What's new

Does India Harbour Territorial Ambitions Towards Pakistan or Not?

LoL troll thread, Pakistan maintains it's military to defend against a regional adversary - which is a large country that we have disputes with, why do countries like Russia have a strong military, are the Germans going to invade.

Take it up with AVM (Ret'd) Abid Rao or Air Marshal (Ret'd) Asghar Khan of the PAF who also has some very interesting and informative views on the Indo-Pakistani conflict and the fact that Pakistan has no need of nuclear weapons.


You are reading the words that were never written. He never took India off the hook for terrorist activities but what he mentioned is that India would "Dare not attack Pakistan because we are strong". It is true that India would dare not initiate a full-scale war and thus this gives them more reasons to engage Pakistan in using sub-war strategies and that includes terrorism.
What?
 
Last edited:
. .
Is demonising India as the perennial enemy only a ploy to justify military spending in Pakistan? With so much of the Pakistani budget allocated to military expenditure, it must be wide open to corruption. Is the Pakistani military elite creaming off money from the Pakistani military budget and using the Indian bogey man to justify that budget, thereby allowing the Pakistani military elite to enrich themselves at the country's expense? Is the militarisation of Pakistan a diversion or a distraction from the pressing economic and social needs of the great bulk of the Pakistani populace?

You decide!

They need a bogeyman for their business .And that is India.Somewhere I heard that their Army has official corporate business.
Their aim for a proper Pakistan was derailed just after the death of their nations father Jinnah.
We can explain it in some wider perspective.US spends so much for their military to protect their interests .But for justify that spending they always used bogeyman .First it was Germany then it was Soviet Union nowit is terrorism tomorrow it would be China .
But the real profit makers in US are civilian leaders and business corporats.And Americans can afford it because they are rich.And they know how to control things when shit is out of
hand.But in the case of Pakistan it would be Army ISI nexus.
Only diference between Americans and Pakistanis is that Americans have surplus money and in Pakistan they are squeezing poor population.
Thos who raise the voices for common population would become foreign agents.

When common Pakistanis begin to think about these trap peoples like Hafiz Saeed and Army Corporats would lose their significance.

Common Pakistanis dont have any problem with India they like our culture our films,songs etc.
Money and Power is the real Kingmakers and unfortunately in Pakistan both is at the hands of security nexus.
 
.

Did Gen. Mention Indian invasion invasion of Indian Forces into Bangladesh? Was that a territorial breach? India didn't hold on to Bangladesh because people of Bangladesh weren't pro India and it would've been a manana if they had.

Its like saying India doesn't want to eat Pakistan's arm but it wouldn't mind if it is cut. India does have territorial ambitions and they captured Sir Creek which is a Pakistani territory under Indian Occupation. What else is called territorial ambitions?

Pakistan and India has fought 3 wars, in one of the wars India invaded East Pakistan militarily. Is misunderstood statement of one militry person going to give India a clean chit? Don't tell me you are that thinly opinionated.
 
.
This is a pretty ridiculous notion!

If India wanted any part of Pakistan, even the US wouldn't find it hard to stop it like 71.
 
. .
Ignore this troll thread by indians, our armed forces protect us from all comers, indians go fck yourselves.
How is it a troll thread? The OP asked a simple question. we have had four wars and the discussion is quite valid. Instead of contributing something, you telling indians to go fck themselves only shows signs of insecurity.
 
. . . . . . .
You are reading the words that were never written. He never took India off the hook for terrorist activities but what he mentioned is that India would "Dare not attack Pakistan because we are strong". It is true that India would dare not initiate a full-scale war and thus this gives them more reasons to engage Pakistan in using sub-war strategies and that includes terrorism.


That is baseless chest thumping. Indian had never been the aggressor, Pakistan has been, many a times. With all that militarism, they only managed to loose half of their country anyways.

Why than Muslims are not allow to cut Cow?

:blink:How do you think beef is obtained ?
 
.
Here we go again! I'm not an Indian. I'm an Australian.

No, you are an indian living in Australia.

How is it a troll thread? The OP asked a simple question. we have had four wars and the discussion is quite valid. Instead of contributing something, you telling indians to go fck themselves only shows signs of insecurity.

It is for Pakistanis to decide on their force level for defence, not for our enemies.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom