Dar warns India not to cast an evil eye on Pakistan's economic prosperity!

[RescueRanger]

Nobody is hiding. If you can run both Pakistani flags despite your location, I can make the same request to @WebMaster to change both my flags to Pakistani too. Let's see what happens. Fair enough?

Good Man!

 

[VCheng]

Independant? So me be being left leaning socialist, secularist thoroughly westernized, believing in equality for all including gays, athiests and all the rest makes me what? Your typical beard flowing mullah?

I have never and never will follow the herd. I think everybody knows that here. In fact I have probably come close to being thrown out of PDF ....

Close to being thrown out? Try "actually thrown out".

Good Man!

Or "retarded thing".


Edit: I will be posting up a new thread in the Senior Section soon. See you guys there!

Edit: Islam and punishment

 

[RescueRanger]

Close to being thrown out? Try "actually thrown out".



Or "retarded thing".


Edit: I will be posting up a new thread in the Senior Section soon. See you guys there!

Now, Now gentlemen let's remember "same team".

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Close to being thrown out? Try "actually thrown out". Or "retarded thing".
Edit: I will be posting up a new thread in the Senior Section soon. See you guys there!

Tag me. Hope it some controversial .....

 

[VCheng]

Tag me. Hope it some controversial .....

Here:

Islam and punishment

 

[Patriot Pakistani]

 

[nForce]

Note: British still had a lot of time left, according to that argument they had. Instead they handed it over to Mahraja. What they should have done was to hold a referendum in Kashmir and GB. If they did you know and i know who Kashmiris would have chosen, being a Muslim majority state and pro-Pakistan.

It is not an argument, it is an agreement. The lease was no longer required, because British Dominion of India, the entity that took the lease in the first place, was no longer going to exist!! Hence, as per Mountbatten plan, all the leased agencies were going back to the princely states where the head of the state will choose what to do next.

The Princely states, which were 635 in total at that time had the liberty to decide which dominion to join. So, it was Hari Singh who had the authority to decide the fate of Gilgit Baltistan. The same instrument of accession was exercised in case of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Kharan etc. etc.

On his own? he had a whole force behind him. GB scouts, and many other people were also playing a leading role. Note: Mahraja hated the force and wanted to get rid of it too, at some point. Thus the reason for the growing pro-Pakistan movement in Chilas and different areas.

On his own? his will, again incorrect. Many leading figures were too backing him. Plus he had noticed that Maharajaha was going to acceded with India, realizing that GB has majority Muslim population and wanted to join Pakistan. Maharajaha was going to go against the peoples wishes.

Yes, on his own, only to be shoved aside when the Pakistani militia attacked Jammu & Kashmir. If I'm not very much mistaken, he was the highest ranking officer to rebel, and no other officer higher than him in the chain of command was a party to it.

I think you are misinterpreting a few things. Militia, no. They were local forces, under maharaja's command.
Read this: How Gilgit-Baltistan got liberated .

Brown rebelled. He was fool to think he was doing it for some greater cause he will be part of. Then the Akbar Khan's militia stepped in and swiftly put him aside. Had he been a bit more experienced, like, say Gracey, he would not have done that. The British officers anyways had to live. He was wrong to do so on multiple counts resulting in the violation of agreements which were accepted by India, Pakistan and the British.

 

[naveen mishra]

Ministers of Pakistan and India should just shut their mouth up. Idiotic war mongers :-/

including media.....selling story

 

[WAJsal]

It is not an argument, it is an agreement.

Sorry.

The lease was no longer required, because British Dominion of India, the entity that took the lease in the first place, was no longer going to exist!! Hence, as per Mountbatten plan, all the leased agencies were going back to the princely states where the head of the state will choose what to do next.

Sir, they could have held the state and they should have. Instead of giving t back and creating problems.

The Princely states, which were 635 in total at that time had the liberty to decide which dominion to join. So, it was Hari Singh who had the authority to decide the fate of Gilgit Baltistan. The same instrument of accession was exercised in case of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Kharan etc. etc

By the wishes of their people. Now India forcefully took over Hyderabad. Can you think of any reasons.

