate the business tactics of China.You single handedly destroying whatever that remains in Pak industry .
Congratulations.

Did you read the recent Global Times ?
Even they are jumping up and down because of our GST .According to current statistics 
we are the top one in FDI , after 2017 GST will implement.
Then you see the real meaning of FDI
Emotions are good but except Pakistan noother nations use emotional priorities for their policies.
Not even Chinese


----------



## Imran Khan

he is plain chutiya once he say JK is not an issue its internal matter of india and then declare it disputed Territory

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## third eye

Pomegranate said:


> India can never digest CPEC .............


In a way you are right.

Indians cannot digest how a nation can mortgage itself and it's territory to another nation to use and exploit at will & have China to to it something it should have for itself in the first place.

Thanks to both the incompetence of its present & past leaders including the adored Generals Pak after 69 years finds itself out of funds & ideas . It then chooses to mortgage the future of generations that follow by lying prone to be exploited.

Two nations were created in Aug 47. One sends multiple satellites in the sky the other pledges itself & the icing on the cake is that this act of intellectual bankruptcy is being celebrated !

Yes , Indians cannot digest this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pulsar

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> India don't care when China protest over Indian infrastructure projects in South Tibet and you guys become sensitive when Pakistan is doing infrastructure in their soil? what kind of double standard is this?


South Tibet? Where the fuk is it? If you're meaning Arunachal Pradesh, then it has absolutely nothing to do with your Han dynasty. It is and will always remain a state of the Indian Union. You can go crying to whomever you want to or climb the nearest pole. India is not Burkina Faso or a country in the SCS that you can bully. Don't forget the pasting the PLA got in 1967 at Nathula by the Indian Army when you tried to encroach into Indian territory. So don't try anything stupid.



paki_rambo said:


> according to UN resolution Pakistan is to withdraw troops and tribesman from the region who entered with the purpose of fighting,and that has happen long ago as no tribesman are present in the region whereas India was asked to keep minimum security personnel and they have infested the region.
> if UN starts enforcing the resolution and IOK accedes to Pakistan what will happen to your dams and development projects
> 
> and its not against the norm to start a development project in a disputed region


Do you even know WTF you're talking? Have you even bothered to read the UN Security Resolutions? I bet not otherwise you wouldn't be talking rubbish.

And for your info, according to Part 2 of the Resolution, *as a first step*, Pakistan had withdrawn ALL its forces from J&K,* the second step was for India to gradually withdraw* *but keep a minimum number of troops in the region for security. The third step was for a plebiscite to be held. You didn't withdraw. It's almost 70 years and we're still waiting. *



kabooter_maila said:


> "...and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?" Must be living in fool's paradise. One can only wonder how in world would you assume that the people of Indian occupied J&K would prefer to be Indian now if they haven't accepted being Indian despite losing more than a hundred thousand lives while fighting against three-quarter of a million Indian military forces. And why the people of Azad Kashmir would prefer India in any plebiscite? You better keep living in your paradise. The people of J&K know what to do for achieving their goal.


Lol! You're funny! Your name is 'Kabooter'? Nuff said!


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

Analyst is quite correct that entire hindu empire is of the same thinking..this modi is just announcing their plans for Pak in public.

CPEC is on track and will remain on track. The Chinese and Pak intelligence services know what the ******** are planning and are capable of. So Sino-Pak friends are prepared.

Also the tragic fact is that hindian terrorism is going to grow in Pak lands. The so called Baloch leaders are foreign assets. Bought and paid to say what they are ordered to do.

Dalai worked with CIA and RAW to bad mouth China all these decades...zero effect. Free Chinese Tibet is a shinning example of this. While the hindu occupied South Tibet is still suffering.

So, if the ******** think they have diplomatic power and can use these Baloch traitors again Pak...then good luck to ********...


CPEC is a ground reality and FDI is going to come as well. Pak is only going to get stronger.

If ******** think that because of their noisemaking or troublemaking China will stop then their delusions are beyond cure. China does not make troubles but is Never afraid of troublemakers...

To Pak friends...please, never underestimate the ********. Never. They will talk peace while plan to destroy you. 

All the best wishes to Pak friends. Crush these foreign assets and their sponsors. Eliminate all hindian sponsored terrorists.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## paki_rambo

Pulsar said:


> Do you even know WTF you're talking? Have you even bothered to read the UN Security Resolutions? I bet not otherwise you wouldn't be talking rubbish.
> 
> And for your info, according to Part 2 of the Resolution, *as a first step*, Pakistan had withdrawn ALL its forces from J&K,* the second step was for India to gradually withdraw* *but keep a minimum number of troops in the region for security. The third step was for a plebiscite to be held. You didn't withdraw. It's almost 70 years and we're still waiting.*




agreed sir the first step was withdrawal of tribesman which has happen long ago 
the next step was withdrawal of indian forces in stages which has never happen

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## idune

Pulsar said:


> South Tibet? Where the fuk is it? If you're meaning Arunachal Pradesh, then it has absolutely nothing to do with your Han dynasty. It is and will always remain a state of the Indian Union. You can go crying to whomever you want to or climb the nearest pole. India is not Burkina Faso or a country in the SCS that you can bully. Don't forget the pasting the PLA got in 1967 at Nathula by the Indian Army when you tried to encroach into Indian territory. So don't try anything stupid.



india is in illegal possession of South Tibet or Arunachal Pradesh by illegal transfer of then colonial power UK - that is historic fact. In fact there are many other parts of india today that is illegally occupied by india or illegally inherited. Like Kashmir and Sikkim which are under illegal indian occupation.Screaming and chest thumping by indians does not make the land as india.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Brickwall

paki_rambo said:


> agreed sir the first step was withdrawal of tribesman which has happen long ago
> the next step was withdrawal of indian forces in stages which has never happen
> 
> View attachment 327703




Read the resolution carefully, it ask Pakistan to withdraw not only tribesman but also pakistan nationals. One the pakistan fulfills the condition, then only Indian security forces will be reduced not withdrawn

Reference http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/47(1948)



idune said:


> india is in illegal possession of South Tibet or Arunachal Pradesh by illegal transfer of then colonial power UK - that is historic fact. In fact there are many other parts of india today that is illegally occupied by india or illegally inherited. Like Kashmir and Sikkim which are under illegal indian occupation.Screaming and chest thumping by indians does not make the land as india.



Is it so, in that case most of country who got independence from colonial power will be under illegal occupation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## third eye

idune said:


> india is in illegal possession of South Tibet or Arunachal Pradesh by illegal transfer of then colonial power UK - that is historic fact. In fact there are many other parts of india today that is illegally occupied by india or illegally inherited. Like Kashmir and Sikkim which are under illegal indian occupation.*Screaming and chest thumping by indians does not make the land as india*.



You are right. Screaming & chest thumping does not make anyone an owner of the land.

Possession does & India possess the land for 69 years.

As regards ' illegal transfer ' by the Brits , those who have an issue on it should speak to the British.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jaam92

This is what happening in Kashmir they talked about our peaceful land lol 




__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1079903908771888


----------



## gslv mk3

Pomegranate said:


> i am happy that india is worried about CPEC and they should be Pakistan is next big power in the region.



Yes, you'll become the next major power by mortgaging your territory & letting someone else build a logistics corridor.



Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Sour grape Indian, you guys just didn't find a trustworthy partner to massively invest as China did,even the mighty Japan just play wait and see attitude toward India regarding investment



Haha, typical Chinese troll. I guess you know nothing about the Industrial corridors being built in India with Japanese investment.

https://defence.pk/threads/delhi-mumbai-industrial-corridor-dmic.379702/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Liquidmetal

If the CPEC takes place it will be a massive investment in developing the infrastructure of PK. This is a big choke for india and the indians. Of course it is much easier dealing with a poor pakistan compared with a PK that is developing and moving towards a better GDP and greater equilibrium of wealth for all people in PK. If India is having such a problem with poor stone age Pakistan, imagine one that is doing well and is attracting positive consideration from the world including other investors.


----------



## I M Sikander

Pulsar said:


> UN after which a plebiscite is to be held. If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?


Nice joke man. Aren't 42 day continuous curfew is enough to show you how much Kashmiris hate india.



SrNair said:


> It seems CPEC is some kind of elixir .
> No other nation in this world trusts a foreign power like this for their own existence
> Again in Pakistan anything can happen


I smell a butt hurt.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pulsar

Ranasikander said:


> Nice joke man. Aren't 42 day continuous curfew is enough to show you how much Kashmiris hate india.


Before quacking like a duck, did you even know that only 6 out of 22 districts of J&K are creating problems? The rest care a damn! I bet you didn't know that.



idune said:


> india is in illegal possession of South Tibet or Arunachal Pradesh by illegal transfer of then colonial power UK - that is historic fact. In fact there are many other parts of india today that is illegally occupied by india or illegally inherited. Like Kashmir and Sikkim which are under illegal indian occupation.Screaming and chest thumping by indians does not make the land as india.


Advice: Morons should mind their own business and stop boot-licking the Chinese when they know squat.



paki_rambo said:


> agreed sir the first step was withdrawal of tribesman which has happen long ago
> the next step was withdrawal of indian forces in stages which has never happen
> View attachment 327703


Please stop obfuscating the issue and clutching at straws. Here's what the Resolution says....






So brother, it's not only tribesmen who are still occupying parts of P0K but the Pak Army (Pakistani Nationals) too which had entered the state for the purpose of fighting and which was led by Brig Akbar Khan who invaded J&K in Operation Gulmarg in 1947. Or do you consider the PA not be Pak nationals? Are they from Mars?


----------



## Mugwop

indian sadist logic: Pakistan withdraw all their forces from Azad Kashmir while indian forces get to stay in iok


----------



## Areesh

Pulsar said:


> Please stop obfuscating the issue and clutching at straws. Here's what the Resolution says....
> 
> View attachment 327784
> 
> 
> So brother, it's not only tribesmen who are still occupying parts of P0K but the Pak Army (Pakistani Nationals) too which had entered the state for the purpose of fighting and which was led by Brig Akbar Khan who invaded J&K in Operation Gulmarg in 1947. Or do you consider the PA not be Pak nationals? Are they from Mars?



Brother kindly take some time to refute the famous Indian lies about UN resolution.

@Azlan Haider

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hellfire

@Pulsar 

Have posted 6 questions 

https://defence.pk/threads/the-kashmir-dispute—the-faultlines-by-dr-m-k-teng.440732/page-3

Ask them to first answer them sequentially.


----------



## Mirza Jatt

gslv mk3 said:


> Yes, you'll become the next major power by mortgaging your territory & letting someone else build a logistics corridor.



the best post... this reminds me of some idiot who claimed in a video that once CPEC is complete, the drains will flow with gold in Pakistan  and here they are already claiming Pakistan to be next super power due to this CPEC. I honestly pray that this CPEC is over soon and then the reality come in front.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

Ranasikander said:


> Nice joke man. Aren't 42 day continuous curfew is enough to show you how much Kashmiris hate india.
> 
> 
> I smell a butt hurt.



Of Course ,You are written off all of your nations industry to Chinese and so we have butthurt .Funny logic.


----------



## Pulsar

hellfire said:


> @Pulsar
> 
> Have posted 6 questions
> 
> https://defence.pk/threads/the-kashmir-dispute—the-faultlines-by-dr-m-k-teng.440732/page-3
> 
> Ask them to first answer them sequentially.


Excellent riposte to the jingoism and half baked knowledge of some of our esteemed Pakistani friends here! They have this inveterate habit of clutching at straws to defend the indefensible. They'll have no answers to your questions!

Another question that they've tried to obfuscate and never really got around answering is:

In spite of the Standstill Agreement signed by Pakistan and the Maharaja, what prompted the Pakistan Army aided by tribals who were mostly from the Abottabad region of Pakistan to invade Kashmir in 1947? This was Operation 'Gulmarg' under Brig Akbar Khan. No answer! But they keep up the monotonous charade that it was India that invaded Kashmir! 

Goebbels' famously said that* “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”* And our Pakistani friends are doing just that!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hellfire

Pulsar said:


> Excellent riposte to the jingoism and half baked knowledge of some of our esteemed Pakistani friends here! They have this inveterate habit of clutching at straws to defend the indefensible. They'll have no answers to your questions!
> 
> Another question that they've tried to obfuscate and never really got around answering is:
> 
> In spite of the Standstill Agreement signed by Pakistan and the Maharaja, what prompted the Pakistan Army aided by tribals who were mostly from the Abottabad region of Pakistan to invade Kashmir in 1947? This was Operation 'Gulmarg' under Brig Akbar Khan. No answer! But they keep up the monotonous charade that it was India that invaded Kashmir!
> 
> Goebbels' famously said that* “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”* And our Pakistani friends are doing just that!




Just the beginning. Am not going further till I work it out with people I was engaging. Stuck at work, hence, nonsensical short posts till I get free time.

Next, you will notice that majority want Kashmiris to have freedom. Yet a few days back their PM said _"Kashmir banega Pakistan"_ ask them to clarify that.

Cheers.


----------



## M. Sarmad

Areesh said:


> Brother kindly take some time to refute the famous Indian lies about UN resolution.
> 
> @Azlan Haider




@Pulsar 

_The 'terms' of the UNSC Resolutions in Kashmir require an agreement between India, Pakistan and UNSC appointed mediators on demilitarization. There is no requirement for a unilateral and unconditional withdrawal upon Pakistan.
_
As for the Indian claim that "Plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw it's forces", this Indian claim, just like many other Indian claims, is not accepted by anyone outside India.


Sir Owen Dixon, the UN appointed official mediator, reported to the Security Council that,

_*"In the end, I became convinced that India`s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any such form, or to provisions governing the period of the plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation, and other forms of abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled." *(Para 52 of Document S/1971)_


_The London Economist stated that _*"the whole world can see that India, which claims the support of this majority [the Kashmiri people]...has been obstructing a holding of an internationally supervised plebiscite. From this the world opinion can only conclude that India really has no confidence that the vote would go in its favour" *_The Economist (London), Feb 18, 1950_



Sir Owen Dixon was the UN appointed official mediator, he blamed India for halting the process. But the Indians say that he was biased against India. This, however is not true.Sir Owen Dixon didn't view many of Pakistan's actions in Kashmir as legally justified. And it was not him only. As per UN Resolution of August 13, 1948, India agreed to begin to withdraw the bulk of its forces from that State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission. But that agreement was never reached and that was what halted the process. And therefore the commission didn't ask Pakistan to withdraw its forces. Pakistan agreed to the UN proposals on demilitarization. But India rejected them.


From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals were made which India rejected. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.

_--------------------_


*. *Since 1949, it has become evident that India refuses to agree to demilitarization in any form or sequence so as to permit a free and impartial plebiscite. 


