Friendship with India

[Umair Nawaz]

Siachen and Kargil have no parallel...In fact any parallel drawn in that regard is a mere face saving exercise...you need to read a bit more on history books before debating on this particular topic mate...

Bullshit n propaganda is in yr mind!!!!!!!!

First read the history then come back.

 

[Spring Onion]

So many pages. gosh what you guys are discussing?

dosa nehari siri paye or beef curry

 

[Nitin Tomer]

I agree kashmir issue needs to be reolved before friennship

 

[ice_man]

Staying in DENIAL MODE is a classic trait of Pakistan and thats the reason you are in trouble.

So keep trolling and expecting a good future for your beloved "country" which will NEVER EVER come unless you stop radicalism and terrorism.

its good how you love to troll regaerdless of what people say. keep derailing the thread and i am sure you will be banned soon.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

So many pages. gosh what you guys are discussing?

dosa nehari siri paye or beef curry

More of "Bheja Fry".

 

[Spring Onion]

More of "Bheja Fry".

desi logon ka bheja hota ha kia

 

[Rajesh_Singh1984]

Kashmir Issue only two solutions available....

1. let go, Pakistan Kashmir free and we our Kashmir free. accept as new nation as jammu and kashmir.
2. accect line of control as permanent line of control.


Pakistan never can take Kashmir from India than fight is useless

 

[Developereo]

Hmm. That begs the question: does magnanimity have to be hostile to one's own interest?

At the risk of sounding Machiavellian, the Indian government is elected and paid to serve Indian interests by whatever means provide maximum return. If (apparent) magnanimity has a greater payoff than the alternatives, in terms of long term national interests, then smart policy planners will chose that option.

PS: This is without prejudice to any future objections to your slipping in that bit about India's goal being the dissection of Pakistan.

Whether it was serendipity or planning, the end result sure suited India.

Even if one were to accept your counter, and one doesn't (without prejudice to..etc., etc.), the difference is that in both the cases you have cited, India stepped in to rein in these entities, which were not being 'run' by Indian agencies, but had received some degree of Indian aid. The LTTE so far resented this restraint that it took violent counter-measures; we did not walk away from a bad situation but did what we could to hold the balance. So too in the case of the Mukti Bahini. It would not have escaped your attention that the whole reason at the outset to take and hold prisoners was to guarantee them their lives in the teeth of the universal hostility they faced. The smarmy insinuations of most of today's Bangladeshi members of PDF notwithstanding.

Pakistan's policies have no brakes, otoh.

Again, India didn't step in to 'hold the balance' but simply because the surrogates had either served their purpose, in the case of Mukti Bahini, or were directly threatening Indian interests, i.e. LTTE's subversive activities in Tamil Nadu itself.

What India did, and Pakistan didn't, was to make sure the surrogates always knew who was boss and, if they forgot, to make it crystal clear.

 

[Joe Shearer]

At the risk of sounding Machiavellian, the Indian government is elected and paid to serve Indian interests by whatever means provide maximum return. If (apparent) magnanimity has a greater payoff than the alternatives, in terms of long term national interests, then smart policy planners will chose that option.



Whether it was serendipity or planning, the end result sure suited India.



Again, India didn't step in to 'hold the balance' but simply because the surrogates had either served their purpose, in the case of Mukti Bahini, or were directly threatening Indian interests, i.e. LTTE's subversive activities in Tamil Nadu itself.

What India did, and Pakistan didn't, was to make sure the surrogates always knew who was boss and, if they forgot, to make it crystal clear.

At this point of our conversation, I am left bemused.

Have you ever met an elected representative of ours in the flesh? Or an Indian diplomat, for that matter? I am just curious to know if you have the opportunity to do a reality check, or are forced to live within an artificial construct entirely of your own original design. You might like to read the play Huis Clos on this possibility.

 

[deckingraj]

Bullshit n propaganda is in yr mind!!!!!!!!

First read the history then come back.

Sorry but such one-liners will not help....Why don't you draw the parallel and i will draw the nonparallel...

a) Siachen was not demarcated border...Kargil was...
b) Siachen was supposed to be No-Man's land....Kargil was not...
c) Both sides had the plans to occupy Siachen...We reached there earlier than you by sheer luck.... whereas Indian side had no such plans in P-O-K...
d) When siachen happened Indian-Pak relations were at status quo...When Kargil happened Indian-pak relations were improving at an unprecedented level....
e) Siachen was an operation conducted by IA and no shelter under any proxy was used...Even now some of your people claim that Kargil was an operation conducted by Mujahedin!!
f) Last but not the least....When Siachen happened International Community did not side with you and declared India an aggressor...whereas we all know what happened in Kargil...


