What's new

3rd war Pakistan?

are you trying to imply that you were too stupid to realize what was being offered?
that you actually believed that states act out of benevolence and not self interest?
or were you blinded by the hatred for Indians that you simply accepted all the terms and conditions offered by US?

Yes we were stupid enough to trust USA and it was not because of India. We decided to side with them right after partition, that was a mistake.

The difference is that Pakistan was not blackmailed into doing America's bidding. You did it fully aware of the potential concequences. It's like a drug addict selling everything he owns to fund his addiction.

I have given a very detailed and appropriate example, if you don't understand then it is the fault of your understanding. We were lassoed in using the rope of friendship, Pakistan was extremely vulnerable after partition thanks to a certain Briton who favored India. We were robbed of 2/3’s of our assets were severely short of funds and so our leaders back then decided to take the supporting shoulder offered by USA, that’s how we got caught in the claws of the loan shark and we have been since then.
 
Why waste bandwidth. To some Pakistanis here, it is never Pakistan's fault that they find themselves in the mess that they are in. Their problems are always due to the conspiracy by Israel/India/West to destroy Pakistan. I guess when you are being fed this nonsense everyday then you will eventually swallow it. And for your information, even sub-Saharan Africa regards Pakistan as a terrorist factory. Go ahead and google about the security measures in place in this region when it comes to permitting Pakistani nationals to enter this region.

Yup, Sub-Sahran States were laughing after the OBL incident, Sub-Sahran couldn't believe what happened at Mehran and now Sub-Sahran this and that. Damn, Sub-Sahran sounds like a big joke, then any wonder you are living there. :lol:
 
Actually the point made by some Pakistani member that the terrorism in Pak is due to US is valid to a certain level as none of this would have ever happened if Soviets did not invade Afghanistan.
 
what world you are talking about?

from world if you take India, US, israel, UK and 1 or two other europeon countries then ok
but remind you there are 7 continents
more then 170 countries
and the above contries are part of world not whole world
enjoy selected propoganda and be paper crusader

their world is only india.
 
Actually the point made by some Pakistani member that the terrorism in Pak is due to US is valid to a certain level as none of this would have ever happened if Soviets did not invade Afghanistan.



---------- Post added at 03:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:34 PM ----------

Actually the point made by some Pakistani member that the terrorism in Pak is due to US is valid to a certain level as none of this would have ever happened if Soviets did not invade Afghanistan.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, then why does Pakistan continue to side with the US if they are so bad? Oh that's right, I almost forgot, the US gives Pakistan millions of dollars in "foreign aid" each year in order to keep them on a leash. I find it funny when people on this forum keep describing the US as basically being "the white devil" Oh they US is so bad, they send in drones that violate airspace, blah, blah, blah. If they are so bad why doesn't Pakistan reject the foreign aid? Why don;t its citizens refuse to use any of the money that is donated to the country? I see a lot of talking, but no action to back it up. True the US and Pakistan have a rocky relationship, but to say that their relationship is not out of necessity is a lie.

same old crap about aid? didnt we tell u ppl so many times. usa gave Pakistan only 32 billion in last 60 years. But Pakistan lost 68 billion on WoT in just ten years. and plus 35000 lives were sacrificed.

get some real facts before you start talking.
 
it was not the US that went begging for dollars, it was your Ayub Khan who made you guys crack addicts of the foreign aid.
:friends not masters: ring a bell?

The USA under Einseinhower (1957-1960) gave more aid to India than to Pakistan; If Kennedy decided to economically help Pakistan instead of India, it was after the Nehru's visit (November 5-15th 1961), who, already a part of the Non-Aligned Movement, was the 'worst Statesman' that Kennedy has even witnessed, being 'de-connected from reality'. It was not until 1962, because of diverse reasons (Indian forces attacking Goa's Portuguese colonies, buying Soviet's MiG-21, ...), that the USA stopped its pro-India aid policy.

