Cameron's inflammatory comments against Pakistan: I meant Pakistanis are terrorists..

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Same MI5.. The info on WMD turned out to be false.. But did it change what happened to Iraq.. It didnt...

So all countries base their state policies on these intels only. At times they are flawed, but more often than not, they are not... So a British PM will not stop relying on MI5 because they miss the mark sometimes.. And if he is saying this in such an open forum and that too in India, either he knows something that none of us do or the UK state policy / relations with Pakistan are on the verge of a change..

If he knows something we do not, then the fact that he has come out into the open and angered Pakistan should no longer be a hindrance in providing the information on which those comments were based.

As for the relationship changing, I think it is changing, along the lines of the US, where economics and trade is taking center-stage and nations will base their relationships on that foundation. Given that India offers far more from an economic and trade standpoint than does Pakistan at this point, the 'de-linking' of India-Pakistan relations, along the lines of the US, is something the UK will adopt as well. So as I pointed out, the 'optics' will change - no more 'visit Pakistan if you visit India' and 'treat both equally in all matters', but advance relationships based on mutual interests with both.

Beyond that the G2G relationship between the US and Pakistan and the US and UK will continue as is so long as NATO is in Afghanistan, and they are going to be there for a long time by all appearances.

 

[somebozo]

One question
Who exactly asked David "Chameleon" for permission to export terror?? He should mind his own business and secure his ailing economy which is likely to create more violent skinheads than some Pakistani taliban fanboys!

 

[karan.1970]

If credible proof is not necessary, then Pakistanis are also justified in pointing to the CIA and RAW supporting terrorists in Pakistan, A-Jad is correct when he points to the US and UK supporting terrorism in Iran, and Indians and the West should just accept it and start, as Ramu suggests, 'introspecting'.

Argumentum ad populum is a fallacy only in a court of law.. In geo political realities, policies are more dependent on common perceptions than a bunch of documents..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

its not a court of law where he has to prove something. he is unilaterally communicating GB's point of view on Pakistan

A serious accusation such as that (though he has now backtracked) needs to be substantiated. Otherwise he is no better than A-Jad accusing the US and UK of supporting terrorism in Iran.

 

[SMC]

I think the biggest proof is what the world thinks of pakistan - epicenter of terrorism.
Just compare pakistan's stature and india's stature in the world and you will get the answer.
Nobody on the world thinks india supports terrorism in pakistan but majority of the world believes that pakistan supports terror from its soil.
Believe it or not, its you people who are even bigger hypocrites than us!!
Keep living in a self-denial mode. It is going to take you nowhere.

Huh? So the western world believing some certain to be true is proof that the certain thing is true?

How old are you? Where does these armchair experts with overly simplistic, childish and naive logic come from? This forum is rife with them.

The problem with is that your argument an incredibly simplistic argument because most of the world you're talking about (i.e. the western world) has similar interests to India. So yes, they'd believe the same.

Considering that, it's not like that western people believing the same thing or nearly the same thing makes even an iota of difference. But yeah, if you want to, by all means, however that's like hanging by a very thin thread.

But you probably won't understand the above considering your intellectual level (at least from what I can gather in the post above).

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Argumentum ad populum is a fallacy only in a court of law.. In geo political realities, policies are more dependent on common perceptions than a bunch of documents..

That does not make Cameron's claims any more legitimate or valid.

 

[SMC]

Argumentum ad populum is a fallacy only in a court of law.. In geo political realities, policies are more dependent on common perceptions than a bunch of documents..

Isn't that what many indians use as their argument? Such as the person I just responded to, that since many westerners believe Pakistan is supporting terrorism, that their beliefs are enough proof that Pakistan is supporting terrorism.

 

[SMC]

Like i said, KEEP LIVING IN A SELF-DENIAL MODE. Hope it will take you somewhere.

Do you even know the meaning of denial? Or are you, like so many other indians, use it for anyone who doesn't believe your story?

I mean, with brilliant arguments such as western public believing something to be true makes it true, it's no wonder that you make posts like the above.

 

[LadyGaga]

I am making a statement.Pakistan is not involved in terrorism.Now prove it.I am not trying to score any points with you.Just want you to see that an argument has 2 sides.US policy dictates WOT,of which unfortunately,your country is a key ally in.My loquacious countrymen have been very quick to present proof which i don't think has made any impact anyway.Why do you want me to serve you up links from the web?To show my vast knowledge of the WWW?Or my lack of knowledge about proof diplomacy?

Since you want to talk about proof bring concrete proof that Pakistan is involved in terrorism? Don't go in circles with empty talk.

Dinner is served on your plate now.

 

[SMC]

I am making a statement.Pakistan is not involved in terrorism.Now prove it.I am not trying to score any points with you.Just want you to see that an argument has 2 sides.US policy dictates WOT,of which unfortunately,your country is a key ally in.My loquacious countrymen have been very quick to present proof which i don't think has made any impact anyway.Why do you want me to serve you up links from the web?To show my vast knowledge of the WWW?Or my lack of knowledge about proof diplomacy?

If you make any accusations, the onus is on you to prove it. Other than that, one is innocent until proven guilty. These philosophical discussions are not only pointless, they are also logically incorrect. Furthermore, what proof have your countrymen presented?

 

[Pakistani_Regiment]

I am making a statement.Pakistan is not involved in terrorism.Now prove it.I am not trying to score any points with you.Just want you to see that an argument has 2 sides.US policy dictates WOT,of which unfortunately,your country is a key ally in.My loquacious countrymen have been very quick to present proof which i don't think has made any impact anyway.Why do you want me to serve you up links from the web?To show my vast knowledge of the WWW?Or my lack of knowledge about proof diplomacy?

thats what i thought..you cannot present credible proof that the u.s.a. will consider concrete. just hallucinations like your indian buddies do on here.

 

[SMC]

DENIAL= denying the truth OR existence of a thing.
HOPE that helps.

Yes, so have you proved your story be true?

Or again, are you like so many other indians who claim that their version of the truth is the truth? That too without any proof?

Why am I wasting time here? It's clear we have a teenager armchair expert at hand here whose intellectual capability does not allow them to understand these points. What a waste of time.

 

[chakra]

Yes, so have you proved your story be true?

Or again, are you like so many other indians who claim that their version of the truth is the truth? That too without any proof?

Why am I wasting time here? It's clear we have a teenager armchair expert at hand here. What a waste of time.

Here are a few links:

http://www.ndtv.com/news/world/isi-used-let-for-anti-india-activities-un-report-20112.php

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21658.pdf

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R40087.pdf

http://www.acus.org/files/publication_pdfs/65/PakistanReport.pdf

If you expect a kind of proof that links pakistan to majority of terror activities is in a form of a lollywood movie, then i am afraid that no such evidence exists!!
Feel free to disagree.
I am posting few documents i found in the public domain.

 

[SMC]

Here are a few links:

ISI used LeT for anti-India activities: UN report

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21658.pdf

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R40087.pdf

http://www.acus.org/files/publication_pdfs/65/PakistanReport.pdf

If you expect a kind of proof that links pakistan to majority of terror activities is in a form of a lollywood movie, then i am afraid that no such evidence exists!!
Feel free to disagree.
I am posting few documents i found in the public domain.

Most of the links are severely outdated and present decades old information. Some don't even mention state involvement. But more importantly, do you understand the meaning of proof?

 

[chakra]

Most of the links are severely outdated and present decades old information. But more importantly, do you understand the meaning of proof?

May i know what is your definition of proof?
Proof presented in the form of a lollywood movie??