*. *This refusal first presented itself as a matter of interpretation of the 13 August and 5 January resolutions. 


*. *India argued that Parts II and III were contingent upon implementation of Part 1. Therefore, there was no question of implementing Parts II and III or the 5 January resolution which dealt with the plebiscite.

*. *Pakistan contended that Part I had been met, and that it was time to proceed with demilitarization under Part II, to prepare for implementation of the 5 January resolution. 



*. *Disagreement arose over the method by which the withdrawal of Pakistani and Indian troops would be synchronized


*. *In an effort to break this deadlock, on August 26, 1949, the Commission proposed arbitration regarding the issues raised relating to Part II of the 13 August resolution. 


*. *The arbitrator was to decide the questions according to equity and his decision was to be binding on the parties. 


*. *Pakistan accepted the proposal, but India rejected it." On August 13, India also rejected a similar proposal for arbitration by President Truman and British Prime Minister Attlee. 


*. *On December 17, 1949, the Security Council asked its President, General A.G.L. McNaughton of Canada, to meet with India and Pakistan to settle the outstanding issues."" McNaughton met informally with the parties to search for a mutually satisfactory basis for dealing with the questions at issue. 

In general, Pakistan accepted McNaughton's proposals, but India did not.' A Security Council resolution based on these proposals, adopted on March 14, 1950, was similarly rejected by India. 



*. *In reports to the Security Council in 1952, U.N. Representative Dr. Frank P. Graham noted that the principal points of difference between the parties continued to be the quality of forces each should maintain after demilitarization and the time when the plebiscite administrator should assume his duties


*. *From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals (for demilitarization) were made which India rejected. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.


And you still expect the UN to blame Pakistan and not India ?


Now read what Sir Owen Dixon had said. Do you get it now ?


*. *The Indian claim that Plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw its forces, in the face of this clear and irrefutable evidence, is patently an attempt to deceive the world. 



*.*The Latin maxim "_Nullus oommodum capere potest de injuria sua propria" _(No advantage may be gained from one’s own wrong) means in Kashmir context that India cannot frustrate attempts to create conditions ripe for a troop withdrawal and ceasefire in order to avoid carrying out its obligations to hold a plebiscite.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Areesh

Azlan Haider said:


> @Pulsar
> 
> _The 'terms' of the UNSC Resolutions in Kashmir require an agreement between India, Pakistan and UNSC appointed mediators on demilitarization. There is no requirement for a unilateral and unconditional withdrawal upon Pakistan.
> _
> As for the Indian claim that "Plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw it's forces", this Indian claim, just like many other Indian claims, is not accepted by anyone outside India.
> 
> 
> Sir Owen Dixon, the UN appointed official mediator, reported to the Security Council that,
> 
> _*"In the end, I became convinced that India`s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any such form, or to provisions governing the period of the plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation, and other forms of abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled." *(Para 52 of Document S/1971)_
> 
> 
> _The London Economist stated that _*"the whole world can see that India, which claims the support of this majority [the Kashmiri people]...has been obstructing a holding of an internationally supervised plebiscite. From this the world opinion can only conclude that India really has no confidence that the vote would go in its favour" *_The Economist (London), Feb 18, 1950_
> 
> 
> 
> Sir Owen Dixon was the UN appointed official mediator, he blamed India for halting the process. But the Indians say that he was biased against India. This, however is not true.Sir Owen Dixon didn't view many of Pakistan's actions in Kashmir as legally justified. And it was not him only. As per UN Resolution of August 13, 1948, India agreed to begin to withdraw the bulk of its forces from that State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission. But that agreement was never reached and that was what halted the process. And therefore the commission didn't ask Pakistan to withdraw its forces. Pakistan agreed to the UN proposals on demilitarization. But India rejected them.
> 
> 
> From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals were made which India rejected. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.
> 
> _--------------------_
> 
> 
> *. *Since 1949, it has become evident that India refuses to agree to demilitarization in any form or sequence so as to permit a free and impartial plebiscite.
> 
> 
> *. *This refusal first presented itself as a matter of interpretation of the 13 August and 5 January resolutions.
> 
> 
> *. *India argued that Parts II and III were contingent upon implementation of Part 1. Therefore, there was no question of implementing Parts II and III or the 5 January resolution which dealt with the plebiscite.
> 
> *. *Pakistan contended that Part I had been met, and that it was time to proceed with demilitarization under Part II, to prepare for implementation of the 5 January resolution.
> 
> 
> 
> *. *Disagreement arose over the method by which the withdrawal of Pakistani and Indian troops would be synchronized
> 
> 
> *. *In an effort to break this deadlock, on August 26, 1949, the Commission proposed arbitration regarding the issues raised relating to Part II of the 13 August resolution.
> 
> 
> *. *The arbitrator was to decide the questions according to equity and his decision was to be binding on the parties.
> 
> 
> *. *Pakistan accepted the proposal, but India rejected it." On August 13, India also rejected a similar proposal for arbitration by President Truman and British Prime Minister Attlee.
> 
> 
> *. *On December 17, 1949, the Security Council asked its President, General A.G.L. McNaughton of Canada, to meet with India and Pakistan to settle the outstanding issues."" McNaughton met informally with the parties to search for a mutually satisfactory basis for dealing with the questions at issue.
> 
> In general, Pakistan accepted McNaughton's proposals, but India did not.' A Security Council resolution based on these proposals, adopted on March 14, 1950, was similarly rejected by India.
> 
> 
> 
> *. *In reports to the Security Council in 1952, U.N. Representative Dr. Frank P. Graham noted that the principal points of difference between the parties continued to be the quality of forces each should maintain after demilitarization and the time when the plebiscite administrator should assume his duties
> 
> 
> *. *From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals (for demilitarization) were made which India rejected. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.
> 
> 
> And you still expect the UN to blame Pakistan and not India ?
> 
> 
> Now read what Sir Owen Dixon had said. Do you get it now ?
> 
> 
> *. *The Indian claim that Plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw its forces, in the face of this clear and irrefutable evidence, is patently an attempt to deceive the world.
> 
> 
> 
> *.*The Latin maxim "_Nullus oommodum capere potest de injuria sua propria" _(No advantage may be gained from one’s own wrong) means in Kashmir context that India cannot frustrate attempts to create conditions ripe for a troop withdrawal and ceasefire in order to avoid carrying out its obligations to hold a plebiscite.



Excellent as always.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Thomas M

somebozo said:


> Indians are passive aggressive and to trust them would always be fatal..be it political or professional life...as their culture goes moo pe ram ram baghal ma churi...



And Pakistan belongs to saints. 

