India and "terrorist state" demands

[Lurch Adams]

Not a single nation implicated Pakistan for Uri attacks

Russian Press Release over Uri attack:

"In view of the attack on the Indian air base at Pathankot in January this year, we note with concern the resurgence of terrorist attacks near the Line of Control. It is alarming, and according to New Delhi, the attack on military unit near the town of Uri was committed from the territory of Pakistan,"

French Press Release:

"We call for decisive actions to be taken within the respect of international law against terrorist groups targeting India and in particular, Lashkar-e-Tayibba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen,"

German Press Release:

"Germany stands firmly on the side of India in the fight against terrorism. Every country has the responsibility to take decisive action against terrorism, which emanates from its own territory,"

none except Russia acknowledged your fake surgical strikes.

http://eptoday.com/indias-war-on-terror/

The European Parliament Vice President acknowledging and praising the surgical strikes.

 

[cocomo]

The European Parliament Vice President acknowledging and praising the surgical strikes

He is not representing the view of European parliament. He is one of 14 vice Prez. of European parliament from POLAND.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_European_Parliament#8th_parliament

"In view of the attack on the Indian air base at Pathankot in January this year, we note with concern the resurgence of terrorist attacks near the Line of Control. It is alarming, and according to New Delhi, the attack on military unit near the town of Uri was committed from the territory of Pakistan,"

"We call for decisive actions to be taken within the respect of international law against terrorist groups targeting India and in particular, Lashkar-e-Tayibba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen,"

"Germany stands firmly on the side of India in the fight against terrorism. Every country has the responsibility to take decisive action against terrorism, which emanates from its own territory,"

How can you deduce from these statements that they are implicating Pakistan state for Uri attack?

 

[Lurch Adams]

He is not representing the view of European parliament. He is one of 14 vice Prez. of European parliament from POLAND.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_European_Parliament#8th_parliament










How can you deduce from these statements that they are implicating Pakistan state for Uri attack?

Its clearly mentioned within the statements. Being (or pretending to be) a retard who cannot read will not get you any extra points.

 

[SHAH07]

Russian Press Release over Uri attack:

"In view of the attack on the Indian air base at Pathankot in January this year, we note with concern the resurgence of terrorist attacks near the Line of Control. It is alarming, and according to New Delhi, the attack on military unit near the town of Uri was committed from the territory of Pakistan,"

French Press Release:

"We call for decisive actions to be taken within the respect of international law against terrorist groups targeting India and in particular, Lashkar-e-Tayibba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen,"

German Press Release:

"Germany stands firmly on the side of India in the fight against terrorism. Every country has the responsibility to take decisive action against terrorism, which emanates from its own territory,"



http://eptoday.com/indias-war-on-terror/

The European Parliament Vice President acknowledging and praising the surgical strikes.

These statesments weren't by Russian foreign office
These were by there ambassador in India just to please you Indians

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

pakistan can't be isolated. every muslim believe in a holy war against india and every muslim is a part of a single body.
indians won't understand it thats why they call those who go and fight in other muslim countries against oppessions a "terrorist force".
muslims are indeed terrorists when it comes to helping their muslim brothers against illegal occupying force. example kosovo, bosnia, afghanistan, iraq, kashmir, palestine.

this won't stop unless people there are given freedom. if pakistani stops helping them, muslims from other countries will start doing it. they had done that after afghan war ended.

Yup 71 happened, but don't forget it wasn't you but lead by USSR (an issue that didn't even involve them, but they were exactly like "Tu kon? main khwa makhwa"), now look at a map today carefully and point to USSR if you can?

pakistan broke india in 1947 and soviets after afghan war.

 

[hassan zohaib]

I have been wondering.

India is running from pillar to post everywhere around the world, lobbying hard that Pakistan be declared "terrorist state" (yeah right! ).

Why doesn't India do it herself? Why does India not officially designate Pakistan a "terrorist state" instead of demanding others to do it?


What is stopping her? Are there serious repercussions for India, if she does it? I know Pakistan will also reciprocate by declaring India a terrorist state, but is it the only thing stopping her?

I mean she has been demanding like for 25-30 years now, why not do it herself?

