'India only gives moral support to Balochistan'

[rohailmalhi]

If u indians think u can do whatever u want , and whenever u want u can seperate pakistan a part , Let me assure u , u ppl are trying tht from the begining but of no use except West Pakistan ...........
As far as u think u can stay in Afghanistan .... i dont think so coz recent comment by ur ministers are tht we want to talk on every issue with Pakistan and including india in Afghanistan ...........so im just waiting for Americans to return and then i will see how much time u can spend there.

As far as moral support to the Moaists is concern , we actually dont need to do tht coz they are playing there part . so we dont really want to be in a mess coz right now we cant afford to be .........

 

[RobbieS]

No need. You don't have one.

And the one you have isn't suitable for such operations. Being fan boy is one thing their are realities on the other hand which we have to accept.

Ahh..then you do believe that India is not materially supporting any Baloch rebels through its consulates in Afghanistan. I believe so too. But then again moral support doesn't require any consulate or base.

 

[karan.1970]

India must stop this dangerous game as it completely justifies taking the fight against India beyond Kashmir and they should remember that India has a lot more targets than Pakistan.

We have one territorial issue, right now. We'll have 10 if this continues.

What game? I havent seen any thing credible or not, coming from Pakistan in terms of details (forget proof) around India's (forget state, even not state actors') involvement in Balochistan

In my view, its a bogey created by Pakistan as a counter punch against the exposure of Pakistan's tangible support to terrorism in India and to hide its inability to handle its internal problems.

 

[Areesh]

Ahh..then you do believe that India is not materially supporting any Baloch rebels through its consulates in Afghanistan. I believe so too. But then again moral support doesn't require any consulate or base.

As I said the one base which you have isn't suitable for such operations. Hope you understand it here. As far as moral support is concerned it is your moral give it's support to anyone. We would return the favor in the same manner.

 

[humanfirst]

I borrow SMC's own words from wikileaks thread
"Show some proofs or shut up"

 

[RobbieS]

As I said the one base which you have isn't suitable for such operations. Hope you understand it here. As far as moral support is concerned it is your moral give it's support to anyone. We would return the favor in the same manner.

Refer to my reply to Asim's post on 1st page. You have been returning favors for quite sometime now.

 

[Areesh]

Refer to my reply to Asim's post on 1st page. You have been returning favors for quite sometime now.

It was you who forced us to do so. We were/are left with no choice.

 

[amitksingh2003]

No need. You don't have one.

And the one you have isn't suitable for such operations. Being fan boy is one thing their are realities on the other hand which we have to accept.

I can't stop wondering, how on one hand you accuse India of interfering in Balochistand and on the other hand also argue that India does't have any base to support those activities you are accusing India of doing.

 

[SMC]

What game? I havent seen any thing credible or not, coming from Pakistan in terms of details (forget proof) around India's (forget state, even not state actors') involvement in Balochistan

In my view, its a bogey created by Pakistan as a counter punch against the exposure of Pakistan's tangible support to terrorism in India and to hide its inability to handle its internal problems.

But I can turn that around. We haven't seen any proof of any Pakistani involvement in India or Afghanistan yet you have no problem believing in those accusations without any proof. From what I can see, it's a bogey created by India/Afghanistan/parts of the west to hide their failure in Afghanistan.

Now yes, it's off-topic, but I am merely showing what a difference perspective makes.

---------- Post added at 02:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:08 AM ----------

I borrow SMC's own words from wikileaks thread
"Show some proofs or shut up"

Read above.

 

[Areesh]

I can't stop wondering, how on one hand you accuse India of interfering in Balochistand and on the other hand also argue that India does't have any base to support those activities you are accusing India of doing.

I thing you should stop wondering and refer to the later posts.

 

[True_Pakistan_Zindabad]

India only has one foothold in Balochistan and that is via BLA. Talk about using terrorists as proxies.

 

[karan.1970]

But I can turn that around. We haven't seen any proof of any Pakistani involvement in India or Afghanistan yet you have no problem believing in those accusations without any proof. From what I can see, it's a bogey created by India/Afghanistan/parts of the west to hide their failure in Afghanistan.

Now yes, it's off-topic, but I am merely showing what a difference perspective makes.

---------- Post added at 02:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:08 AM ----------

Not entirely true, since India has publically and formally shared information with Pakistan about involvement of its citizens in terror, the credibility of which is being debated in Pakistani courts. Havent seen anything as yet from Pakistan on similar lines. And thats what I was saying.

 

[Areesh]

India only has one foothold in Balochistan and that is via BLA. Talk about using terrorists as proxies.

And that foot hold is trying hard to make itself a complete failure.

 

[nanmun]

But I can turn that around. We haven't seen any proof of any Pakistani involvement in India or Afghanistan yet you have no problem believing in those accusations without any proof. From what I can see, it's a bogey created by India/Afghanistan/parts of the west to hide their failure in Afghanistan.

Seriously!!!

All the Governments right from US, Russia, UK almost all sane countries have officially recognized Pakistan's involvement directly or indirectly in Mumbai attacks.

If there is no conclusive evidence, I don't think the whole world would pressure Pakistan to stop its support for extremists groups.

 

[SMC]

Not entirely true, since India has publically and formally shared information with Pakistan about involvement of its citizens in terror, the credibility of which is being debated in Pakistani courts. Havent seen anything as yet from Pakistan on similar lines. And thats what I was saying.

I am talking about Pakistani state involvement. What I stated is that you and other indians have no problem believing in that despite a lack of proof yet the same argument is used against us.

Now yes, I know about the involvement of citizens. However, my point is you and other Indians have no problems believing some certain things without any proof.

Yes, there might have been proof in the former case, but even when there is none, you have no problem in believing the allegations.

I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.

As far as BLA is concerned, I saw an interview on TV (Geo news) of a Baloch separatist leader (might be the same guy in this article) which was quite convincing in showing that he indeed is receiving help from India.

Anyway, all said and done, I think what's important is that neither side have any concrete public proof of their allegations. So Indians might point fingers at us for believing these 'conspiracy theories', but they are in the same boat (and yes, before you say it, also many westerners).


---------- Post added at 02:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 AM ----------

Seriously!!!

All the Governments right from US, Russia, UK almost all sane countries have officially recognized Pakistan's involvement directly or indirectly in Mumbai attacks.

If there is no conclusive evidence, I don't think the whole world would pressure Pakistan to stop its support for extremists groups.

Nah - don't see which countries have said that besides India.

And besides, there are many other allegations than what you just mentioned.