China likely to seek explanation from India over terror sponsorship

[Stag112]

Chinese are listening to much into Pakistani propaganda

No they are not. Pakistani desperate awam listening too much into their military propaganda is all.

 

[MilSpec]

You didn't really try to comprehend my previous response did you? Let me break it down into a simple summary:

.

You can try to weasel out your claim but which implies India supporting TTP and LEJ.
Please present a shred of evidence to prove the same instead of the traditional blah blah.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No they are not. Pakistani desperate awam listening too much into their military propaganda is all.

Unlike the Indian media that plasters GoI propaganda hand-out's (media reports) verbatim on almost every single major media outlet, the commentary in the OP has been limited to a handful of outlets.

The 'desperate awam listening too much to their military propaganda' statement is therefore better applied to the Indian Awam and media.

 

[Dragon4]

Unlike the Indian media that plasters GoI propaganda hand-out's (media reports) verbatim on almost every single major media outlet, the commentary in the OP has been limited to a handful of outlets.

The 'desperate awam listening too much to their military propaganda' statement is therefore better applied to the Indian Awam and media.

unkil do you realize you are on the 7th page of a news piece which is nothing but a propaganda?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You can try to weasel out your claim but which implies India supporting TTP and LEJ.
Please present a shred of evidence to prove the same instead of the traditional blah blah.

I never made any categorical claim one way or the other about 'India supports XYZ terrorists' - go back and re-read the posts since you're having both comprehension and memory issues. What you're doing is in fact 'weaseling out' of the original comments, and dragging the discussion further away from the original focus.

What I've pointed out in the last couple of responses to you is that Indian support for terrorist groups such as the TTP, LeJ etc. cannot be ruled out merely because 'extremist organizations like these would not accept support from a Hindu country', and you've avoided responding to those specific arguments.

unkil do you realize you are on the 7th page of a news piece which is nothing but a propaganda?

Baba Ji, do you realize that your fellow countrymen are still making bogus arguments leading into the 7th page of a so called 'propaganda news piece'?

Bogus arguments and claims need to be debunked, no?

 

[Stag112]

Unlike the Indian media that plasters GoI propaganda hand-out's (media reports) verbatim on almost every single major media outlet, the commentary in the OP has been limited to a handful of outlets.

The 'desperate awam listening too much to their military propaganda' statement is therefore better applied to the Indian Awam and media.

Your ignorance on media matters is shocking. If media outlets print verbatim press release with source then thats accurate reporting, not making stuff up.

Making stuff up would be the crap we are discussing or wikileaks etc. and you defence of such only discredits you.

 

[Dragon4]

Budhay, do you realize that you and your fellow countrymen keep making bogus arguments leading into the 7th page of a so called 'propaganda news piece'?

ok unkil keep it up, inshah allah more power to Pakistan and propaganda.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Your ignorance on media matters is shocking. If media outlets print verbatim press release with source then thats accurate reporting, not making stuff up.

What's the 'source' for:

"Dawood is now being protected by Elite Pakistani Army Commandos'?
"Dawood's residence has been located in Pakistan"? (several addresses were non-existent)
"Musharraf accepts OBL & Zawahiri as Pakistan's heroes?
"Mukhtar accepts Pakistan government knowledge of OBL hiding in Pakistan?

These claims (and many more) were plastered almost verbatim across the Indian media - who did the fact checking before regurgitating what are obviously false and/or (at best) grossly distorted reports?

 

[MilSpec]

I never made any categorical claim one way or the other about 'India supports XYZ terrorists' - go back and re-read the posts since you're having both comprehension and memory issues. What you're doing is in fact 'weaseling out' of the original comments, and dragging the discussion further away from the original focus

What I've pointed out in the last couple of responses to you is that Indian support for terrorist groups such as the TTP, LeJ etc. cannot be ruled out merely because 'extremist organizations like these would not accept support from a Hindu country', and you've avoided responding to those specific arguments.

Purposefully, as these strawman arguments holds no logical value.