The funny thing is that it was Nehru who was literally begging for the money, because 'he couldn't do without' (read Sarvepalli Gopal's biography on the man.) Ayyub Khan just, naturally, said that this money is given in a war-paradigm against the Soviets, and not freely; thus, the USA had to view Pakistan as a helped partner, not a feed slave.

And 'aid', in a developing-country where feudal system prevails doesn't mean a direct contribution to the nation's wealth; there's a detailed study in the book 'Delivering aid differently: lessons from the field', and that's what is said about Pakistan: '... has historically received large volumes of aid in support of its development into a lower-middle-income country. Yet it has also faced the increasingly difficult task of aid coordination. In 2007 Pakistan received more than 2.2 billion dollars in official development assistance (ODA), ranking the country as the sixth-largest recipient of official aid in the world. This overall sum, however, amounted to only 1.5 percent of gross domestic income, translating into a per capita aid of 14 dollars - much smaller than the amount received by countries with similar levels of income, such as Sudan (55 dollars), Kenya (34 dollars), and Vietnam (29 dollars.)'

Concerning the US aid about WoT specifically, we all know how much they gave us and how much we had to spent.
 
and abhi son u dont need to worry abt our history worry abt your present and future........... before hilighting our problems control your extremists; in other words mind your own bussiness
 
Yup, Sub-Sahran States were laughing after the OBL incident, Sub-Sahran couldn't believe what happened at Mehran and now Sub-Sahran this and that. Damn, Sub-Sahran sounds like a big joke, then any wonder you are living there. :lol:

It's certainly safer to live here than to live in Pakistan. On that note I always wonder what makes you live in Her Majesty's domain yet profess to be an expert on the situation in Pakistan. Ahh don't bother replying as I don't intend visiting this thread again
 
TaimiKhan;1874023]1. What world are you talking about ??? US, India, US allies Europe & others just because the are getting killed by the Taliban. Has Pakistan become Somalia or what ??
Check the earlier link, there are 1100 terror related accidents in Pakistan. Isn't enough? Not saying Pakistan is Somalia, but remember the TTP invaded your tribal areas earlier and you need to send army to flush out them.

And about the term world - who else need to be accounted for?

2. You talking about KSM ?? Have you read about him or just opening up ?? He was born in Kuwait, his radicalization started there, he studied in the US. What has Pakistan to do with him ?? He was raised and radicalized somewhere else, not in Pakistan. This is how much you guys are informed and then come here and open your mouths without knowing shiet.

He was caught where? how come he reached there? not mentioned OBL

3. And as for 26/11, is it remotely possible that 10 men enter a city and roam around and reach their targets without any kind of local support ?? If you guys think that way, i salute your brains and their thinking power. First root out the local support in your own country, then talk to us. Whenever ghar maee daikatiii perti hai, apnay ghar kaaa hi bandaa involve hotaa hai.

If Navy SEALS can do it within 40 minutes with all sophistication, 10 commando - trained ppl can target a civilian city and make such damage. Listen t0 Uncle Headly's words too.

4. Out of the 180Million population is a few dozens or a few hundred act on their own, does it makes the whole 180Million liable ?? Does the actions of Lt Col Prohit represent the whole of 800Million Hindus in India ?? What that officer did suggests i should call the whole Hindus of India as terrorists or a terrorist factory ??

Off cource not..But the difference is Purohit is under the bars awaiting his fate but on the other side of the border, they roam free ..

Jamaat-ud-Dawah warns India against 'striking' Pakistan - The Times of India

5. No, they are fighting the occupational forces in Afghanistan, the ones fighting the PA are the local ones with support from people across the border.

All ideology is same, you cant differentiate..there is no good one and bad one

6. Had the western powers not been playing their dirty games, we would have not been taking sides. And before lecturing us, look to your own country which very soon is gonna be taking sides of western allies to counter China, rather it has already begun. As said, these dirty games and politics are making the world a bad place to live in and things are going to the worse side day by day.