Yes, on his own, only to be shoved aside when the Pakistani militia attacked Jammu & Kashmir. If I'm not very much mistaken, he was the highest ranking officer to rebel, and no other officer higher than him in the chain of command was a party to it.

GB scouts and Major brown surrounded Governors house. After retaliation and etc, etc they following morning he surrendered. And the GB scouts got rid of many Sikh forces controlled by mahraja. I really thought you would be aware of the history at least. And then a government was formed for 15 day's, which decided to join Pakistan.

Brown rebelled. He was fool to think he was doing it for some greater cause he will be part of. Then the Akbar Khan's militia stepped in and swiftly put him aside. Had he been a bit more experienced, like, say Gracey, he would not have done that. The British officers anyways had to live. He was wrong to do so on multiple counts resulting in the violation of agreements which were accepted by India, Pakistan and the British.

So GB scouts were militant's according to you. Pakistan had nothing to do with GB's liberation. GB scouts are the one's to be given credit. He was never put aside. He had many people backing him, by your logic one man was the result of a huge piece of land going to Pakistan. He might have inspired many, played a key role. He had many backing him.

 

[nForce]

By the wishes of their people. Now India forcefully took over Hyderabad. Can you think of any reasons.

Interesting for you to mention Hyderabad. I'll get back to other points, a little busy, so let me address only this point as of now.

As per the Mountbatten plan, the 630+ princely states were free to decide what to do, whether they want to join India or Pakistan or stay independent.

The Maharaja of Jammu & Kashmir used to despise Congress and Nehru because he knew he will have to conform to land reforms sooner or later, which is infact one of the first things India did post-Independence.
But, he decided to accede to India when he came under attack from militia. So, that choice was made according to terms previously agreed upon, as per the provisions of Government of India Act, 1947.

Now, coming to the question of Hyderabad. Yes, the Nizam was well within his rights to say he wanted to stay independent. Point to be noted, the Nizam, not even for once said he wanted to join Pakistan. He had his standing army, with which he hoped to maintain the state, along with his aristocrats.

Now, Indian government opposed the idea of 'Balkanization' of India. It was argued, there has been one partition already and any more cannot be entertained, for the sake of integrity. We cannot have pockets or islands of other countries within India. Hyderabad had close links with rest of India and was viewed as a part of it only.
So, India invaded Hyderabad in September 1948, led by Maj. Gen. Jayonto Chaudhuri, who later went on to become the COAS of India.

So, to summarize, the difference is, Jammu & Kashmir had acceded to India, while Hyderabad did not. India treated Hyderabad as a separate state and invaded it.
I've seen many Pakistanis talk about Hyderabad and Junagadh as a counter-argument to Kashmir, but it's not the same. The ruler of Hyderabad, or it's people, had no plans to join Pakistan.

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Dar warns India not to cast an evil eye on Pakistan's economic prosperity
By Zahid Gishkori
Published: July 10, 2015

“We have not closed our eyes. We don’t have soft corner for India. We are not beggars,” said Dar. PHOTO: REUTERS

ISLAMABAD: Even as Pakistan and India moved to resume the stalled dialogue process, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar on Friday warned its eastern neighbour not to cast an evil eye on Pakistan’s economic prosperity.

Responding to an attention notice moved by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Senator Sassui Palijo, Dar said “Pakistan’s next-door neigbour India could not digest Pak-China Economic Corridor Project deal.”

Palijo had initially drawn the attention of Defence Minister Khawaja Asif towards the destruction caused by the heavy mortar shelling by the Indian troops along the working boundary recently, but Dar rose to answer in the MNA’s stead.

“We would give a befitting response to any Indian aggression [both on economic and war fronts]. It is [Indian aggression] directly linked to our recent economic stability particularly in form of Pak-China economic deal,” the finance minister told lawmakers.