No wonder every top valued UN designated terrorists either surface, get arrested or killed inside Pakistan (OBLand Mulla Masoor etc. to be named a few). But all still Members of UN can trust Pakistan, they are more than trustworthy. LOL


----------



## Pulsar

Azlan Haider said:


> @Pulsar
> 
> _The 'terms' of the UNSC Resolutions in Kashmir require an agreement between India, Pakistan and UNSC appointed mediators on demilitarization. There is no requirement for a unilateral and unconditional withdrawal upon Pakistan.
> _
> As for the Indian claim that "Plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw it's forces", this Indian claim, just like many other Indian claims, is not accepted by anyone outside India.
> 
> 
> Sir Owen Dixon, the UN appointed official mediator, reported to the Security Council that,
> 
> _*"In the end, I became convinced that India`s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any such form, or to provisions governing the period of the plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation, and other forms of abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled." *(Para 52 of Document S/1971)_
> 
> 
> _The London Economist stated that _*"the whole world can see that India, which claims the support of this majority [the Kashmiri people]...has been obstructing a holding of an internationally supervised plebiscite. From this the world opinion can only conclude that India really has no confidence that the vote would go in its favour" *_The Economist (London), Feb 18, 1950_
> 
> 
> 
> Sir Owen Dixon was the UN appointed official mediator, he blamed India for halting the process. But the Indians say that he was biased against India. This, however is not true.Sir Owen Dixon didn't view many of Pakistan's actions in Kashmir as legally justified. And it was not him only. As per UN Resolution of August 13, 1948, India agreed to begin to withdraw the bulk of its forces from that State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission. But that agreement was never reached and that was what halted the process. And therefore the commission didn't ask Pakistan to withdraw its forces. Pakistan agreed to the UN proposals on demilitarization. But India rejected them.
> 
> 
> From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals were made which India rejected. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.
> 
> _--------------------_
> 
> 
> *. *Since 1949, it has become evident that India refuses to agree to demilitarization in any form or sequence so as to permit a free and impartial plebiscite.
> 
> 
> *. *This refusal first presented itself as a matter of interpretation of the 13 August and 5 January resolutions.
> 
> 
> *. *India argued that Parts II and III were contingent upon implementation of Part 1. Therefore, there was no question of implementing Parts II and III or the 5 January resolution which dealt with the plebiscite.
> 
> *. *Pakistan contended that Part I had been met, and that it was time to proceed with demilitarization under Part II, to prepare for implementation of the 5 January resolution.
> 
> 
> 
> *. *Disagreement arose over the method by which the withdrawal of Pakistani and Indian troops would be synchronized
> 
> 
> *. *In an effort to break this deadlock, on August 26, 1949, the Commission proposed arbitration regarding the issues raised relating to Part II of the 13 August resolution.
> 
> 
> *. *The arbitrator was to decide the questions according to equity and his decision was to be binding on the parties.
> 
> 
> *. *Pakistan accepted the proposal, but India rejected it." On August 13, India also rejected a similar proposal for arbitration by President Truman and British Prime Minister Attlee.
> 
> 
> *. *On December 17, 1949, the Security Council asked its President, General A.G.L. McNaughton of Canada, to meet with India and Pakistan to settle the outstanding issues."" McNaughton met informally with the parties to search for a mutually satisfactory basis for dealing with the questions at issue.
> 
> In general, Pakistan accepted McNaughton's proposals, but India did not.' A Security Council resolution based on these proposals, adopted on March 14, 1950, was similarly rejected by India.
> 
> 
> 
> *. *In reports to the Security Council in 1952, U.N. Representative Dr. Frank P. Graham noted that the principal points of difference between the parties continued to be the quality of forces each should maintain after demilitarization and the time when the plebiscite administrator should assume his duties
> 
> 
> *. *From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals (for demilitarization) were made which India rejected. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.
> 
> 
> And you still expect the UN to blame Pakistan and not India ?
> 
> 
> Now read what Sir Owen Dixon had said. Do you get it now ?
> 
> 
> *. *The Indian claim that Plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw its forces, in the face of this clear and irrefutable evidence, is patently an attempt to deceive the world.
> 
> 
> 
> *.*The Latin maxim "_Nullus oommodum capere potest de injuria sua propria" _(No advantage may be gained from one’s own wrong) means in Kashmir context that India cannot frustrate attempts to create conditions ripe for a troop withdrawal and ceasefire in order to avoid carrying out its obligations to hold a plebiscite.


Azlan bhai, Dixon was just a representative of the UN and his recommendations were not supposed to be binding on either India or Pakistan.

Secondly to put it in a nutshell, the UN Resolution was the basis for a plebiscite and not recommendations of various committees. Part 2 of the Resolution very clearly lays down that Pakistani tribals not resident of J&K as well as all Pakistani nationals used for the purpose of fighting will withdraw as a first step. Here....







And.....Hear this carefully..


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pulsar said:


> Azlan bhai, Dixon was just a representative of the UN and his recommendations were not supposed to be binding on either India or Pakistan.
> 
> Secondly to put it in a nutshell, the UN Resolution was the basis for a plebiscite and not recommendations of various committees. Part 2 of the Resolution very clearly lays down that Pakistani tribals not resident of J&K as well as all Pakistani nationals used for the purpose of fighting will withdraw as a first step. Here....
> 
> View attachment 327847



India itself took the matter to the UN, didn't it ? The UN didn't declare Pakistan an aggressor state, nor did it hold Pakistan responsible for halting the process. It was India which didn't let a plebiscite take place in Kashmir. Read the previous post again. 

As for the binding nature of the UN Resolutions and India's chapter VI mantra:


The UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir are neither _"Unenforceable"_ nor _"Non-binding" ... _You, just like many other Indians (and some Pakistanis too), have fallen victim to the false Indian State Propaganda on Kashmir. Let me explain:



*1)* UN maintains that "NO SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION CAN BE DESCRIBED AS UNENFORCEABLE."


*2)* There always has been a general inability of the Permanent Five to agree upon imaginative and expansive applications of Chapter VI ... In Somalia, the Security Council deployed the UN's first operation, UNOSOM I, in mid-1992 to separate warring combatants and help delivery of humanitarian relief ....

UNOSOM I entered and operated without invoking Chapter VII

Further Reading: http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/6/1/1305.pdf



*3) *India approached UN under Chapter VI of the UN charter , BUT the decision taken by UN reflected that its resolutions were not based exclusively on this chapter .... The resolutions , apart from chapter VI , are based upon other chapters , including chapter VII

The fact that there does not exist any provision for the deputing of UN peace keeping mission under chapter VI makes it obvious that UN resolutions were not exclusively based on chapter VI .... The interim measures which included cease fire and deputation of United Nations Military Observer Group were based on Article 40 of chapter VII ...

Besides chapter VI and VII , UN resolutions are based on other chapters also(i.e Article 1 , Chapter I (2) and Article 55 , Chapter IX) ...

^^ And this is not my personal opinion. That is Rosalyn Higgins' opinion on 'Kashmir Resolutions and under which chapter they were passed' .. Source: 'Higgins, Rosalyn. United Nations Peace Keeping 1946-67: Documents and Commentary. London, UK: Oxford University Press, 1970. (349-51)

_(Rosalyn Higgins is an expert on International Law; a Doctor of Juridical Science. She has served as a Judge in the International Court of Justice for fourteen years (and was elected President in 2006). Her competence has been recognised by many academic institutions, having received at least thirteen honorary doctorates)_




*4)* While a recommendation under Chapter VI by itself "may not" be binding, this is not the case in the Kashmir dispute. Here, the parties have consented to be bound by the resolutions of 13 August and 5 January. _(13 M. WHITEMAN, DIGEST OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 360 (1968)._



*5) *The UNSC Resolutions endorsed a binding agreement between India and Pakistan reached through the mediation of UNCIP, that a plebiscite would be held, under agreed and specified conditions. A letter dated December 23, 1948, from India's Secretary-General of the Ministry of External Affairs to the Representative of UNCIP, stated that the Indian Prime Minister's acceptance of the 5 January resolution was conditioned on Pakistan's acceptance of the resolution. By this letter, India consented to be bound by the resolution of 5 January and, through this, the resolution of 13 August as well. _(Aide Memoire No. 1, Letter Dated 23 December 1948 From the Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations of the Government of India to Mr. Alfredo Lozano, Representative of UNCIP at 23, U.N. Doc. S/1196 (1949)_




*6) Self-Determination as a Binding Rule of International Law*

Four instances may inform the principle of self-determination with a legal dimension.

