Germany to Pakistan: Terror for political goals unacceptable

[BATMAN]

How will controling our cable TV stop Western leaders from issuing statements?

Although I agree that our media is too open to foreign propaganda. India restricts Pakistani programs on its airwaves; why can't we do the same in reverse until they open up?

There diplomats and visitors report more than enough back to their govt.
as you have seen in wiki leaks foreign diplomats have additional responsibility of spying.

They know that youth have no love for Pakistan and coming generation of Pakistan is really lost in non-issues revolving around constitutional amendments and judiciary.

Cable TV is only promoting hinduism and hate towards Pakistan and its army.

Pakistan will face the consequences in couple of years.

 

[Dalai Lama]

Self-Delete

 

[IceCold]

India getting rich obviously meant more troubles for Pakistan and a more financing for traitors.

We need Musharraf to bring out the evidence of Indian terrorism.

Pak army need to expose NATO involvement in harboring TTP.

Musharraf didnt do anything either when he was in power other then making empty statements. I agree that in his tenure Pakistan saw economic development but that was it. India hasn't been involved in Pakistan just recently, its covert activities have been occurring even during Musharrafs era and what did he do to expose those activities.....absolutely nothing other then making a few empty statements about Indias involvement. So i don't see how bringing Musharraf back will help Pakistan. We need the likes of Imran Khan, because he is the only hope left for Pakistan. He speaks keeping Pakistan in view while others including Musharraf speak keeping US in mind.

 

[Guest01]

Do you even need to ask that question? It is India.

So if India and Pakistan were to be friends, it is a direct loss to China. Is that what we can deduce here? that the need for China to contain India is to keep India and Pakistan in a low level perpetual conflict as in the case of North and South Korea.

 

[Guest01]

When Nehru refused a security pact proposed by Ayub Khan in the late 50's to jointly work together even in case of war.

Nehru said who have we got to fight, ironically India went to war with China soon.

Then the 1965 adventure ended the dreams of Jinnah.

Sir, I read a little bit about that offer of Pact and I am sure that Mr. Jinnah would not have approved of Nehru accepting it anyway. Also you would too appreciate Nehru's gesture of not allying with a dictatorship in Pakistan today in retrospective. And maybe 65 was a direct result of Nehru's allegiance to democracy in Pakistan?

 

[IceCold]

Well to be frank,,the basic reason for these statment is "Terrorism". Eoropean countries also face the same threat as india,and thats why the issue such statment cause they know the reality and its roots..!

Cause they know the reality and its roots.....very convenient

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Well, you guys try to keep convincing us otherwise...

I once thought not, but as you know, things have changed.

The geopolitical reality, is that India has disputes with BOTH China and Pakistan. This situation will continue.

 

[justanobserver]

When Nehru refused a security pact proposed by Ayub Khan in the late 50's to jointly work together even in case of war.
Nehru said who have we got to fight, ironically India went to war with China soon.

Then the 1965 adventure ended the dreams of Jinnah.

Cmon, you think India would trust Pakistan after the 1948 fiasco ? (please sir don't bring up Junagadh and Hyderabad )

 

[Dalai Lama]

So if India and Pakistan were to be friends, it is a direct loss to China. Is that what we can deduce here? that the need for China to contain India is to keep India and Pakistan in a low level perpetual conflict as in the case of North and South Korea.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. So in our interest, we should try to solve this "K" issue as soon as possible and build a stronger deterrence against China?

 

[Dalai Lama]

I once thought not, but as you know, things have changed.

The geopolitical reality, is that India has disputes with BOTH China and Pakistan. This situation will continue.

Too quick on the quote there sir! Lol, even before I could delete it. And that's precisely why I deleted it.

 

[IceCold]

Only one way to stop it: become an economic powerhouse.

We have a powerful friend in China who would love to see us become strong. Do our leaders have the vision and planning to leverage our friendship with the world's fastest growing economy?

Well said. Unfortunately our so called political leaders lack not only the vision and planning but also the morals to do something for their country once for a change and to add into this, they are sadly not alone but its the Pakistani nation(majority) who bring these thugs back into the power.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

So if India and Pakistan were to be friends, it is a direct loss to China. Is that what we can deduce here?

Not necessarily.

As long as Pakistan remains an ally of China (which I believe will be forever) that will be fine, it won't matter much if they become more friendly with India.

The Sino-Pakistan relationship was first developed because of mutual conflict with India, however nowadays it has become geopolitical and economic (Gwadar port for instance will protect us from naval blockades).

The enmity with India still remains of course, as everyone knows. Given that, I would love to see you guys solving your age-old problems with each other, that would bring more stability to the region and hence will be good for the regional economy.

 

[T-Faz]

Sir, I read a little bit about that offer of Pact and I am sure that Mr. Jinnah would not have approved of Nehru accepting it anyway. Also you would too appreciate Nehru's gesture of not allying with a dictatorship in Pakistan today in retrospective. And maybe 65 was a direct result of Nehru's allegiance to democracy in Pakistan?

The pact was overlooked by US too and it was a test to show US that India was not willing to partner with Pakistan, this the planning to attack Indian began.

I also approve of the military intervention by Ayub but not his latter actions.

Cmon, you think India would trust Pakistan after the 1948 fiasco ? (please sir don't bring up Junagadh and Hyderabad )

Indis wasn't Pakistans enemy till after 65. Nothing to be wary about.

 

[alibaz]

First off what about Kashmiri Pandits, aren't they Kashmiris too?

Second I being a Dogra from J&K, had my family stayed in P O K they too would've been killed by these fanatics you call "freedom fighters"

Third where's the source for the bolded part? And I mean real sources.. no lying green media crap.

Where you stayed in AJK and who killed whom.

 

[Guest01]

Not necessarily.

As long as Pakistan remains an ally of China (which I believe will be forever) that will be fine, it won't matter much if they become more friendly with India.

The Sino-Pakistan relationship was first developed because of mutual conflict with India, however nowadays it has become geopolitical and economic (Gwadar port for instance will protect us from naval blockades).

The enmity with India still remains of course, as everyone knows.

That is what I was hoping to question here. Irrespective of what you may believe individually, if India and Pakistan where to actually be in a situation of mutual benefit and trade, it will be something that will be adversarial to China. Because there goes a big market in Pakistan + also there comes a bigger economic giant in India who has been hitherto successfully tangled in the maze of bloody Kashmir via Pakistan. is that now Sir? And then the help from Pakistan too will also be at a much greater premium and so more expensive maybe. Surely not convenient for China though better and prosperous for Pakistan and peaceful for India I think.