The minister recalled that even Indian Premier Narendra Modi had expressed his concerns over CPEC during his recent visit to China, arguing that the economic corridor’s route was controversial. “But China has shown [Modi] the red flag,” he observed.

Dar said that the government has been taking up issue of cross-border violation at international forums as well as with India adding that Pakistani forces are also responding with full force.

“We have not closed our eyes. We don’t have soft corner for India. We are not beggars.”

Fake NOCs for Bulletproof Vehicles

During the proceeding, lawmakers expressed their concern over issuance of alleged fake NOCs by the Ministry of Interior for bulletproof vehicles.

Senator Talha Mahmood of Jammiat Ulema-e-Islam Fazl (JUI-F) informed the Senate that over three dozen NOCs which had been issued to various dignitaries were found to be fake.

“It is a serious matter. The government should take notice of it,” he observed.

Senator Azam Swati of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) too pointed out problems with the authenticity of his own NOC issued five years ago.

Credit Bureau Bill 2015 Passed

The Senate on Friday passed the Credit Bureau Bill 2015, which was moved by the finance minister.

The bill, which provides for the incorporation and functioning of the credit bureau, was approved after amendments proposed by the Senate Standing Committee on Finance.

Two important clauses included in the bill by the standing committee are: “Any credit information report issued by the credit bureau shall be verified by the State Bank of Pakistan. No credit information report issued by the credit bureau shall be valid unless verified by State Bank of Pakistan.”

Nomination of Senators for Parliamentary Committee on CPEC

The House through a motion authorised the Chairman Senate Mian Raza Rabbani to choose seven Senators for a parliamentary committee to oversee the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Project.

Over 22b bailout package for PIA

The government told Senate that a total of Rs22.26 billion had peen given to bailout the national flag carrier and to improve its workings.
Dar warns India not to cast an evil eye on Pakistan's economic prosperity - The Express Tribune

Minister Ishaq Dollar is still spoon-feeding once a great commercial giant of Pakistan and he is talking about alleged economic prosperity. What economic prosperity? If the economy was going great, Pakistani investors should be investing in Pakistan, not in Dubai:
Pakistanis buy Dubai property worth $379m in three months - Pakistan - DAWN.COM

As of now.. the only breed that is casting a bad eye on Pakistan's prosperity is Pakistani Civil-Military leadership... these leaders should stop this topi drama and focus on Pakistan's development.

 

[WAJsal]

But, he decided to accede to India when he came under attack from militia. So, that choice was made according to terms previously agreed upon, as per the provisions of Government of India Act, 1947.

not militia. GB scouts, please don't misinterpret.

Now, Indian government opposed the idea of 'Balkanization' of India. It was argued, there has been one partition already and any more cannot be entertained, for the sake of integrity. We cannot have pockets or islands of other countries within India. Hyderabad had close links with rest of India and was viewed as a part of it only.

Look at it through a neutral point of view. Was it the right or the wrong thing to do? Note: Indian army was involved in killing of many, could it not have been prevented. we are going off topic, best to end this discussion here.

I've seen many Pakistanis talk about Hyderabad and Junagadh as a counter-argument to Kashmir, but it's not the same. The ruler of Hyderabad, or it's people, had no plans to join Pakistan.

I have read otherwise on many occasions. Again not an expert, won't comment.

 

[nForce]

not militia. GB scouts, please don't misinterpret.

I'm not talking about Gilgit there. I'm talking about attack on Kashmir, launched on 22nd October, 1947 early morning.

Look at it through a neutral point of view. Was it the right or the wrong thing to do? Note: Indian army was involved in killing of many, could it not have been prevented. we are going off topic, best to end this discussion here.

I already gave you an impartial view, without any sugarcoating. It was an invasion, yes. Important point is, it is unrelated to Pakistan, the same way Kalat is unrelated to India.
And I agree with you. I believe we have reached an end to our discussion.

 

[WAJsal]

I'm not talking about Gilgit there. I'm talking about attack on Kashmir, launched on 22nd October, 1947 early morning.

my bad.