India Uses Terror Card To Counter Pakistan At UNGA

[Baahubali]

I mentioned that it was off-topic the very first time.

What was off-topic was that I was talking about evidence for the claim and you went on to talk about how India's strategy is working.

My evidence is:

1. The status quo still exists.

We want the status quo to exist and you don't. Now if the status quo exists don't you think your strategy has failed?

Our objective is being met and that is my proof.

2. No major world power is siding with Pak.

No major world power has criticised India over Kashmir and hence again our objective of keeping Kashmir under international silence has been met.

Your objective of cashing in on the recent protests has not been met.

3. Points 1 and 2 do not look to be undergoing any change in the foreseeable future.

So again you see our objective has been met.

Simple see baat hai mere dost, India wants status quo and as long as status quo remains, our purpose is fulfilled.

 

[SMC]

No, the claim I am talking about is Pakistani state sponsoring terrorism.

 

[karan.1970]

If thats the case then drone strikes did the same. So what has changed in the this week?

Both are violation of sovereignty.

There is an agreement privately between the government. ISI provides them intelligence to carry out the attacks, such as with Baitullah Mehsud.

GoP says otherwise only for public consumption.

So I dont know what is worse..

1. An ally continuously attacking your soil despite your objections
or
2. Having an under the table deal with the same ally to allow the same while protest in public of those attacks and seem impotent to rest of the world and your population in stopping those.

or may be

3. The real situaion being Number 1 and Pakistan pretending its Number 2 so that some face can be saved ???

Deal is still on, we're not suppose to get have them ATM.

The proof of the pudding is in its eating.

Symbolically some may have a problem but if it's killing terrorists then for all practical purposes it's OK.

No disagreement there...

Took 2 years to change the plan, huh? And again, you're still making this into a trend.

All this means is that USA will listen to Kayani or any other General after Kayani retires, only if it suites their plan.

 

[Baahubali]

No, the claim I am talking about is Pakistani state sponsoring terrorism.

O bade bhai ye pehle bata dete toh mera itna time toh waste nahin hota!

Anyways, so you are not ready to accept that you supported/sent jihadis in Kashmir?

Ok sire there you go:

I've pasted three videos but your answer lies at the start of video no. 2.

Here is Mushy accepting this

Pakistan had a BIG role instigating insurgency in kashmir and khalistan.

It didn't work in khalistan because there was no people's support.

It survived in Kashmir for so long because of People's support and even that has been slowly fading away.

Of course I must accept that a lot of credit for decreasing insurgency in Kashmir goes to mushy since he turned the tap off on those jihadi groups once supported by PAK.

But after Mushy went, all good work was undone.

 

[SMC]

So I dont know what is worse..

1. An ally continuously attacking your soil despite your objections
or
2. Having an under the table deal with the same ally to allow the same while protest in public of those attacks and seem impotent to rest of the world and your population in stopping those.

or may be

3. The real situaion being Number 1 and Pakistan pretending its Number 2 so that some face can be saved ???

It's #2 as we saw with Mehsuds. Now again, you make the argument about how it looks symbolically, but if the government is OK with it, particularly the all-important ISI and the army, then the argument doesn't work.

The proof of the pudding is in its eating.

Ok. Well, I made a grammar error and what I meant to say was that the deal is still on and we're suppose to get them later on. Not right now.

All this means is that USA will listen to Kayani or any other General after Kayani retires, only if it suites their plan.

It probably suited their plans to have manned attacks before. Didn't happen. But again, let's wait a couple of months and see if this trend continues.

@ Baahubali
I am talking about allegations that Pakistan is STILL today supporting terrorism.

 

[karan.1970]

It's #2 as we saw with Mehsuds. Now again, you make the argument about how it looks symbolically, but if the government is OK with it, particularly the all-important ISI and the army, then the argument doesn't work.

I seriously dont believe that.. I think its #3

Also about all important.. I always thought that in a democracy, only people are all important.

Ok. Well, I made a grammar error and what I meant to say was that the deal is still on and we're suppose to get them later on. Not right now.

Lets see.. I think its another face save to avoid looking ditched by the french

It probably suited their plans to have manned attacks before. Didn't happen. But again, let's wait a couple of months and see if this trend continues.

Yes.. too soon to spot a trend here..

 

[Hutchroy]

No, the claim I am talking about is Pakistani state sponsoring terrorism.

Kind Sir,

When discussing, arguing or have a tête-à-tête about Terrorism emanating or sponsored by Pakistan please note the following :

1. Terrorism in China : In respect of the Uyghur Terrorist President General Musharraf guaranteed the Chinese Government that Pakistan would henceforth not allow Pakistan to be used as an operational or logistic base or receive any support from the Government of Pakistan.

You must have heard possibly in the last three months of the Chinese concern for Uyghur Terrorists still having a Pakistani connection, be it from Non-State Actors. The Pakistani Government again assured the Chinese government that there will not Uyghur Movement supported by Pakistan.

However, the Pakistani Non-State Actors are still seemingly supporting the Uyghur Movement.

2. The British Government has stated that 70% of all Terrorist Acts in Britain have a Pakistani connection. I am sure they mean “Non-State Actors”.

3. The Government of India is similarly complaining about Terrorists operating from Pakistani Bases. Agreed they are “Non-State Actors” but they are operating from Bases in Pakistan.

4. The USA is also quite assured that Terrorism is emanating from Pakistani based Groups. The validity of their point of view is the continuous Bombing of Pakistan, especially by UAV of the Predator kind.

Now we have this report India Uses Terror Card To Counter Pakistan At UNGA.

One therefore cannot appreciate or support the idea of a Pakistani Complaint in this matter as in addition to the above points is the news that the British and European Countries, in a joint effort, have thwarted the type of Attacks as were carried out by Pakistani “Non-State Actors” in Mumbai around 26 November 2008. These "Non-State Actors" are also traced to Pakistan.