(i) *The principle of self-determination is binding upon the parties, whether they have adopted it as the basis or as a criterion for the settlement of a particular issue or dispute*. In the peace treaties after World War I, and in the cases of Kashmir (after 1948), the Saar Territory (1955), and Algeria’s struggle for independence, the principle of self-determination was chosen as a basis for negotiation, and in the Agreement on Ending War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam (1973) the parties expressly recognized the South Vietnamese people’s right to self-determination.


http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e873





*7) The binding nature of these UN resolutions (as acknowledged by Indian officials)*



Finally some quotes from Indian officials on Kashmir exemplifying their commitment to plebiscite rather than forced accession as history has found them do :-

We adhere strictly to our pledge of plebiscite in Kashmir; a pledge made to the people because they believe in democratic government; We don't regard Kashmir as a commodity to be trafficked in -Krishna Menon (Press statement in London, reported in the Statesman, New Delhi, 2nd August, 1951)

The Government of India not only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the question of the continuing accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations, but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible -Letter from Govt. of India to UN Representative for India and Pakistan, 11th September, 1951

I want to say for the purpose of the record that there is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of India or the Union of India will dishonour any international obligations it has undertaken.
-Krishna Menon (Statement at UN Security Council, 24th January, 1957)

The resolutions of January 17, 1948 and the resolutions of the UNICP, the assurances given, these are all resolutions which carry a greater weight; that is because we have accepted them, we are parties to them, whether we like them or not. -Krishna Menon, (Statement at UN Security Council, 20th February, 1957)

These documents (UNCIP reports) and declarations and the resolutions of the Security Council are decisions; they are resolutions, there has been some resolving of a question of one character or another, there has been a meeting of minds on this question where we have committed ourselves to it. -Krishna Menon, (Statement at the Security Council, 9th October, 1957)


India believes that sovereignty rests in the people and should return to them. -Krishna Menon, (The Statesman, Delhi, 19th January, 1962)





Therefore, India is bound by word and deed to leave the future of Kashmir to the will of its people.



Pulsar said:


> And.....Hear this carefully..



Read this carefully:

https://defence.pk/threads/christin...-of-trash-ive-seen.444780/page-4#post-8586944

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

SrNair said:


> First of all .We are really appreaciate the business tactics of China.You single handedly destroying whatever that remains in Pak industry .
> Congratulations.
> 
> Did you read the recent Global Times ?
> Even they are jumping up and down because of our GST .According to current statistics
> we are the top one in FDI , after 2017 GST will implement.
> Then you see the real meaning of FDI
> Emotions are good but except Pakistan noother nations use emotional priorities for their policies.
> Not even Chinese



Sour grape appreciation, tell me which country invest in India like China invest in Pakistan ? you guys are so envy to have similar deal but on one look India as future, but China see the great future ahead of Pakistan when this CPEC is completed that why Chinese government is willing to massive invest. And you can call us what so ever it suit you but India can only make lousy noise but empty handed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HAIDER

somebozo said:


> Indians are passive aggressive and to trust them would always be fatal..be it political or professional life...as their culture goes moo pe ram ram baghal ma churi...


It's fact that it was damaging Pakistan very slowly. War on terror was blessing in disguise . It exposed everything.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Pulsar said:


> South Tibet? Where the fuk is it? If you're meaning Arunachal Pradesh, then it has absolutely nothing to do with your Han dynasty. It is and will always remain a state of the Indian Union. You can go crying to whomever you want to or climb the nearest pole. India is not Burkina Faso or a country in the SCS that you can bully. Don't forget the pasting the PLA got in 1967 at Nathula by the Indian Army when you tried to encroach into Indian territory. So don't try anything stupid.



Woo, I sense someone is anger and frustrated , you Indian like to live in denial when come to dispute territory with China and play deaf ear but be extreme sensitive like girld with come to claim Pakistan land..it's really a matter of laugh. And why we cry when we're the one who control the fate of this region with the mighty Brahmaputra river, each time we do something with that river, India is the first to cry LMAO ...And 1967 is just a fiction written by Indian to boost their moral after 1962 humiliation, if that can comfort you...we don't have any problem.


----------



## Deepika Maheshwari

Mugwop said:


> indian sadist logic: Pakistan withdraw all their forces from Azad Kashmir while indian forces get to stay in iok


Exactly! UN is sadist because they created such a resolution which is not favorable to Pakistan! Thats why we give no shit to UN and their human rights commission. Now since Pakistan is inviting sadist UN fact finding committee to Azad Kashmir/GB, it makes them what? Masochist?


----------



## thesolar65

Pakistanis does not know that Modi actually loves Pakistan. He does not want to see them ruined. After CPEC is over, Pakistan will be at the mercy of the China. I think after CPEC at some point Pakistan and China will be at each others throats. China will destroy Pakistan's all kind of Industry just like Britain destroyed India's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

thesolar65 said:


> Pakistanis does not know that Modi actually loves Pakistan. He does not want to see them ruined. After CPEC is over, Pakistan will be at the mercy of the China. I think after CPEC at some point Pakistan and China will be at each others throats. China will destroy Pakistan's all kind of Industry just like Britain destroyed India's.



This is pure Indian paranoid fantasy, I hope you guys think like that for foreign invest in your country and India will be not only on China but entire South East Asia mercy, we will jump of joy to receive more FDI and India get nothing. Pakistan is the one to control their own destiny and China has no interest to do harm to Pakistan in the risk of losing an all weather friend...only Idiot will do that...nice try to spoil our relation with Pakistan...simply just don't work this way

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SrNair

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Sour grape appreciation, tell me which country invest in India like China invest in Pakistan ? you guys are so envy to have similar deal but on one look India as future, but China see the great future ahead of Pakistan when this CPEC is completed that why Chinese government is willing to massive invest. And you can call us what so ever it suit you but India can only make lousy noise but empty handed.



Again which country has that kind of capacity to grab lionshare of our FDI investment ?
I would say noone can do that ,perhaps US but it is too far stretched .And unlike Pakistan we wont allow a single nation's majority in our dealings .
Pakistan only has the GDP of our Maharashtra state .So use your brain and think twice before spew such BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

SrNair said:


> Again which country has that kind of capacity to grab lionshare of our FDI investment ?I would say noone can do that ,perhaps US but it is too far stretched .And unlike Pakistan we wont allow a single nation's majority in our dealings . Pakistan only has the GDP of our Maharashtra state .So use your brain and think twice before spew such BS.



What ever you did with your country is your business, not because China has lionshare mean we will absolutely doing harm to Pakistan. The simple fact is that China has lionshare while India don't even have catshare of what Pakistan offer that why you guys like to badmouth us because of jealousy and of course because the CPEC pass your so call disputed land

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## wiseone2

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Sour grape appreciation, tell me which country invest in India like China invest in Pakistan ? you guys are so envy to have similar deal but on one look India as future, but China see the great future ahead of Pakistan when this CPEC is completed that why Chinese government is willing to massive invest. And you can call us what so ever it suit you but India can only make lousy noise but empty handed.



america has invested in india more than china in pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gslv mk3

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> you guys are so envy to have similar deal but on one look India as future, but China see the great future ahead of Pakistan when this CPEC is completed



Seriously, stop talking trash. We don't need a third-party logistics corridor & foreign investment to build basic infrastructure like power plants in our country.

Your CPEC project is hardly a quarter of the size of India's DMIC project, being undertaken with JICA financing & internal resources.

And that is just one of India's upcoming industrial corridors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mugwop

Deepika Maheshwari said:


> Exactly! UN is sadist because they created such a resolution which is not favorable to Pakistan! Thats why we give no shit to UN and their human rights commission. Now since Pakistan is inviting sadist UN fact finding committee to Azad Kashmir/GB, it makes them what? Masochist?


WTF did i just read?? UN is sadist 

Pakistan has nothing to hide,UN can come and go.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

wiseone2 said:


> america has invested in india more than china in pakistan



So does that mean US is completely control India as well...why are you guys always cry that Pakistan will be at the mercy of China? I don't know if Pakistan will be at China mercy like you guys want to believe but I do know that India was once at US mercy if you guys still recall the Bhopal disaster and you guys doesn't seem to concern about US investments.



gslv mk3 said:


> Seriously, stop talking trash. We don't need a third-party logistics corridor & foreign investment to build basic infrastructure like power plants in our country.
> 
> Your CPEC project is hardly a quarter of the size of India's DMIC project, being undertaken with JICA financing & internal resources.
> 
> And that is just one of India's upcoming industrial corridors.



You call CPEC a third party logistic corridor?  do you also know that this corridor is also Pakistan inter-city link corridor? with a good infrastructure, once one city is booming, the domino effect will be on all inter connected city,
And I'm not talking trash, you guys are the one like sabotage this CPEC with all kind of bullsh1t such as Pakistan will be under China domination, Pakistan will become another China city...Pakistan will be at China mercy....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## X-2.

No one should mind pls what modi mindzzz

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## X-2.

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> So does that mean US is completely control India as well...why are you guys always cry that Pakistan will be at the mercy of China? I don't know if Pakistan will be at China mercy like you guys want to believe but I do know that India was once at US mercy if you guys still recall the Bhopal disaster and you guys doesn't seem to concern about US investments.
> 
> 
> 
> You call CPEC a third party logistic corridor?  do you also know that this corridor is also Pakistan inter-city link corridor? with a good infrastructure, once one city is booming, the domino effect will be on all inter connected city,
> And I'm not talking trash, you guys are the one like sabotage this CPEC with all kind of bullsh1t such as Pakistan will be under China domination, Pakistan will become another China city...Pakistan will be at China mercy....


Dragon Let them burn lol
Just 5 years after .....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HAIDER

Let the CPEC complete , may be after next election some other Indian leader join CPEC and enjoy the benefits of this regional trade hub. But, India is waiting for Chinese gas line through Pakistan. Once gas line complete , India will join right away. Because, China will be guarantor for the security of this gas line.


----------



## wiseone2

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> So does that mean US is completely control India as well...why are you guys always cry that Pakistan will be at the mercy of China? I don't know if Pakistan will be at China mercy like you guys want to believe but I do know that India was once at US mercy if you guys still recall the Bhopal disaster and you guys doesn't seem to concern about US investments.
> 
> You call CPEC a third party logistic corridor?  do you also know that this corridor is also Pakistan inter-city link corridor? with a good infrastructure, once one city is booming, the domino effect will be on all inter connected city,
> And I'm not talking trash, you guys are the one like sabotage this CPEC with all kind of bullsh1t such as Pakistan will be under China domination, Pakistan will become another China city...Pakistan will be at China mercy....



America does not control India. The IT boom has increased our dependence upon America. I would be lying if I said otherwise.

The Bhopal disaster was one time industrial accident (a bad one) involving subsidary of American corporation. It has no relevance here.

The questions about CPEC are simple:
If it is a economic corridor why not use Karachi ? It is easier/cheaper to expand Karachi. Why use Gwadar ?

If it is a game changer or good deal for Pakistan why are the financial agreements on CPEC deals kept secret ? 
I hear all this hogwash about enemies of CPEC wanting to sabotage it. There is nothing India can do to stop CPEC.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stealth

Pulsar said:


> The plain fact is that the *CPEC is being built in DISPUTED TERRITORY* which is against norms.
> 
> Some have said that India has built dams and other infrastructure in the 'disputed' region of Kashmir, so what's the problem? But there's a huge difference in a third country building and using infrastructure there. So WTF is China doing in disputed territory?
> 
> As per the UN Resolutions, Pakistan is required to withdraw ALL its forces from P0K/GB to the satisfaction of the UN after which a plebiscite is to be held. If this ever happens and J&K accedes to India, then what happens to the CPEC?



stop bullshits everywhere... when China built Karakoram there was no objection from India ... all of sudden bc thrid party yaad agaye hey ? dhakan Indians as usual!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## third eye

HAIDER said:


> Once gas line complete , India will join right away. Because, *China will be guarantor for the security of this gas line.*



Let me get this right, what you are saying that a Gas pipeline will pass through Pakistan & China will be the Guarantor.

Is this correct ?


----------



## HAIDER

third eye said:


> Let me get this right, what you are saying that a Gas pipeline will pass through Pakistan & China will be the Guarantor.
> 
> Is this correct ?


How you perceive


----------



## third eye

HAIDER said:


> How you perceive



Dont deflect by throwing a counter question. My observations are in a previous post here # 18 perhaps.

I want a confirmation if as stated by you - is China securing the pipeline ?


----------



## The Eagle

hellfire said:


> The underlined portion, another act of imprudence which led to the whole cycle of statements. It is exactly the thing that is meant to ensure a perpetuation of violence as means of state policy. A contrarian view to the claimed stance of Pakistan to be fighting for peace and security as also the welfare of the Kashmiri people.



Well that is an Indian narration but from Pakistan point of view, Pakistan is only supporting Kashmir cause for their rights of freedom and all that resistance by Kashmiris, is their fight for their own rights and we are just supporting the cause only that world's knows as well. 



hellfire said:


> &K is an autonomous state under Constitution of India genius (the author not at you @The Eagle ), hence it can not be "integrated".



Constitution of India but not the status of Kashmir that is declared by UN so Indian constitution in this matter doesn't matter alone hence not the integral part of India as well. Kashmir is a dispute not some internal matter of India. The author is pointing the issue towards the wishes of Kashmiris that wanted to be the part of Pakistan like "Kashmir banay ga Pakisan" and they are at liberty for that otherwise, GB would have been integrated a long ago into Pakistan that even People of GB wishes the same as well but Pakistan stance is currently for Independent Kashmir then after, it is the wish of Kashmiris who they wanted to be with but an impartial and unbiased election is must. 

It has been discussed to death and still you are towing the same line that what GoI says so nothing new here (no offense). If it was that influenced by such article or sub-sections then long ago, Kashmir would have been integrated to India and GoI would have won the case in UN. The thing, why India couldn't succeed in such manner because it is not the case what India is trying to project nowadays hence rejected United Nations Human Rights Commission's request to visit IoK. You would have gone through the latest BBC news on Kashmir as well, I hope. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37092938

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## war&peace

The good thing is that Modi has removed the veil of hypocrisy from India's ugly face and now he openly admits its involvement in 1971 terrorism, openly talks against Pakistan, supports terrorism in Baluchistan. But to our dismay, we have the govt of traitors who are not only ignoring but factually supporting Modi against the state of Pakistan and our military leadership is too selfish to think beyond its personal record and professional career.



somebozo said:


> Indians are passive aggressive and to trust them would always be fatal..be it political or professional life...as their culture *goes moo pe ram ram baghal ma churi.*..