Would appreciate if someone knowledgeable could shed more light on that.

really to understand this we need to understand the objective of declaring "terrorist state".
1st; india wants because it wants that nobody should trade with us.
2nd; India wants because it does not want any country to sell arms to Pak.
3rd; India wants this because it wants that we become isolated.
Answer.
if india declares us Terrorist then tell me how much trade balance we have with india. if it does so Pak will not hurt.
if India declares then how much for arms we rely on India?
if india declares then how could be we isolated except from east side and which we already are.

IMO, collectivity can harm you more than individuality. so if we are more dependent on each other then we can , if we do, reap the benefits of declaring terrorist state.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

Russian Press Release over Uri attack:

"In view of the attack on the Indian air base at Pathankot in January this year, we note with concern the resurgence of terrorist attacks near the Line of Control. It is alarming, and according to New Delhi, the attack on military unit near the town of Uri was committed from the territory of Pakistan,"

French Press Release:

"We call for decisive actions to be taken within the respect of international law against terrorist groups targeting India and in particular, Lashkar-e-Tayibba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen,"

German Press Release:

"Germany stands firmly on the side of India in the fight against terrorism. Every country has the responsibility to take decisive action against terrorism, which emanates from its own territory,"



http://eptoday.com/indias-war-on-terror/

The European Parliament Vice President acknowledging and praising the surgical strikes.

good for you.
AFTER URI:
russians never postponed their military exercise with pakistan.
germany has still strong relations with pakistan. infact indian raw agents in germany, keeping eye on sikhs were caught.
french had still strong relations with pakistan , same as before uri. french business delegations made plans to visit pakistan.

 

[Lurch Adams]

These were by there ambassador in India just to please you Indians

In which case it would be the same as NATO representative visiting Pakistan appreciating Zarb-e-Azb, just to make you feel happy. No harm really.

good for you.
AFTER URI:
russians never postponed their military exercise with pakistan.
germany has still strong relations with pakistan. infact indian raw agents in germany, keeping eye on sikhs were caught.
french had still strong relations with pakistan , same as before uri. french business delegations made plans to visit pakistan.

I am so happy for you. At least the international flights to Pakistan will have some passengers. Congratulations.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

In which case it would be the same as NATO representative visiting Pakistan appreciating Zarb-e-Azb, just to make you feel happy. No harm really.



I am so happy for you. At least the international flights to Pakistan will have some passengers. Congratulations.

we started zarb e azb after APS school attack. we are not and would not fight anyone who is not a threat to pakistan.
nato generals appreciated zarb e azb because it achieved, what nato and isaf were not able to achieve in 15 years. 50 percent afghanistan is still under taliban control.
we do not need anyone appreciation. we got peace. thats more than enough for us.

we donot want more foreigners. we are already sick of your afghan friends.
any way. tourism had increased in pakistan. more than 1 million people from pakistan and abroad had visited northern areas of pakistan in 2015.

 

[coffee_cup]

It will make no difference to Pakistan. Such things, declarations and the like, are useful not to vent one side's spleen, but as a corrective, or a serious disincentive that causes some introspection. I increasingly get from my Pakistani friends a sense that the sensitive Pakistani thinking about things has decided that India has gone mad; that the players within the deep state remain where they were, withers unwrung; that the man in the street is hostile, in a remote, detached kind of way, and uneasy, at the sharp change in behaviour and demeanour that they sense, and finally, that the worst of the TV talking heads have taken it upon themselves to neutralise peace. In such a climate, any further acts by India will have no effect, and are therefore useless.

really to understand this we need to understand the objective of declaring "terrorist state".
1st; india wants because it wants that nobody should trade with us.
2nd; India wants because it does not want any country to sell arms to Pak.
3rd; India wants this because it wants that we become isolated.
Answer.
if india declares us Terrorist then tell me how much trade balance we have with india. if it does so Pak will not hurt.
if India declares then how much for arms we rely on India?
if india declares then how could be we isolated except from east side and which we already are.

IMO, collectivity can harm you more than individuality. so if we are more dependent on each other then we can , if we do, reap the benefits of declaring terrorist state.