Pakistani extremist wahhabi /sallafi organisations being supported by saudi/Pak deep state nexus which has been the traditional institutionalized breeding grounds for such organisation should be ignored and instead the accusation should be on a polar opposite India which has zero stake in such groups . Despite - your prime ally's accusations of Pak deepstate assisting taliban/haqqani/hekymetyaar groups time and again, your idea is that India is behind your sectarian/terrorism problems.
When you start capturing terrorists originating from thiruvanantpuram and kolhapur, let us know.

 

[Lurch Adams]

You didn't really try to comprehend my previous response did you? Let me break it down into a simple summary:

1. Support for a terrorist group at one point in time does not automatically mean support for said terrorist group (or its predecessors/off-shoots) for all time.

2. Support for said terrorist groups does not come with a "Supported by RAW/Indian Government" label or announcement

3. Even if the Indian Government made public statements announcing its support for TTP, Baloch and sectarian terrorists in Pakistan, the operational leadership of these groups wouldn't care, because their primary goal is attacking the Pakistani State and continuing their criminal enterprises to raise finances in support of said goals. If murder, kidnapping, extortion, smuggling etc can be justified by these groups in 'support of the cause', then taking financial and training support from someone they might suspect to be working for the GoI is pretty far down the list of things they won't do.


You lot are so deluded by your own media propaganda that you really don't get it do you? The bar is being set higher each day, not lower. The West, even the US, is continuing to offer weapons and economic support to Pakistan. The US is openly talking about some kind of 'path to mainstreaming Pakistan's civilian nuclear program'. There are no Western sanctions, economic or otherwise, on Pakistan, and no talk (outside of Indian apologists throwing hissy fits) of sanctions. Even the Russians are now selling Pakistan weapons and increasing economic cooperation.

All of India's 'Bollywood Rhona Dhona' about alleged Pakistani State sponsoring of terrorism, and the result is that things have only improved for Pakistan from a Western policy standpoint. At some level you realize this fact but just can't admit it, and this shows in your desperate attempt of clinging to straws when you dredge up 'Western support for Pakistan via diplomatic and military threats in 1965 & 1971'. Western support for Pakistan in 1965 & 1971 was a result of Cold War alignments, and India's relationship with the Soviets. That support started evaporating with the Soviet defeat and disintegration in the aftermath of the Afghan Jihad - India and alleged terrorism had nothing to do with it. If it wasn't for the Cold War, Western pressure on India (in support of Pakistan) in 1965 & 1971 would likely have not materialized, and certainly not at the levels seen.

The thuggery, raping and murdering was done by the East Pakistani terrorists trained and supported by India. Pakistan forces merely responded to wide scale atrocities, violence and chaos by said terrorists, and Indian/Bengali terrorist accusations of 'millions killed, raped etc' have never been credibly proven, with even the newly formed Bangladesh government's own investigation commissions on rape and deaths coming up with ridiculously low numbers (that could be substantiated).

Very nice, most clever. I must admit you do spend a lot of hard effort into defending the indefensible. Your attempts to try and pass off scrappy aid and mundane diplomatic ties as proof of Western approval of Pakistan fools no one. Nor does your efforts to try and paint the sporadic silence over Pakistani sponsorship of terror as some form of acquiescence. For every period of quasi-normal diplomatic relations with Pakistan, there have been equally long periods of humiliations in the form of sanctions, positions on watch lists, tech-transfer bans, ultimatums of being bombed into the stone age, and so on. For each period of silence there have been timely reminders that Pakistan has to stop sponsoring terrorism.

Every year, the US Department of State publishes a world terrorism report, and every year, without exception, Pakistan finds mention as a sponsor/harbourer of terrorism. According to your version of events, these are just "nudge! nudge! wink! wink!" games that countries play, because "Hey! Pakistan is receiving some money at the end of the day, isn't it?!" The amount of money received by Pakistan as aid/foreign investment/net capital transfer is less than peanuts for a country its size. It is comical to hoist it as some form of validation of Pakistani buffoonery on the world stage, where it is a known fact that Pakistan is only to be engaged on negative agendas such as nuclear proliferation, terrorism, arms sale, etc.