Clarification : The term “Non-State Actors” has been coined by the Pakistani authorities in General and the Pakistani Army along with its ISA in Particular.

However the Government of India considers these Pakistani "Non-State Actors" are actually Pakistani Sponsored Terrorists.

Of course the Pakistani Government will Hem and Haw about these Terrorists being "Non-State Actors" but with the aforesaid evidence there is no weight to the declarations made by the Pakistani Government.

 

[Baahubali]

@ Baahubali
I am talking about allegations that Pakistan is STILL today supporting terrorism.

GoI didn't give me the proof so I cannot give it to you. GoI gave the proof to GoP. Ask your GoP.

People like Hafiz Sayeed, Lakhvi, Dawood Ibrahim have ample amount of proof against them.

Chidambaram talked about getting voive samples checked, GoP didn't agree.

Chidambaram gave dossiers after dossiers yet GoP kept mum.

Now this kind of an attitude only deserver a bada wala facepalm and that too from GoI.

Nobody in this world can help you if you choose to live in denial, least of all me.

 

[SMC]

I seriously dont believe that.. I think its #3

Also about all important.. I always thought that in a democracy, only people are all important.

Fair enough if you think it's #3. The attacks on Baitullah and Hakimullah suggest otherwise, however.

As far as democracy is concerned, yes, true, but ISI and army has slightly more say in Pakistan.

Lets see.. I think its another face save to avoid looking ditched by the french

What? The deal was never cancelled man. I am not sure what you're implying here.

 

[SMC]

Kind Sir,

When discussing, arguing or have a tête-à-tête about Terrorism emanating or sponsored by Pakistan please note the following :

1. Terrorism in China : In respect of the Uyghur Terrorist President General Musharraf guaranteed the Chinese Government that Pakistan would henceforth not allow Pakistan to be used as an operational or logistic base or receive any support from the Government of Pakistan.

You must have heard possibly in the last three months of the Chinese concern for Uyghur Terrorists still having a Pakistani connection, be it from Non-State Actors. The Pakistani Government again assured the Chinese government that there will not Uyghur Movement supported by Pakistan.

However, the Pakistani Non-State Actors are still seemingly supporting the Uyghur Movement.

2. The British Government has stated that 70% of all Terrorist Acts in Britain have a Pakistani connection. I am sure they mean “Non-State Actors”.

3. The Government of India is similarly complaining about Terrorists operating from Pakistani Bases. Agreed they are “Non-State Actors” but they are operating from Bases in Pakistan.

4. The USA is also quite assured that Terrorism is emanating from Pakistani based Groups. The validity of their point of view is the continuous Bombing of Pakistan, especially by UAV of the Predator kind.

Now we have this report India Uses Terror Card To Counter Pakistan At UNGA.

One therefore cannot appreciate or support the idea of a Pakistani Complaint in this matter as in addition to the above points is the news that the British and European Countries, in a joint effort, have thwarted the type of Attacks as were carried out by Pakistani “Non-State Actors” in Mumbai around 26 November 2008. These "Non-State Actors" are also traced to Pakistan.

Clarification : The term “Non-State Actors” has been coined by the Pakistani authorities in General and the Pakistani Army along with its ISA in Particular.

However the Government of India considers these Pakistani "Non-State Actors" are actually Pakistani Sponsored Terrorists.

Of course the Pakistani Government will Hem and Haw about these Terrorists being "Non-State Actors" but with the aforesaid evidence there is no weight to the declarations made by the Pakistani Government.

What evidence is there that the Pakistani state is supporting terrorism?

I don't think you or Baahubali are getting what I am saying.

The term "Pakistan-sponsored terrorism" refers to terrorism supported by the Pakistani state - the ISI, the army, GoP, etc.

 

[Hutchroy]

What evidence is there that the Pakistani state is supporting terrorism?

I don't think you or Baahubali are getting what I am saying.

The term "Pakistan-sponsored terrorism" refers to terrorism supported by the Pakistani state - the ISI, the army, GoP, etc.

Predator, Predator, Predator Blues.....

 

[SMC]

So any reply that is relevant to what I said AND makes sense?

 

[Baahubali]

What evidence is there that the Pakistani state is supporting terrorism?

I don't think you or Baahubali are getting what I am saying.

The term "Pakistan-sponsored terrorism" refers to terrorism supported by the Pakistani state - the ISI, the army, GoP, etc.

And I told you to ask your GoP.

Look buddy, the actual proof cannot be found on internet forums etc. as it is exchanged only in diplomatic parleys and what we are not diplomats or official reps. of our respective govt.

What I or anyone else on the internet can give you is a 'pointer to the proofs' which you do not seem to give any credence to and hence there is no point in debating this further. I do not have access to official records of either GoI or GoP so I cannot give you documents with the word "PROOF" stamped on them in CAPITAL LETTERS!

It's your choice, if you want to live in denial, be my guest!

 

[SMC]

No, no, no. Public accusation means you must provide proof in public. Private evidence may exist, but it's pointless if no one has seen it. Burden of proof is on you to give it to me since you're accusing my country. I don't have that burden.

As far as denial is concerned, consider learning the meaning of the word.

 

[Baahubali]

No, no, no. Public accusation means you must provide proof in public. Private evidence may exist, but it's pointless if no one has seen it. Burden of proof is on you to give it to me since you're accusing my country. I don't have that burden.

As far as denial is concerned, consider learning the meaning of the word.

WTH is this? Now you are debating just for the sake of it.

You are apparently sitting in CANADA and you have google and youtube at your disposal.

Use search at times.

Sorry but I'm not interested in spoon feeding anyone here. Bbye