INDIA’S GEOPOLITICAL HATE FOR PAKISTAN IS SABOTAGING THE NORTH-SOUTH CORRIDOR

[Musafir117]

Could you explain in others words please, my English is not good as yours.

Thanks

Keh raha ke moongphali ke liye aap bohat walk kar gae ho

 

[Lurch Adams]

Contrary to Indian belief, 80% of baluch don't want freedom from Pakistan. All they want is that they get their rightful right under constitution.

Who did this plebiscite and arrived at the figure of 80%?

If India resolves Kashmir dispute today it will benefit India the most.

What does "resolving Kashmir" mean?

If you have friendly Pakistan you can built crude oil pipeline from Iran via Baluchistan and Sindh to jam nagar refinery and to other sources.

And have our energy needs hostage to Pakistan's blackmail?

If ordinary Indians start to question their media, govt and army just like Pakistanis did after bin laden raid many such problems will be solved.

Why should we question our government? Is it the Indian government that is cited as the No.1 sponsor of terrorism in the world?

Let me get this straight. Your point in brief is that Pakistan has every right to continue occupying the Khanate of Kalat that it annexed in 1948 and an invasion in the face of an existing insurgency, whereas India must give up Kashmir which it never invaded and had to absorb to prevent annexation by Pakistan, which had invaded?

Are we on the same page now?

 

[UQAAB]

a very good read

 

[Vortex]

Keh raha ke moongphali ke liye aap bohat walk kar gae ho

Thank your for the translation. But I would also he explain me what he wanted to say, why he said that.

Mongpheli mazaydarr thy. Laikun thora gund parh geya hey.

 

[Taxzu]

Who did this plebiscite and arrived at the figure of 80%?



What does "resolving Kashmir" mean?



And have our energy needs hostage to Pakistan's blackmail?



Why should we question our government? Is it the Indian government that is cited as the No.1 sponsor of terrorism in the world?

Let me get this straight. Your point in brief is that Pakistan has every right to continue occupying the Khanate of Kalat that it annexed in 1948 and an invasion in the face of an existing insurgency, whereas India must give up Kashmir which it never invaded and had to absorb to prevent annexation by Pakistan, which had invaded?

Are we on the same page now?

Dear I usually don't get into arguments that are not backed by historical truth but I will answer you anyway.
I will tell from where 80% came. I have baluch relatives and friends living in Quetta, khuzdar and Gawader and none of them talk about separate country. You have to differentiate between disagreement with those in power and demand for separate country. While I type this shahzen bugti the grandson of Akbar bugti and cousin of brahmdag is saying the same. He is also saying Akbar Bugti voluntary accepted to join Pakistan in 1948. So your argument that Baluchistan was invaded by Pakistan is wrong. Yes there is problem but not the problem that Indian are claiming. I would request you to go watch shahzen bugti interview on jirga today at geo news.


Kashmir was not part of India and was independent princely state so how come Indian forces end up there without occupying it.


Well when your govt claims that uri attackers came from Pakistan while the attack was still underway you have to ask them how come they didn't know about attacks but soon after the attack how come they know all the detail.
When your govt claims that they carried out operation just a km within Pakistani territory and destroyed launch pads then you need to ask how come launch pads or any of such kind of activity takes place so close to border and they knew nothing about it. If the launch pads are so near and they can see them then how come they can't stop the infiltration with half million force. Also for your information Kashmiris can move around whole of Kashmir with proper documents and For kashmiris LOC doesn't exist as per UN charter.

Resolve Kashmir means let them full autonomy and let them live as they like.

As for being blackmailed by Pakistan on pipeline, when livelihoods of hundred of Pakistanis will depend on the operation of pipeline Pakistan will never use that to blackmail India. You will be more prone to blackmail when China will build naval base in Gawader. The more you push Pakistan the more Pakistan will go into China camp.

 

[wiseone2]

Could you explain in others words please, my English is not good as yours.

Thanks

peanuts is another word for a small amount

for a few hundred million dollars and a few F-16s your military got involved in fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan
I do not know if Pakistani military could have cut a deal allowing the Soviets to control Afghanistan in return for not interfering in Pakistan The Soviets are out of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a mess. Parts of Pakistan close to Afghanistan are a mess.

Neither did USA, when it needed OBL to fight against Soviets.

Just like all those terrorists fighting in Syria for Americans right now.

USA asked Pakistan and Taliban to expel OBL crowd repeatedly
Pakistan chose to ignore American requests

The biggest enabler of ISIS crowd in Syria are your friends - Turkey and Saudi Arabia

America has always maintained a working relationship with the Assad in Syria. It is not USA idea to destabilize Syria

 

[Lurch Adams]

So your argument that Baluchistan was invaded by Pakistan is wrong.

First quote:

In March 1948, Pakistan invaded and seized Baluchistan. Under threat of imprisonment, the traditional Baluch leader, the Khan of Kalat, Mir Ahmed Yar Khan, was pressured to sign a treaty of integration. This treaty was, however, never agreed by the Baluchistan parliament and never mandated by the Baluch people.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/aug/15/pakistancelebratesbaluchista

Second quote:

On March 27, 1948 Pakistan annexed Balochistan after a military invasion. Thereafter 5 uprisings have taken place against Pakistan to gain independence.

http://organiser.org/Encyc/2016/8/8/Balochistan-conflict---The-Untold-History.aspx

Unfortunately, Pakistan rejected the legitimate concerns of the Baloch. Pakistan never treated Kalat as a non-Indian state and insisted on unconditional accession. To attain this objective, the Pakistani government used several ploys, including the buying off of Kalat state feudatories (Kharan and Las Bela) through lavish privy purses, and the elevation of the Gichki sardar of Mekran — a Kalat district sardar — to princely status. The end result of these machinations, including a threat of military action, was that the Khan acceded to Pakistan in March 27, 1948.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/aug/15/pakistancelebratesbaluchista

Kashmir was not part of India and was independent princely state so how come Indian forces end up there without occupying it.

