What's new

“We are not seeking hostility with India for the next 100 years" pakistan's New security policy seeks ‘peace’ with India

Nov 18, 2014
1,388
2
1,815
Country
United States
Location
United States
Civilizational conflicts don't settle that easily. Catastrophic circumstances and happenings provide a resolution, not some documents.

Promise the house away... who knows what's on the cards. It makes for a good soundbite and nothing else.
Imagine if you resolve all outlined issues, including handover of Kashmir... then what?
Is that really the end?
In fact, it all starts FROM there!
Give it all away till your back is against the wall and, then, there will be nothing else to give...

At that point either one becomes a meal or slays the belligerent!

Remember, the states formed after 47 namely, Israel and India... something happened after eons. One, an ominous sign of the Almighty... they'll be collected back on that land ... the other one, was never really an entity, ever!
Both in complete and utter opposition from Muslims...
So, history happens, like it or not!!!
Strategize that...
 

Pak Nationalist

FULL MEMBER
Jul 4, 2021
975
3
1,308
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
No. I only post and respond, and know how to paste an image in the post. Other features, I don't know. Whenever necessary, I request some fellow poster to open a thread.


Sometimes, I wonder that people can be so naive on geopolitics and diplomacy.

Sometimes I wonder how people could be so blinded by political partisanship. Your foe does not want to talk with you on anything else than "cessation of terrorism" targetting it from Pakistani soil and has a stated policy now of attacking Pakistan when there is any major incident in that country. All the while it bleeds Pakistan dry using proxies (while the resistance in Kashmir barely has the means to resist effectively). Such jewels of diplomacy are lost on your foe that is unflinching and unyielding in its rigid stance.

Meanwhile, the political partisans of the hybrid regime are willing to give every latitude possible to the extent of sanctifying blatant, naked, and unrepentant APPEASEMENT of a belligerent enemy state that attacked sovereign Pakistani territory using airpower just 2 years back and has since then unilaterally "settled" the Kashmir conflict.

No sire, this is no diplomacy. If one views the developments and how these unfolded in their historical context under the current setup, it would be patently obvious that what is being passed on as a desire for peace and use of diplomacy is emboldening the enemy further and further.

If these are mere diplomatic statements, we should be seeing all-out support for the Kashmiri resistance on the ground while lip service is given to "peace" and diplomacy. That is not happening. There is unilateral attrition of Pakistani troops in proxy conflicts at the hands of Indian proxies while such statements are passed.

Open your eyes, this is neither geopolitical suaveness nor some diplomatic masterstroke.
Never go full retard... What is stated here is the formal policy in the region nobody seeks war whether it is China, India etc etc literally nobody.. I know it would be to much for layman to understand this

Interesting that I am the layman while you believe that the entire world's poverty combined is less than India's and believe with a straight face that Pakistan enjoys parity with the Indians on every front. I may be a layman, but at least I am not a resident of some alternative reality.
 
Last edited:

Khanate

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 16, 2016
2,913
7
5,181
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Sanctify appeasement. If only this came from someone like NS, we would have seen how much understanding, forgiving, and inclined towards spin-doctoring you would have been.

Things have to be seen in their larger contexts. The type of appeasement this regime has done of India is nearly unparalleled given the magnitude of hostility that has emanated from that country towards this one over the course of the past 5-7 years. Groveling for "talks", yapping about peace when the other side has not only sealed the fate of IoJK from its side but now openly expresses the desire to annex AJK/GB.



Welcome to 21st century.

US wages war around the world using the language of peace. Just last week, world powers declared a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought while spending billions to modernize their nuclear arsenals. India is building a nuclear city at Challakere but still sings the songs of peace and democracy.

This is diplomacy and optics matter. The state of Pakistan has to respond to international politics unless the goal is to turn into North Korea.

Just in case, if you didn't get the memo, this is how the western world is articulating Kashmir i.e. no mention of India's illegal occupation of J&K.

 

Titanium100

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 1, 2019
6,836
-9
5,691
Country
Denmark
Location
Denmark
Welcome to 21st century.

US wages war around the world using the language of peace. Just last week, world powers declared a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought while spending billions to modernize their nuclear arsenals. India is building a nuclear city at Challakere but still sings the songs of peace and democracy.

This is diplomacy and optics matter. The state of Pakistan has to respond to international politics unless the goal is to turn into North Korea.

Just in case, if you didn't get the memo, this is how the western world is articulating Kashmir i.e. no mention of India's illegal occupation of J&K.