Thanks @Joe Shearer @hassan zohaib for the insights.

I have also understood it the same way as you guys, that declaring some country a "terrorist state" is the first step which logically follows by countless economic and other sanctions. And since no sanctions from Indian side are gonna have significant effect on Pakistan, it is useless thing to do.

But the point I was making is: Since India has been trying to create this narrative around the world and asking other countries to literally cut-off bilateral relations with Pakistan, wouldn't the other countries from whom India is demanding this, logically ask India, if she really believes in what she is thinking, why doesn't she do it herself?

So wouldn't it be a logical thing to do for India herself before she demands it from others?

@ rest: Please stick to the topic, we have countless other threads to have our fights. Thanks for your understanding!

 

[Joe Shearer]

Thanks @Joe Shearer @hassan zohaib for the insights.

I have also understood it the same way as you guys, that declaring some country a "terrorist state" is the first step which logically follows by countless economic and other sanctions. And since no sanctions from Indian side are gonna have significant effect on Pakistan, it is useless thing to do.

But the point I was making is: Since India has been trying to create this narrative around the world and asking other countries to literally cut-off bilateral relations with Pakistan, wouldn't the other countries from whom India is demanding this, logically ask India, if she really believes in what she is thinking, why doesn't she do it herself?

So wouldn't it be a logical thing to do for India herself before she demands it from others?

@ rest: Please stick to the topic, we have countless other threads to have our fights. Thanks for your understanding!

Hmm.

Interesting observation. You are saying that if we want the world at large to do something, we should put our money where our mouth is, otherwise we are very unlikely to be taken seriously.

True, that. But there are countervailing arguments.

By unilaterally acting against Pakistan, on an issue where only consensual action will have an effect, India will demonstrate a pettiness and a quarrelsome attitude, which by itself will be enough to put off various other necessary players; they will conclude - the fatal equation - that this is a family quarrel, and that it is best to stay out of it.

If India were to argue, on the other hand, as I believe she should, that it is a large question and a difficult one, and one to be decided only with the greatest circumspection and the greatest soul-searching, and therefore one for a collective decision, it is not only more ethical and honest and germane to the issues involved, it is also more reassuring to the others, especially to learn that they therefore have an opportunity to hear the arguments for and against, and to hear against 'the defendant', so to speak. To carry the legal conceit further, it would not go down very well to find the plaintiff saying,"I have examined the matter, and the defendant is damnably guilty. The rest of you may come to my conclusion at a more leisurely place, but for heavens' sakes, don't take all day about it." Somehow not convincing. The other way would be for the plaintiff to say,"It's been a difficult seventy years with these rough-necks, and they are more and more turning out to be a problem affecting the whole world. We really need to get together and decide how to deal with them."

I find the second approach immeasurably more balanced and determined to allow reason and fair play their days in the sun.

 

[hassan zohaib]

Thanks @Joe Shearer @hassan zohaib for the insights.

I have also understood it the same way as you guys, that declaring some country a "terrorist state" is the first step which logically follows by countless economic and other sanctions. And since no sanctions from Indian side are gonna have significant effect on Pakistan, it is useless thing to do.

But the point I was making is: Since India has been trying to create this narrative around the world and asking other countries to literally cut-off bilateral relations with Pakistan, wouldn't the other countries from whom India is demanding this, logically ask India, if she really believes in what she is thinking, why doesn't she do it herself?

So wouldn't it be a logical thing to do for India herself before she demands it from others?

@ rest: Please stick to the topic, we have countless other threads to have our fights. Thanks for your understanding!

two things really need to understand here.
1st: in international politico, it does matters that which type of relations you are enjoying with P5 in UNSC. if having good relations then it does not matter that which type of relations you are having with other countries.
2nd; strategic importance does not only comes from economy only. it may comes from different factors as well like Pakistan-due to its strategic importance in the region.

infact, India has labelled and declared Pak as a terrorist state by itself so before going other countries it has done its part and as far as other countries are concerned then you should know what the strategic importance Pak is enjoying. if Pak is not declared terrorist state then it is only because that 3 superpowers have interest in Pakistan.