You are wrong, we keep our strategic individuality intact, see MMRCA decisions, PAK-FA etc. We are lucky to have good leaders in that case.
 
@Solo Monk -If Kennedy decided to economically help Pakistan instead of India, it was after the Nehru's visit (November 5-15th 1961), who, already a part of the Non-Aligned Movement, was the 'worst Statesman' that Kennedy has even witnessed, being 'de-connected from reality'. It was not until 1962, because of diverse reasons (Indian forces attacking Goa's Portuguese colonies, buying Soviet's MiG-21, ...), that the USA stopped its pro-India aid policy.

To put it in more accurate words India had developed its own path in the form of NAM and US found a more malleable regime in Pakistan to take advantage of. As for our shift towards the soviets, it was a direct reaction to Pakistan joining the US camp but still we didn't become a vassal state to USSR.

The funny thing is that it was Nehru who was literally begging for the money, because 'he couldn't do without' (read Sarvepalli Gopal's biography on the man.) Ayyub Khan just, naturally, said that this money is given in a war-paradigm against the Soviets, and not freely; thus, the USA had to view Pakistan as a helped partner, not a feed slave.

lol at Nehru begging, did the local maulvi told you that? On the contrary it was the Pakistani regime that was willing to be a mercenary state for the US ambitions in Afghanistan.

And 'aid', in a developing-country where feudal system prevails doesn't mean a direct contribution to the nation's wealth; there's a detailed study in the book 'Delivering aid differently: lessons from the field', and that's what is said about Pakistan: '... has historically received large volumes of aid in support of its development into a lower-middle-income country. Yet it has also faced the increasingly difficult task of aid coordination. In 2007 Pakistan received more than 2.2 billion dollars in official development assistance (ODA), ranking the country as the sixth-largest recipient of official aid in the world. This overall sum, however, amounted to only 1.5 percent of gross domestic income, translating into a per capita aid of 14 dollars - much smaller than the amount received by countries with similar levels of income, such as Sudan (55 dollars), Kenya (34 dollars), and Vietnam (29 dollars.)'

and whose responsibility is it to change the feudal system in Pakistan, US?

Concerning the US aid about WoT specifically, we all know how much they gave us and how much we had to spent.

Poor planning on your part perhaps? or are you still bent on telling yourself in the mirror that somehow you were the innocent lassy taken for a ride?
 
@Abhishek_:"To put it in more accurate words India had developed its own path in the form of NAM and US found a more malleable regime in Pakistan to take advantage of. As for our shift towards the soviets, it was a direct reaction to Pakistan joining the US camp but still we didn't become a vassal state to USSR.
lol at Nehru begging, did the local maulvi told you that? On the contrary it was the Pakistani regime that was willing to be a mercenary state for the US ambitions in Afghanistan.
"

To put it in more rational fashion: India had the USA pissed off, and so bye bye the dollars. And, lol dude, I didn't talked of Nehru begging: it was maulvi Sarvepalli Gopal in the second volume of his biography about Nehru. Everything I've said is backed up by a French book called 'Les avatars du non-alignement' (and published by the Sorbonne, Paris), which exclusively centralizes on American (and Soviet) aid to India. Ever-great with-three-digits-GDP-growth Bharat receiving economic help... Astonishing, eh ? But I'll not go through the hundred of pages about the lovely Soviet-India relationship; I'm not interested by India per se, just defending Pakistan against brainless claims.

"and whose responsibility is it to change the feudal system in Pakistan, US?"

Huh, yes, and so ? You're talking like since Ayyub Khan, Pakistan's GDP is measured in terms of American aid. I've just shown you that this aid is mismanaged in the worst way.

"Poor planning on your part perhaps? or are you still bent on telling yourself in the mirror that somehow you were the innocent lassy taken for a ride?"

Meray pyaray ladoo, Musharraf didn't have the choice, he said it himself in his autobiography. Digest it.
 
Back
Top Bottom