That I have observed in my personal life too but the thanks to Allah I saw it coming and I was able to shoot it down without causing any collateral damage

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## paki_rambo

guy sach said:


> Read the resolution carefully, it ask Pakistan to withdraw not only tribesman but also pakistan nationals. One the pakistan fulfills the condition, then only Indian security forces will be reduced not withdrawn



the directions given by UN to both Pakistan and India are different.India had to start acting as soon the tribesmen withdrew but it didn't.

withdrawal of India force in stages was also part of the resolution though India was allowed to keep minimum no of security personnel in the valley for law and order situation 








thesolar65 said:


> Pakistanis does not know that Modi actually loves Pakistan. He does not want to see them ruined. After CPEC is over, Pakistan will be at the mercy of the China. I think after CPEC at some point Pakistan and China will be at each others throats. China will destroy Pakistan's all kind of Industry just like Britain destroyed India's.



Unlike India Pakistan and China have settled their geographical disputes long ago.In 50s India was also looking for a bromance with China and their was a phrase "hindi chini bhai bhai" at that time but a territorial controversy ended the relation.Now don't be jealous if Pakistan and China are enjoying a better relation


----------



## Hellfire

paki_rambo said:


> Unlike India Pakistan and China have settled their geographical disputes long ago.In 50s India was also looking for a bromance with China and their was a phrase "hindi chini bhai bhai" at that time but a territorial controversy ended the relation.Now don't be jealous if Pakistan and China are enjoying a better relation



You have only reached a temporary agreement when you ceded Shasgam Valley, a territory of the Khanate of Hunza, in exchange for SinoPak Boundary Settlement of 1963. 

The agreement is temporary till as such time the matter of Kashmir is settled, whereupon a fresh boundary agreement will be needed.

In short, your facts are off.


----------



## paki_rambo

hellfire said:


> You have only reached a temporary agreement when you ceded Shasgam Valley, a territory of the Khanate of Hunza, in exchange for SinoPak Boundary Settlement of 1963.
> 
> The agreement is temporary till as such time the matter of Kashmir is settled, whereupon a fresh boundary agreement will be needed.
> 
> In short, your facts are off.



even if a fresh boundary agreement is needed Pakistan and China would still have it in pleasant tone 
India tried to developed a working relation but ended up in a war with China or you still think it is a wrong fact


----------



## Vapnope

SrNair said:


> It seems CPEC is some kind of elixir .
> No other nation in this world trusts a foreign power like this for their own existence
> Again in Pakistan anything can happen


I wonder why Indians are so concerned about who Pakistan trusts or not?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

Vapnope said:


> I wonder why Indians are so concerned about who Pakistan trusts or not?



Well we dont care whether you trusts or not .
But most of them have grand delusions and for them CPEC is not a development project but a mere show off to satisfiy their ego with India .
And your diplomacy is such extraordinary

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv mk3

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> You call CPEC a third party logistic corridor? do you also know that this corridor is also Pakistan inter-city link corridor? with a good infrastructure, once one city is booming, the domino effect will be on all inter connected city,
> 
> And I'm not talking trash, you guys are the one like sabotage this CPEC with all kind of bullsh1t such as Pakistan will be under China domination, Pakistan will become another China city...Pakistan will be at China mercy....



It is a logistics corridor & rest of what you say are secondary objectives. With Pakistan's key industry- textiles closing down, I would seriously doubt the utility of any new transportation infra.

And the exploitation of Pakistan has already started. No one in their sane mind would believe that investment of $34 billion is needed for establishing thermal power plants with combined installed capacity of 17GW. Other than our Western neighbors.

Actually as an Indian, I have no problem if Pakistan surrenders their autonomy & territory to someone else as long as it doesn't affect us. But that's not the case with this project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> What ever you did with your country is your business, not because China has lionshare mean we will absolutely doing harm to Pakistan. The simple fact is that China has lionshare while India don't even have catshare of what Pakistan offer that why you guys like to badmouth us because of jealousy and of course because the CPEC pass your so call disputed land



Then you should stop to measure us with the bench mark of your 'deeper than ocean' friend.
Our Maharashtra state offers more than entire Pakistan can offer .
Noone forcing you to invest here .There are others that have much capability .
They will do and will take their profit .
Jealousy ??
There is nothing in there to show jealousy .

But your second point is the real reason . 


Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> because the CPEC pass your so call disputed land

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv mk3

SrNair said:


> Our Maharashtra state offers more than entire Pakistan can offer .



Actually Maharashtra received some $100 billion worth of investment commitments during 'Make in India week'. 

And those are investment for setting up industries. Not for setting up some power plant with guarantee agreement for buying all the power produced at uneconomical rates.

It is quite interesting to note that 75% of the $46 billion chinese investment will go into setting up an installed capacity of 17 GW. We don't need that sort of investment, since we add some 34GW to our installed capacity every year. Without a logistics corridor project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

gslv mk3 said:


> Actually Maharashtra received some $100 billion worth of investment commitments during 'Make in India week'.
> 
> And those are investment for setting up industries. Not for setting up some power plant with guarantee agreement for buying all the power produced at uneconomical rates.
> 
> It is quite interesting to note that 75% of the $46 billion chinese investment will go into setting up an installed capacity of 17 GW. We don't need that sort of investment, since we add some 34GW to our installed capacity every year. Without a logistics corridor project.



Funny ,then again we are talking about Chinese power equipments .
They themselves shut down a lots of project in there because of the inefficiency .

Look at the business tactics of the Chinese ,we Indians should learn a thing or two from their business.
They proposed an unfeasible project ,bought the entire corrupted corridor of GHQ ,that was the phase one .
They already began phase two ,flooding the Pak markets with their goods .
Even after all these restrictions ,our govt couldnt stop them completely .Then one can only imagines the situation of a fragile economy that opened full door for them.
What ever they got in theri nation is already began to breathe their last breath .
But Vikram Sood is correct in his last sentence .
Army's corporation will flourish .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brickwall

paki_rambo said:


> the directions given by UN to both Pakistan and India are different.India had to start acting as soon the tribesmen withdrew but it didn't.
> 
> withdrawal of India force in stages was also part of the resolution though India was allowed to keep minimum no of security personnel in the valley for law and order situation



Withdrawal has to be from entire valley including Pakistan occupied part and gilgit-baltistan, but tribesmen was replaced by Pakistan regulars, causing whole mess...


----------



## paki_rambo

guy sach said:


> Withdrawal has to be from entire valley including Pakistan occupied part and gilgit-baltistan, but tribesmen was replaced by Pakistan regulars, causing whole mess...


again sir refer to my post and compare the advices given to both Pakistan and India
and please elaborate what mess Pakistan army has created in Pakistan liberated Kashmir and GB?
both these regions are peaceful and show complete support to Pakistan


----------



## Brickwall

paki_rambo said:


> again sir refer to my post and compare the advices given to both Pakistan and India
> and please elaborate what mess Pakistan army has created in Pakistan liberated Kashmir and GB?
> both these regions are peaceful and show complete support to Pakistan




I have not yet refereed to condition currently in the region, only to the UN resolution , which asked entire valley to be vacated including gilgit-baltistan from tribesmen and pakistan nationals


----------



## Dem!god

Mugwop said:


> indian sadist logic: Pakistan withdraw all their forces from Azad Kashmir while indian forces get to stay in iok


Wow... ever heard of UN kashmir dispute resolution, that you people keep on chanting day and nite. 
Time for you to read it once.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vapnope

SrNair said:


> Well we dont care whether you trusts or not .
> But most of them have grand delusions and for them CPEC is not a development project but a mere show off to satisfiy their ego with India .
> And your diplomacy is such extraordinary


I haven't seen a single Pakistani who talks about Gwadar and compares Pakistan and India on that, however all the articles of how this project is nothing are coming from Indian writers. I wonder why !