I am assuming you will treat these points on its merit and will reply back with some mature comments...Looking forward to hear your side...

 

[Developereo]

At this point of our conversation, I am left bemused.

Have you ever met an elected representative of ours in the flesh? Or an Indian diplomat, for that matter? I am just curious to know if you have the opportunity to do a reality check, or are forced to live within an artificial construct entirely of your own original design. You might like to read the play Huis Clos on this possibility.

Admittedly, I haven't had the pleasure.

I am not suggesting that Indian diplomats are cunning, far-sighted supermen; at least no more so than anywhere else. Pakistan also has its share of astute policy makers, capable of long term strategizing, but the difference is that their recommendations and plans are subject to the whims of the feudal-military alliance.

 

[Jade]

I doubt friendship with India is possible unless the issue of terrorism is solved.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Sorry but such one-liners will not help....Why don't you draw the parallel and i will draw the nonparallel...

a) Siachen was not demarcated border...Kargil was...
b) Siachen was supposed to be No-Man's land....Kargil was not...
c) Both sides had the plans to occupy Siachen...We reached there earlier than you by sheer luck.... whereas Indian side had no such plans in P-O-K...
d) When siachen happened Indian-Pak relations were at status quo...When Kargil happened Indian-pak relations were improving at an unprecedented level....
e) Siachen was an operation conducted by IA and no shelter under any proxy was used...Even now some of your people claim that Kargil was an operation conducted by Mujahedin!!
f) Last but not the least....When Siachen happened International Community did not side with you and declared India an aggressor...whereas we all know what happened in Kargil...


I am assuming you will treat these points on its merit and will reply back with some mature comments...Looking forward to hear your side...

A) lol according to simla accord it was n now how do u explain the failed attempt to invade lahore in 1965 by crossing international borders at 3am in night in 6th september 1965 in the wake of so called op giberaltor. That even in this 21 century LOL

b) again prove it.

have a look at this it has things from yr own country.

c)again proved?
and further more according to shimla accord it lied with in boundary of Pak.

d and e)Bullshit, indian propaganda at its best.
Yr PM had as usual refused to talk abt kashmir n siachin.aand traitor nawaz sharif had bowed against yr pm leaving us to chance but to use force to get our territory back.
The goal was to occupy the highway from where yr army carries the supplies for yr troops in that area n make them starve in that area same way u did in east pak with us. Because as yr in the advantageous position so it makes close to impossible to clear that area from invaders in one one one fight.

That is something yr Army Chief also said while talking to our journalist wajahat saeed khan some time back.

f) This was the only mistake done by us and i agree 1000% with u.
in 84 when this happened we were fighting in afghanistan against USSR n we should have blackmailed the US n EU in the same way how u did in kargil when yr PM ran to his mamma in White House as US had put sanctions on us since 90 a year after USSR left region n they tightened them in 98 when we did nuke blasts.

well let me explain, first u need to understand the int. politics. after Cold war there was only 1 superpower left n they had introduced a new world order in 91. They had designed it such a way that it could address their future challenges and that was now economy. They had the biggest challenge to face and that was n still is China n its mighty economy which also is fastest growing economy in the world n was at that time too!!!!!!!

So they had wanted a country in the world who could address this issue n who has approx same numbers in its man power as china has!!! who could match the cheap chinese labor n their cheap products that out class the expensive western products in any field in global economy. So they Chose india a country with 1.3 billion people with mostly men then women in this population just like china as the population of women is more then men in everywhere else in the world including USA,EU and Pak.
There is a reason why even in my country who is known as conservative country by western standards has female pilots and yr country dont have as such in frontline.

there r rumors from wikileaks that america had decided to make india their next 'most important' ally in as back as 1985.
cant u see that in 91 the new world order had passed n in 92 yr country had opened the dors for foreign investment even though there was a high opposition in yr country

Dont u see in yr country even in media industry how much it is controlled by foreign forces from yr news channels to yr entertainment channels!!!! from yr sports channels to yr music to yr film channels!!!!!! Im talking abt yr most watched channels ie Star network etc etc

Yes they did sanctioned u in 98 but they were not as hard as ours since same era. when we did the same as we were already in sanctions since 90 n they just tightened them more n followed by some more.