If that is your line about Kashmir then same applies to the Khanate of Kalat. No double standards please.

Well when your govt claims that uri attackers came from Pakistan while the attack was still underway you have to ask them how come they didn't know about attacks but soon after the attack how come they know all the detail.
When your govt claims that they carried out operation just a km within Pakistani territory and destroyed launch pads then you need to ask how come launch pads or any of such kind of activity takes place so close to border and they knew nothing about it. If the launch pads are so near and they can see them then how come they can't stop the infiltration with half million force. Also for your information Kashmiris can move around whole of Kashmir with proper documents and For kashmiris LOC doesn't exist as per UN charter.

Where else would well-armed insurgents come from, if not from Pakistan? Who arms and trains them?

Resolve Kashmir means let them full autonomy and let them live as they like.

Will the erstwhile Khanate of Kalat get its rights?

As for being blackmailed by Pakistan on pipeline, when livelihoods of hundred of Pakistanis will depend on the operation of pipeline Pakistan will never use that to blackmail India.

Did Pakistan not shut off NATO supply lines to Afghanistan? Is it not continuing to do so with land route from India to Afghanistan?

You will be more prone to blackmail when China will build naval base in Gawader.

You are right. That is a serious concern. The threat of aggression will no doubt increase.

 

[nana41]

Pakistan support for taliban makes a mockery of all your claims of terrorism

Indian adventures in Srilanka/Tamil Tiger and Bangladesh (East Pakistan)/Mukti Bahini are 2 examples no neighbour of India should ever forget.India in pursuance of its dream of becoming a "superpower"is out to subjugate and impose its hedgemony in the area.Since she is not a country of a homogenous people with one language,history tells us,her dream is not going to be realized, especially if nationalist Governments come to power in Pakistan instead of Governments of thugs and crooks of today.

 

[Vortex]

peanuts is another word for a small amount

for a few hundred million dollars and a few F-16s your military got involved in fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan
I do not know if Pakistani military could have cut a deal allowing the Soviets to control Afghanistan in return for not interfering in Pakistan The Soviets are out of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a mess. Parts of Pakistan close to Afghanistan are a mess.

Thanks for explanation.

Yes we can imagine any sort of possibilities and their hypothetical results today.

USA asked Pakistan and Taliban to expel OBL crowd repeatedly
Pakistan chose to ignore American requests

The biggest enabler of ISIS crowd in Syria are your friends - Turkey and Saudi Arabia

America has always maintained a working relationship with the Assad in Syria. It is not USA idea to destabilize Syria

I'm not sure... you forgot israeli factor in the scenario. Especially with their goal to create the Great Israel or at lease having weak arabs countries if not friendly on around.

 

[wiseone2]

Thanks for explanation.

Yes we can imagine any sort of possibilities and their hypothetical results today.



I'm not sure... you forgot israeli factor in the scenario. Especially with their goal to create the Great Israel or at lease having weak arabs countries if not friendly on around.

Israel has working relationship with Assad clan in Syria. At least in the past

 

[Vortex]

Israel has working relationship with Assad clan in Syria. At least in the past

Sorry but this is the very first time i heard this news. Could you explain in which relation did they worked ?

 

[sady]

I mentioned similiar sentiments as this article does many times before regarding Indian penchant for Pakistan's demise. Illogical, vindictive and prejudiced.
What ever the history between the two countries, India being a bigger party to the conflict has now the onus to create a friendly South Asia. Pakistan has gone through paradigm shift. The proxy war which was favoured once by Pakistan now only remains a bitter medicine, to gulp down as a necessity. Kashmir is not an unsolvable issue. However if India will keep trying to cash it's strong position so will Pakistan resist till the very end. This is a logical end to an illogical pursuit.

 

[wiseone2]

I mentioned similiar sentiments as this article does many times before regarding Indian penchant for Pakistan's demise. Illogical, vindictive and prejudiced.
What ever the history between the two countries, India being a bigger party to the conflict has now the onus to create a friendly South Asia. Pakistan has gone through paradigm shift. The proxy war which was favoured once by Pakistan now only remains a bitter medicine, to gulp down as a necessity. Kashmir is not an unsolvable issue. However if India will keep trying to cash it's strong position so will Pakistan resist till the very end. This is a logical end to an illogical pursuit.

the real proxy war is in Afghanistan not Kashmir
Pakistan generals realized a long time ago winning a proxy war in Kashmir is close to impossible

 

[wiseone2]

Sorry but this is the very first time i heard this news. Could you explain in which relation did they worked ?

Israel and Syria are not friends. they have a long history of working on issues of mutual interest. I do not know about the current Assad. The older Assad was politically astute.

In 1983 both Israel and Syria launched a co-ordinated attack on Arafat in Tripoli in Lebanon
Until Palestinian uprising Israel and Syria tried to undercut Arafat's control of the PLO
Israel & Syria have conducted unofficial peace talks. they were much closer to resolving their disputes

Syria joined the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq
USA has 5-7 states as sponsors of terrorism. Syria is the only one with whom they have not cut diplomatic relations