----------



## SrNair

Vapnope said:


> I haven't seen a single Pakistani who talks about Gwadar and compares Pakistan and India on that, however all the articles of how this project is nothing are coming from Indian writers. I wonder why !


Because that thing is passed through our
disputed area

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Vapnope

SrNair said:


> Because that thing is passed through our
> disputed area


I don't see much discussion on disputed area, all i see is that it is a useless project and Pakistanis are going to suffer because of it. We know what your "Real" concerns are, some of you are open to accept others just come in the guise of something else.


----------



## Clutch

Mirza Jatt said:


> the best post... this reminds me of some idiot who claimed in a video that once CPEC is complete, the drains will flow with gold in Pakistan  and here they are already claiming Pakistan to be next super power due to this CPEC. I honestly pray that this CPEC is over soon and then the reality come in front.




So much concern for our well being... bring a tear to my eye.



CPEC burns Indians with jealousy! Lol


----------



## Mugwop

Dem!god said:


> Wow... ever heard of UN kashmir dispute resolution, that you people keep on chanting day and nite.
> Time for you to read it once.


Did you read what I said? I am talking about indian logic not the UN.
The only time I bring up IOK is when indians here pretend to be champion of Pakistani minorities.


----------



## Mirza Jatt

Clutch said:


> So much concern for our well being... bring a tear to my eye.
> 
> 
> 
> CPEC burns Indians with jealousy! Lol



Love thy neighbors he said


----------



## SrNair

SrNair said:


> Because that thing is passed through our
> disputed area



@waz @WAJsal @Irfan Baloch @WebMaster 
Dont know the motivation of this negative rating.
Neither an offtopic nor abusive .
I was expressing a general opinion .CPEC is passed through the P0K ,that is the only issue of GoI

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

Vapnope said:


> I don't see much discussion on disputed area, all i see is that it is a useless project and Pakistanis are going to suffer because of it. We know what your "Real" concerns are, some of you are open to accept others just come in the guise of something else.



Nope,for us these developments seems very funny.
And often we can see the thread posted by your own countrymen that shows the declining of Pak industry because of the Chinese goods.
Every nations have their own potential ,so whatever they say we knows the limits of your nation's potential and that is not a concern for us .
But for us ,Azad Kashmir is a disputed area .
That is our sole issue.


----------



## Daghalodi

SrNair said:


> Nope,for us these developments seems very funny.
> And often we can see the thread posted by your own countrymen that shows the declining of Pak industry because of the Chinese goods.
> Every nations have their own potential ,so whatever they say we knows the limits of your nation's potential and that is not a concern for us .
> But for us ,Azad Kashmir is a disputed area .
> That is our sole issue.



I think Cpec and China for Pakistan is a strategic window which Pakistan has realized and is utilizing it looking at what Pakistan is going through right now it is the best option for us, fighting corruption,corrupt politicians terrorism and than to tackle with India's proxy war Pakistan has and is going through a lot. It's funny to see your concern for our local industry because I personally think what we are going through right now Chinese market will only give us a boost. Who knows the next iPhone will be made in Pakistan Hahahaha.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

Daghalodi said:


> I think Cpec and China for Pakistan is a strategic window which Pakistan has realized and is utilizing it looking at what Pakistan is going through right now it is the best option for us, fighting corruption,corrupt politicians terrorism and than to tackle with India's proxy war Pakistan has and is going through a lot. It's funny to see your concern for our local industry because I personally think what we are going through right now Chinese market will only give us a boost. Who knows the next iPhone will be made in Pakistan Hahahaha.



Good luck with that.


----------



## I M Sikander

SrNair said:


> @waz @WAJsal @Irfan Baloch @WebMaster
> Dont know the motivation of this negative rating.
> Neither an offtopic nor abusive .
> I was expressing a general opinion .CPEC is passed through the P0K ,that is the only issue of GoI


Who cares what India think of cpec. 

Neither pakistan nor China needs any certificates from India for cpec. So keep on cruing, it's entertaining when we see whole india and it's gov. Crying like a raped widow on cpec.

Indian ridiculous crying on cpec make Pakistanis more committed to cpec completion.



SrNair said:


> But for us ,Azad Kashmir is a disputed area .
> That is our sole issue.


And for us whole Kashmir specially IOK Kashmir is the real issue. where 7 lakh indian army is brutally killing the civilian population.



Vapnope said:


> i see is that it is a useless project and Pakistanis are going to suffer because of it.


Hahah. That's pure butt hurt dude. The continuous hue and cry on indian side is enough to prove the effectiveness of cpec.



Vapnope said:


> We know what your "Real" concerns are, some of you are open to accept others just come in the guise of something else.


U better don't worry about cpec and Pakistan. We are enough to worry about it.


----------



## SrNair

Ranasikander said:


> Who cares what India think of cpec.
> 
> Neither pakistan nor China needs any certificates from India for cpec. So keep on cruing, it's entertaining when we see whole india and it's gov. Crying like a raped widow on cpec.
> 
> Indian ridiculous crying on cpec make Pakistanis more committed to cpec completion.
> 
> 
> And for us whole Kashmir specially IOK Kashmir is the real issue. where 7 lakh indian army is brutally killing the civilian population.
> 
> 
> Hahah. That's pure butt hurt dude. The continuous hue and cry on indian side is enough to prove the effectiveness of cpec.



Infact we dont cares whether you care or not.
And for GoI this is passing through the disputed areas .That is their only issue that concerns here.


----------



## HAIDER

third eye said:


> Dont deflect by throwing a counter question. My observations are in a previous post here # 18 perhaps.
> 
> I want a confirmation if as stated by you - is China securing the pipeline ?


China will provide neutral guarantee for the constant supply of gas to India. But, India need permission from US before entering this project.


----------



## Clutch

Mirza Jatt said:


> Love thy neighbors he said



Sure you do... with the love of a female praying mantise.



Even "love" can be fatal.


----------



## Mirza Jatt

Clutch said:


> Sure you do... with the love of a female praying mantise.
> 
> 
> 
> Even "love" can be fatal.



love thy neighbors...he said.... to correct them


----------



## Salik

In AJK there is Azad Kashmir Regiment. I believe they are local people. Pakistan can raise GB regiment as well. And give these two regiments particular status for plebiscite purposes. Police is already local, so it fulfills the UN resolutions requirement.


----------



## third eye

HAIDER said:


> China will provide neutral guarantee for the constant supply of gas to India. But, India need permission from US before entering this project.



What is a Neutral Guarantee ? and why should China give it ?

Why should Pakistan allow China to guarantee anything .

Why would India like to join a project like this ?


----------



## HAIDER

third eye said:


> What is a Neutral Guarantee ? and why should China give it ?
> 
> Why should Pakistan allow China to guarantee anything .
> 
> Why would India like to join a project like this ?


Think and let me know.


----------



## third eye

HAIDER said:


> Think and let me know.



You are using terms like ' neutral guarantee' not me.


----------



## HAIDER

third eye said:


> You are using terms like ' neutral guarantee' not me.


Search you will find the answer. No pain no gain.


----------



## Vapnope

Ranasikander said:


> U better don't worry about cpec and Pakistan. We are enough to worry about it.


Check out my flags We are on the same side.


----------

