India - 1.4 billion people

[Cobra Arbok]

Yeah... while we kept our focus on economic growth, Pakistan is begging for fund to payback LOANS...

Even after 70 years of Independence IK is thinking about NAYA PAKISTAN and 50% population which lives BELOW POVERTY LINE...

You have shown your BALLS in Kargil war... where you disowned your brave soldiers who died like STATELESS ACTORS...

The BALLS were hiding in the a$$ at that time... and I mean USA by $$...

No need to derail this thread even further, especially since India is far from perfect

 

[Cobra Arbok]

@Iqbal Ali Look man, I have gone through our debate. Perhaps I appeared overly confrontational. I want to extend an olive branch. I looked at the Cabinet Mission Plan, and it looks like if India adopted it, Balochistan, SIndh, and KP would have heavy autonomy. Here are the main points:

1. Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan in the North-West of India, namely Pakistan, zones where the Muslims are in a dominant majority, be constituted into a sovereign independent State and that an unequivocal undertaking be given to implement the establishment of Pakistan without delay.
2. The two separate constitution-making bodies be set up by the people of Pakistan and Hindustan for the purpose of framing their respective Constitutions.
3. That the acceptance of the Muslim League demand of Pakistan and its implementation without delay are the sine qua non for Muslim League cooperation and participation in the formation of an Interim Government at the Center.
4. That any attempt to impose a Constitution on a united-India basis or to force any interim arrangement at the Center contrary to the Muslim League demand will leave the Muslims no alternative but to resist any such imposition by all possible means for their survival and national existence.

http://historypak.com/cabinet-mission-plan-1946/
You have the view that India could have technically ruled over Balochistan and Sindh as one union. I however, believe that there is no way India could have adopted that union and still be strong and prosperous. I do not think Hindus could have "dominated" those provinces considering they would have had autonomy. It looks like that's something we will have to agree to disagree on
You think that Hindus lost west Punjab and east Bengal. I disagree, because according to the Lahore resolution, the entirety of those provinces were supposed to go to Pakistan. I also think that West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir are small compared to the combined size of East Punjab, West Bengal, Assam and Northeast India, and IOk, as well as the princely states. It looks like we interpret that differently, so we will have to agree to disagree.
It also looks like you think because SIndh, Balochistan, and KP converted to Islam in strong numbers, that land was taken from Hindus. I disagree, because that land was not controlled by Indian Hindus since the Guptas, and you can make a counter argument that Pakistan is small compared to the Mughal Empire, which means Muslims lost territory. Looks like we will have to agree to disagree there.

Overall, I still do not see how Hindus lost any territory on August 15 47 that they had controlled a year before. Of course, there are radicals on both sides, but the fact is the majority of people have accepted that. Those who did not will have to understand that AKhand Bharat will never happen and could not have happened(unless you call semi-sovereign states as "United"). Similarly, some people will have to accept that the Mughal Empire will never be recreated, and that Muslims will never rule any part of India again, including Kashmir.

Hope you have a good evening.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

FDI in India $61.96 billion in 2017-18. Bilateral trade between India and China around 90 B. Just saying.

india is 7x bigger than Pakistan and did not have the WOT imposed on it. So $65 billion has WAY more effect on us than would on a nation of 1.4 billion people.

 

[LASER1]

Evidence for your claims please otherwise they are more indianistic lies...........

https://10mosttoday.com/10-countries-with-largest-water-area/
https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/e...up-by-1-in-2-years-centre/article22732640.ece
https://tradingeconomics.com/india/arable-land-hectares-wb-data.html
Arable land

 

[Cobra Arbok]

https://10mosttoday.com/10-countries-with-largest-water-area/
https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/e...up-by-1-in-2-years-centre/article22732640.ece
https://tradingeconomics.com/india/arable-land-hectares-wb-data.html
Arable land
View attachment 496113

How dare you destroy his narrative with facts and evidence.

 

[LASER1]

PS: There are 1,200,000,000 more indians than Pakistanis. That is 1.2 BILLION. You can NOT tell us about over population. That is even more ominous considering india's area is only 3.5 times larger that that of Pakistan......

Doesn't matter, as long as we can feed them. And we will never run out of manpower. Not in next 50 years. Advantages

 

[Tejas Spokesman]

In 2016, the population density of Pakistan was around 251 people per square kilometer of land area,

Population Density India 413.15 person/km2. Year. -5 -1 2018

...and this is when GB region Pakistan and AJK is not included/measured in the land mass of Pakistan, that is about 88,000 sq.km of area, bigger than Austria, and this landmass is measured as Indian landmass so their actual population density is higher than mentioned above and Pakistan density is lower.

Not really.
What matters is population density eith respect to arable/fertile land and India has a lower population density than both Pakistan and China in that respect.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Doesn't matter, as long as we can feed them. And we will never run out of manpower. Not in next 50 years. Advantages

If you say so. It's far easier

https://10mosttoday.com/10-countries-with-largest-water-area/
https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/e...up-by-1-in-2-years-centre/article22732640.ece
https://tradingeconomics.com/india/arable-land-hectares-wb-data.html
Arable land
View attachment 496113

The above source is from the "hindu" which is an indian source. Which means it us highly likely to be fake news. indian media sources are ALWAYS highly dubious. Can you please provide GENUINE, IRREFUTABLE, HONEST RELIABLE & ACCURATE evidence for your claims. Namely a "non-indian" source.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

Not really.
What matters is population density eith respect to arable/fertile land and India has a lower population density than both Pakistan and China in that respect.

Not exactly, check the link below, in absolute terms yes, but when looked into w.r.t population of both countries Pakistan arable/fertile land is bigger, higher.



India: 0.12 Hectares per person


Pakistan: 0.16 Hectares per person.



https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.lnd.Arbl.HA.pc

 

[LASER1]

The above source is from the "hindu" which is an indian source. Which means it us highly likely to be fake news. indian media sources are ALWAYS highly dubious. Can you please provide GENUINE, IRREFUTABLE, HONEST RELIABLE & ACCURATE evidence for your claims. Namely a "non-indian" source.

What's next? Denial Mode?

Page 23
https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-07.pdf

This only includes forest cover(tropical and subtropical), excluding tree cover.

Other source I gave is the World Bank source on the Arable area.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

400 million at least will be Muslims Alhamdulillah.
You should see changes in India from 2030.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

@Pluralist @PAKISTANFOREVER as I promised, here are some links about India's agricultural productivity

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/top-jute-producing-countries-in-the-world.html
https://www.worldlistmania.com/worlds-largest-bananas-producing-countries/
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/top-wheat-producing-countries.html
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-countries-producing-the-most-rice-in-the-world.html
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-world-leaders-in-coconut-production.html
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-top-mango-producing-countries-in-the-world.html

These are just a few examples. So as you can see, India is one of the most agriculturally productive countries in the world.

This is partly because India has some of the world's most fertile land in the Gangetic Plains, as well as a humid subtropical climate with plenty of rain.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

What's next? Denial Mode?

Page 23
https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-07.pdf

This only includes forest cover(tropical and subtropical), excluding tree cover.

Other source I gave is the World Bank source on the Arable area.

What's next? Denial Mode?

Page 23
https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-07.pdf

This only includes forest cover(tropical and subtropical), excluding tree cover.

Other source I gave is the World Bank source on the Arable area.

All it says is india has 64 million HA in 2001. I take it to mean arable land.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

and that Muslims will never rule any part of India again

I don't agree with this.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

india is 7x bigger than Pakistan and did not have the WOT imposed on it. So $65 billion has WAY more effect on us than would on a nation of 1.4 billion people.

I can tell you have no idea of how economics works.