You understand one part but missing out on the other one.

When has India stolen JK? It has never been with us like literally never.. I find it curious when some say Kashmir is stolen from us? If we are going by that then whole of India is stolen because there is technically no difference between Delhi and Kashmir both were territories that didn't belong to us but held by our ancestors the question is why lay claim to Kashmir and not all of India because the scenario is technically same as Kashmir.. Imho Kashmir fallacy and Pakistan using it as an excuse is not logical.. They used that card so well that even the Indians started to believing in it... but it was a deflection by Jinnah so Pakistan doesn't claim all of India.. Hence this is not the true issues with India..

The issues truly steems from Rss goons this is the heart of it period.. Not from the claim on whole of India which is still valid we have claim on it and i mean as entirety of it
 
Last edited:
Nov 18, 2014
1,388
2
1,815
Country
United States
Location
United States
Sometimes I wonder how people could be so blinded by political partisanship. Your foe does not want to talk with you on anything else than "cessation of terrorism" targetting it from Pakistani soil and has a stated policy now of attacking Pakistan when there is any major incident in that country. All the while it bleeds Pakistan dry using proxies (while the resistance in Kashmir barely has the means to resist effectively). Such jewels of diplomacy are lost on your foe that is unflinching and unyielding in its rigid stance.

Meanwhile, the political partisans of the hybrid regime are willing to give every latitude possible to the extent of sanctifying blatant, naked, and unrepentant APPEASEMENT of a belligerent enemy state that attacked sovereign Pakistani territory using airpower just 2 years back and has since then unilaterally "settled" the Kashmir conflict.

No sire, this is no diplomacy. If one views the developments and these unfolded in their historical context under the current setup, it would be patently obvious that what is being passed on as a desire for peace and using diplomacy is emboldening the enemy further and further.

If these are mere diplomatic statements, we should be seeing all-out support for the Kashmiri resistance on the ground while lip service is given to "peace" and diplomacy. That is not happening. There is unilateral attrition of Pakistani troops in proxy conflicts at the hands of Indian proxies while such statements are passed.

Open your eyes, this is neither geopolitical suaveness nor some diplomatic masterstroke.

Correct!
The one in power offers or enforces peace, meek only appease.
 
Last edited:

Pak Nationalist

FULL MEMBER
Jul 4, 2021
975
3
1,308
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Welcome to 21st century.

US wages war around the world using the language of peace. Just last week, world powers declared a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought while spending billions to modernize their nuclear arsenals. India is building a nuclear city at Challakere but still sings the songs of peace and democracy.

This is diplomacy and optics matter. The state of Pakistan has to respond to international politics unless the goal is to turn into North Korea.

Just in case, if you didn't get the memo, this is how the western world is articulating Kashmir i.e. no mention of India's illegal occupation of J&K.

Does the US also appease its enemies? Refer to my comment before this one. I would have bought what you are suggesting had we been on a rampage in Kashmir while paying lip service to peace and tranquility. We are not, hence, it follows that what is being said is also being believed and would be manifested as well. Hence, the appeasement comment.
 

Khanate

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 16, 2016
2,913
7
5,181
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Does the US also appease its enemies? Refer to my comment before this one. I would have bought what you are suggesting had we been on a rampage in Kashmir while paying lip service to peace and tranquility. We are not, hence, it follows that what is being said is also being believed and would be manifested as well. Hence, the appeasement.



Was US appeasing Taliban when it negotiated with them and then withdrew from Afghanistan?

US has more levers of power at its disposal. It can use sanctions against Afghanistan and FATF against Pakistan by buying off Saudis. US is now building a narrative of protecting Uyghur Muslims having killed Muslims. Is US appeasing Muslims?

The state is doing what the state must and continuing war by other means.



Your foe does not want to talk with you on anything else than "cessation of terrorism"



So India has a narrative.

What is your narrative?

We previously glossed over Kashmir and edited out Indian state-sponsored terrorism.


When has India stolen JK? It has never been with us like literally never.. I find it curious when some say Kashmir is stolen from us? If we are going by that then whole of India is stolen because there is technically no difference between Delhi and Kashmir both were territories that didn't belong to us but held by our ancestors the question is why lay claim to Kashmir and not all of India because the scenario is technically same as Kashmir.. Imho Kashmir fallacy and Pakistan using it as and excuse is not logical..

The issues truly steems from Rss goons this is the heart of it



Neither Congress nor RSS have an interest in peace, whether the subject is Kashmir or Pakistan.