Your criteria for showing world-wide reprehension about Pakistan's conduct as a nation can only be met if:
1) All countries snap diplomatic ties.
2) All countries impose sanctions.
3) All countries jointly invade Pakistan, preferably under aegis of UNSC.

And since that is not happening tomorrow, you stand vindicated, right?

As for '71, let's not play this game, shall we? I will quote from Tony Mascarenhas, and the voluminous body of neutral research on the subject. You will quote from Sarmila Bose, and that random crackpot Bangladeshi blogger. I will then point out the dozens of references (again, neutral), that thoroughly discredit Bose, and the blogger's background as a Jamaat sympathizer. So spare me your cleverness.

 

[zeetr]

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Purposefully, as these strawman arguments holds no logical value.

Purposefully since that was not the point I responded to and therefore not the argument I was engaging in. You chose to make the argument that I responded to, so your 'strawman argument' claim applies to you, not me, since I'm merely responding in the same context.

Pakistani extremist wahhabi /sallafi organisations being supported by saudi/Pak deep state nexus which has been the traditional institutionalized breeding grounds for such organisation should be ignored and instead the accusation should be on a polar opposite India which has zero stake in such groups . Despite - your prime ally's accusations of Pak deepstate assisting taliban/haqqani/hekymetyaar groups time and again, your idea is that India is behind your sectarian/terrorism problems.

Narrow and deluded tunnel vision, while analyzing or attempting to understand Pakistan, is a hallmark of Indian intelligentsia and commentators of late. The presence of Wahabi support for the TTP, LeJ, etc does not automatically exclude the role of other State actors (India for example) who see their interests being met through the overall goals of such groups. I've explained, multiple times now, why your argument of 'Hindu India not supporting Islamic terrorist groups' is invalid, and you're choosing to dance around and babble about irrelevant issues in an attempt to avoid answering those points.

The claim of 'Pakistani Deep State support' for these groups is laughably flawed given the fact that the primary enemy of these groups is the very same so called 'Pakistani Deep State'. They have carried out high profile and complex terrorist attacks inflicting significant casualties on ISI, Army, Air Force and Navy locations, and only deluded fools would argue that the the Deep State would be supporting and sponsoring attacks on itself that erode the very same Deep State's military and political influence and capabilities.

When you start capturing terrorists originating from thiruvanantpuram and kolhapur, let us know.

Why would India send terrorist from thiruvanantpuram and kolhapur when it can support the TTP/LeJ/Baloch terrorists out of Afghanistan?

Very nice, most clever. I must admit you do spend a lot of hard effort into defending the indefensible..

It's simple really - list all the tangible policy positions (towards Pakistan) taken by the global powers (influenced by India's allegations of terrorism) that have weakened Pakistan. I've already pointed out tangible policies by global powers that are strengthening Pakistan, so the onus is on you, even if all you can come up with are the same kind of 'scrappy aid and mundane diplomatic ties' kind of 'tangible policies'. There's no point wasting my time if you can't even provide a specific and tangible set of policies/actions undertaken against Pakistan as a direct result of Indian rhona dhona over all these years.

I'll even help you out a but and trash those other straws you trotted out in your deluded rant:

"there have been equally long periods of humiliations in the form of sanctions, positions on watch lists, tech-transfer bans," -- These were related to the nuclear tests, and as far as I recall, India had similar restrictions imposed on her.

"ultimatums of being bombed into the stone age, and so on. " - Denied by the US, and most likely a 'paraphrased interpretation' by the Pakistani General engaged in talks with the US over the pending Afghan invasion. Nothing India related/influenced here either.

"US Department of State publishes a world terrorism report, and every year, without exception, Pakistan finds mention as a sponsor/harbourer of terrorism." - an irrelevant report (and I'm not sure the language you used is the same as that used by the State Department) given the lack of any tangible negative impact on Pakistan, which is the only thing that counts in terms of gauging the efficacy of Indian Rhona Dhona in front of the world over the last several decades.