 

[Kaniska]

I have been wondering.

India is running from pillar to post everywhere around the world, lobbying hard that Pakistan be declared "terrorist state" (yeah right! ).

Why doesn't India do it herself? Why does India not officially designate Pakistan a "terrorist state" instead of demanding others to do it?


What is stopping her? Are there serious repercussions for India, if she does it? I know Pakistan will also reciprocate by declaring India a terrorist state, but is it the only thing stopping her?

I mean she has been demanding like for 25-30 years now, why not do it herself?

Would appreciate if someone knowledgeable could shed more light on that.

World does not listen to any country, if they did not get any return for their favor...
Anyway, where India run around for declaring Pakistan as terrorist state...Please do not show me some media link.
Provide me a source where GoI has publicly stated about it. But yes, India is demanding to punish the terrorist who are in Pakistan operating against India but that action is different than claiming that India is asking to declare Pakistan as a terrorist state.

In contrast to your opinion, most of Indian political establishment understand that NS was doing a good job with the economy of Pakistan. And your favorite Army guys somehow do not like any Political leader to become successful. So they always find a way where your democratic set up is in problem. So we feel empathetic for your PM that although he tries his best to improve relation with India, your Military is so powerful that they undermine democratic set up and ovverrule anything in a positive way. Rather we would like your democratic elected Gov to become successful and powerful enough to take correct decision to make peace in the region.

 

[coffee_cup]

Hmm.

Interesting observation. You are saying that if we want the world at large to do something, we should put our money where our mouth is, otherwise we are very unlikely to be taken seriously.

True, that. But there are countervailing arguments.

By unilaterally acting against Pakistan, on an issue where only consensual action will have an effect, India will demonstrate a pettiness and a quarrelsome attitude, which by itself will be enough to put off various other necessary players; they will conclude - the fatal equation - that this is a family quarrel, and that it is best to stay out of it.

If India were to argue, on the other hand, as I believe she should, that it is a large question and a difficult one, and one to be decided only with the greatest circumspection and the greatest soul-searching, and therefore one for a collective decision, it is not only more ethical and honest and germane to the issues involved, it is also more reassuring to the others, especially to learn that they therefore have an opportunity to hear the arguments for and against, and to hear against 'the defendant', so to speak. To carry the legal conceit further, it would not go down very well to find the plaintiff saying,"I have examined the matter, and the defendant is damnably guilty. The rest of you may come to my conclusion at a more leisurely place, but for heavens' sakes, don't take all day about it." Somehow not convincing. The other way would be for the plaintiff to say,"It's been a difficult seventy years with these rough-necks, and they are more and more turning out to be a problem affecting the whole world. We really need to get together and decide how to deal with them."

I find the second approach immeasurably more balanced and determined to allow reason and fair play their days in the sun.

In other words to conclude: The world needs Pakistan and world needs India.

The arguments both countries have against each other, no matter how powerful, sum up in a way showing both countries being right and wrong at the same time.

Since the world is growing multi-polar, after almost 25 years of American dominance, every country will be needed by one camp or the other. So I do not see in anyway that any of these countries can be declared an "outcast".

Why then Indian deep state not telling the top brass to stop making Pakistan bashing the only crowd pleasing criteria and put their corporate media on leash (surely all those Ambanis and Jindals can do it)?

Why am I saying this? In the past few years Kashmir being not so prominant and foreign sponsored terrorism in Pakistan on decline, we actually started to see a kind of hope for peace.

Then Modi happend!

And the way Indian media is incitng the right wing mob, I think it will be the major contributor to the end of sub-continent as we know it today.

So now that several things are off the table, like IWT, declaring Pakistan an "outcast" etc, don't all those "lobbies" who matter in India see what acutally is pushing their fancy corporations in danger? And it is not Pakistan for sure!

 

[hassan zohaib]

lol help yourself first..



hehe, after wasting so much of time and you came up with this?? anyways your concerns are awfully right but hey economy or defence or bi lateral relations does not run on ifs and buts nor on bullet points..

bhae khna kia cha rhae ho?
thnx for granting me certificate.
i think you forget to realize that bilateral relations run on ifs and butts only.