So how do u realistically imagine that in Kargil any int community would have listened to our concerns???
It is obviously illogical to think like that.
This was something we had also knew n thats why we did it with mujahadeen (which is an arabic word meaning warriors).

If we had used our forces then only God knows what these int. community would have done to us.

 

[deckingraj]

You are all over Umair...I had to do lot of work in joining the pieces together...Quick request...try to quote the specific line to which you are replying...

b/w i am ready to discuss this topic with you only if you are ready to research a bit before replying....In case you are not interested then please let me know..I like to stick to the topic in hand so i have removed some of the lines which are more on describing the conflict....i am interested in knowing the parallel b/w Siachen and Kargil only....

A) lol according to simla accord it was n now how do u explain the failed attempt to invade lahore in 1965 by crossing international borders at 3am in night in 6th september 1965 in the wake of so called op giberaltor. That even in this 21 century LOL

Factually wrong...Siachen was not demarcated...Had it been, this issue would have never popped up....once again Siachen has nothing to do with 65 war...It is a failed attempt to draw a parralel...b/w weren't we discussing the parralel b/w Siachen and Kargil??

b) again prove it.

have a look at this it has things from yr own country.

Haven't seen the video....To be honest i am not interested in usual propaganda be it pakistani side or be it Indian....listen the precise reason Siachen was not demarcated was that it was supposed to be a barren land with no strategic importance....In short both sides were convinced that this area is inhabitable and thus there is no need to demarcate it at this moment...implying it was no man's land....

c)again proved?
and further more according to shimla accord it lied with in boundary of Pak.

I am not sure what version of shimla agreement you have read but Siachen was not demarcated....It belong to Pakistan is just an interpertation of your side...there is not a single agreement which say's Siachen belonged to Pakistan...So please learn to differentiate b/w an interpretation vs a treaty....and yes this is fact that both sides wanted to occupy Siachen....in this cat and mouse game we won just by 8-10 days....

d and e)Bullshit, indian propaganda at its best.
Yr PM had as usual refused to talk abt kashmir n siachin.aand traitor nawaz sharif had bowed against yr pm leaving us to chance but to use force to get our territory back.

Nawaz was a traitor or not is not my headache...he was the elected PM of your country chosen by your own people...Vajpayee came all over to Lahore on a bus with the pretext to improve relations....If you can't contemplate that it was unpredented move then i am sorry you will not understand much here...

Nawaz Sharif bowed against us is nothing but a mere propaganda for people who want to save there face...but again this is your internal politics and i have no interest in that...b/w the same Saviour(read Mushy) also came to Agra few years later with the similar intentions that so called traitor Nawaz had...

f) This was the only mistake done by us and i agree 1000% with u.
in 84 when this happened we were fighting in afghanistan against USSR n we should have blackmailed the US n EU in the same way how u did in kargil when yr PM ran to his mamma in White House as US had put sanctions on us since 90 a year after USSR left region n they tightened them in 98 when we did nuke blasts.

I am shocked at the level of ignorance people have on this subject and that too in this media age...What leverage did we have with US in 98?? Weren't we under sanctions?? If i am not wrong it was Nawaz who went to US and that too on 4rth July(their holiday - independence day)...From where are you reading things Umair??

So how do u realistically imagine that in Kargil any int community would have listened to our concerns??? It is obviously illogical to think like that.This was something we had also knew n thats why we did it with mujaheddin (which is an arabic word meaning warriors).If we had used our forces then only God knows what these int. community would have done to us.

Your last few lines were so much outrageously ignorant that i have deleted them...anyhow i have picked up the theme....International community doesn't listen to your concerns is not my headache....it is your problem...b/w if you very well know that International community won't listen to you then honestly not sure how u justify Kargil... PLease do me a favor...Go to YouTube and type "Kargil war"...Strictly watch Pakistani talk shows that have come up since there was a new book launched recently on Kargil by Gen. Aziz....Look what experts at your end are saying about

- Who fought from Pak side...were those pak soldiers or mujhahids
- Who went to US to come out of the mess...

Once you sort them out please do share the parallels b/w Siachen and kargil....you spent the entire time in debunking my claims...but not a single point on the so called parallel....

 

[haviZsultan]

The best thing that can improve ties with India is an increase in bilateral trade. The only worry in this is India dominating our markets which we would not like. They are already dominating our television channels.