The amount of money received by Pakistan as aid/foreign investment/net capital transfer is less than peanuts for a country its size. -- The small amount of foreign investment that Pakistan receives is a consequence of domestic Pakistani failures in governance, and not a consequence of Indian Rhona Dhona or a deliberate withholding (as a means of punishment) of capital and investment inflows into Pakistan by the governments of global powers. Irrelevant example yet again.

So the fact remains, the world powers have done nothing in terms of tangible policies/actions against Pakistan as a result of India's Rhona Dhona - sanctions have been lifted, economic ties and even aid (the latter is something I am not in support of, but it establishes my point) continue, as do military ties and sales. The discussion over the remaining tech restrictions (NSG membership for the most part) has now been officially kicked off. India has accomplished nothing, and Pakistan is in fact much better placed today in the international community than it was in 1999 after the nuclear tests.

While I'm sure to be disappointed, I'll wait for some kind of factual response from you on tangible policies/steps/actions (influenced by India) that have been taken by the global powers against Pakistan.

 

[Lurch Adams]

While I'm sure to be disappointed, I'll wait for some kind of factual response from you on tangible policies/steps/actions (influenced by India) that have been taken by the global powers against Pakistan

At what time did the discussion between us become one where I had to prove that world powers were sanctioning Pakistan under Indian pressure? The support you stated from the world community was some money given and the right to exist. To which I agreed with you, that if that is how low your threshold is then who can argue with you? If I provide a "list", as per your request, you will either deny it or if denial proves difficult you will lower the bar even further.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

As for '71, let's not play this game, shall we? I will quote from Tony Mascarenhas, and the voluminous body of neutral research on the subject. You will quote from Sarmila Bose, and that random crackpot Bangladeshi blogger. I will then point out the dozens of references (again, neutral), that thoroughly discredit Bose, and the blogger's background as a Jamaat sympathizer. So spare me your cleverness.

Indian and Bangladeshi propaganda has been contradicted, and the lack of factual corroboration for the claims made, highlighted in multiple existing threads. Please respond and continue the discussion (on the subject of 1971) on those existing threads instead of hijacking this one.

Here are some links for you to start off with:

The atrocities in the 1971 civil war

Disproving some genocide claims

The courageous Pakistan army stand on the eastern front | Page 9

At what time did the discussion between us become one where I had to prove that world powers were sanctioning Pakistan under Indian pressure? The support you stated from the world community was some money given and the right to exist. To which I agreed with you, that if that is how low your threshold is then who can argue with you? If I provide a "list", as per your request, you will either deny it or if denial proves difficult you will lower the bar even further.

So what exactly are you trying to prove? What tangible actions against Pakistan has India managed to influence from her Rhona Dhona?

Pakistan is not sanctioned, economically or militarily. Her economic and military relationships with global powers continue to improve, with even the Russians entering into military and economic cooperation. Pakistan's limitations (in terms of the extent of that cooperation) are a consequence of her poor domestic economic and governance situation, and nothing influenced by India, unless you want to argue Indian support for TTP/Baloch/LeJ terrorists.

What kind of 'support from the world' are you looking for? Do you want the world to fight wars against Indian for Pakistan? Sanction India for Pakistan? The world isn't going to do that for India either, so what exactly is your point, in terms of India's Rhona Dhona having done anything other than titillate a global audience with a Bollywood style tamasha?

Far from 'merely surviving', Pakistan is (relative to 1999 for example) thriving in terms of her economic and military engagement with global powers and her increasing middle class and diversification of the local economy, and that too despite massive losses suffered over a decade due to terrorist violence and instability.

 

[Lurch Adams]

So what exactly are you trying to prove? What tangible actions against Pakistan has India managed to influence from her Rhona Dhona?

The point was not about India influencing the world. That is how you decided to shape your end of the debate. If you read whatever I wrote, not once have I addressed your premise about Indian rona dhona. The point, very simply put is whether or not Pakistan is a diplomatically isolated country with zero cedibility in the world. To which you posted generic homilies such as prospects of trade and investment and money "pouring" into Pakistan. Your generic statements can only be met by similarly generic statements.