India under Congress attacked Pakistan in 1965 and 1971 and then organised a genocide in Indian-occupied Punjab in 1984. Congress did this while suspending democracy, free press and imposing emergency in India in 1975 - all things Congress accuses RSS and BJP of.

Given a chance, RSS goons will recreate the 2002 genocide of Gujarat like they recreate the murder of Gandhi.

There are no partners for peace in India, only hands drenched in blood.
 
Last edited:

Titanium100

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 1, 2019
6,836
-9
5,691
Country
Denmark
Location
Denmark
Was US appeasing Taliban when it negotiated with them and then withdrew from Afghanistan?

US has more levers of power at its disposal. It can use sanctions against Afghanistan and FATF against Pakistan by buying off Saudis. US is now building a narrative of protecting Uyghur Muslims having killed Muslims. Is US appeasing Muslims?

The state is doing what the state must and continuing war by other means.







So India has a narrative.

What is your narrative?

We previously glossed over Kashmir and edited out Indian state-sponsored terrorism.






Neither Congress nor RSS have an interest in peace, whether the subject is Kashmir or Pakistan.

India under Congress attacked Pakistan in 1965 and 1971 and then organised a genocide in Indian-occupied Punjab in 1984. Congress did this while suspending democracy, free press and imposing emergency in India in 1975 - all things Congress accuses RSS and BJP of.

Given a chance, RSS goons will recreate the 2002 genocide of Gujarat like they recreate the murder of Gandhi.

There are no partners for peace in India, only hands drenched in blood.

You are belting alot of non-sense I never said we should go for peace as I am against it but all I said is why not all of India as claim instead of only Kashmir it makes no sense that is all.. Hope you understand where I was coming from..

I am of the opinion that we have a claim on all of India and we should keep that position Kashmir and Delhi, agra etc etc or Deccan is all same to us. Our ancestors held all these territories once just like Kashmir it is all the same...

So in my opinion Kashmir makes absolutely no sense whatsoever hence fuk Kashmir but All of India is the real claim... Delhi, Agra, Deccan etc etc have more historical significiance then a nonsense valley that once our ancestors held before the creation of Pakistan hence Kashmir has never been with us just like Delhi, Agra, Deccan etc etc..
 
Last edited:

Titanium100

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 1, 2019
6,836
-9
5,691
Country
Denmark
Location
Denmark
Who is stopping you? Not me.

Finally.. This is what we should have laid claim on from the get go.. All this Kashmir thing is stragetically a deflection and made no sense and I have even seen some claiming it was stolen from us:lol:? I am like really the question is when? like never-ury because if you remember during partition the deal included Kashmir, Delhi, deccan, Agra etc etc for there side..

Because they claimed that we were invaders? and Jinnah agreed upon the analogy that we were the invaders hence the Indians insisted on the Muhammad of Ghor border lines.. meaning the Indians liberated themselves 100% via the pen? meaning everything back to pre-1192 before the battle of Tarain border lines but in truth we held about 50% of India's current territories today before the negotiations..

Alot of people view Jinnah has some sort of hero but he was in partnership with them and is technically an Indian hero in truth because he has liberated them entirely via the pen

It was us who took GB and AK by force.. Theorically that part also included for them technically speaking and some disagreed with these territories going to them hence the war in 1948.. JK has always been with India by international law and signed in that partition deal to them period.
 
Last edited:

Wood

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 30, 2013
4,379
-9
3,666
Country
India
Location
Canada
It is very interesting that Pakistani establishment feels that it will not be possible for rapprochement with Modi.

Modi is likely to get reelected in 2026. Once the new Parliament is completed, the seats in Indian Parliament will get refactored to account for population growth in the last 50 years. This will double the seats allocated to UP and Hindi belt - that's a guarantee to get Yogi elected as Modi's successor for the foreseeable future. Yogi will make Modi seem like a liberal air head :laugh:

Makes one wonder if the Pakistani establishment has thought this through in their policy :azn:
 

Khanate

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 16, 2016
2,913
7
5,181
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
All this Kashmir thing is stragetically a deflection and made no sense



It is less of a deflection and more about international law.

Junagadh, Jammu and Kashmir are under illegal Indian occupation. What other parts of India must be liberated is an open-ended question.



Alot of people view Jinnah has some sort of hero but he was in partnership with them and is technically an Indian hero in truth because he has liberated them entirely via the pen



Now you are going off the deep end.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom