Manmohan Singh's hypocrisy

[Spitfighter]

Even if I accept what ever you said, can you tell us why exactly this all started? if you had solved the kashmir issue, wouldn't interfere in Bangal.. then thing would be much better then today. It is habit of hypocrite indians to 1st forward the peace hand, when time comes to implement things, they back stab.

Ps: i never wanted to be anti-indian, but you guyz don't deserve friendship. Indian will always be anti-Pakistan..

I am not anti Pakistani, I'm just calling a spade a spade

 

[duhastmish]

hypocrisy or no hypocrisy!!! manmoham singh goverment is loosing its ground.

Their strong approach to coutner the terrorist activites were just verbal diarrhea. they talk the talk but couldnt walk thw walk.

Its all two faced b.s - india want a strong action against terrorism , if its coming from pakistan - indian want goverment to go to any level to stop the terrorism first and then talk about anything else.

it has nothing to do with pakistan or war with pakistan

its all about - let jud , and other kashmiri based terrorist organisations. they have to be crushed . but i doubt this b.s congress govt can do it.

this corrupt bullshit goverment need to have a lesson from pakistan itself - the way they are crushing taleban - size of nmonster - our sissy goverment cant handle a bunch of - mentally sick - small size terrorist. bullshit

pakistan have nothign to worry about till we have such - meaningless gutless people to pioneer our nation.

 

[Fracker]

it started when the PA intervened in Kashmir in 1947. Then again in 1965, 88 and 99.

Then why run into agreement? of LoC, and accepting the referendum right for kashmiries? they could let it be. Till today may be the problem would be solved automatically, one way or another. Hypocrite Indians, who just do agreement for their on good and break promises. You guyz don't give the right for the kashmiries, you shouldn't be complaining for terrorism. You yourself want to push this problem forward. Don't want to solve it.

its all about - let jud , and other kashmiri based terrorist organisations. they have to be crushed . but i doubt this b.s congress govt can do it.

Solve Kashmir issue, terrorism will finish automatically. your indian fellows wont be then crying for terrorism.

 

[ajpirzada]

hypocrisy has no limits when it comes to diplomacy

 

[ajpirzada]

Singh-Gilani talks get mixed reception in India

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: The outcome of the India-Pakistan talks in the Egyptian city of Sharm El Sheikh has been received in India with mixed response. Experts believe the joint statement issued after the summit-level talks between Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and his Indian counterpart Dr Manmohan Singh was ambiguous and left to the interpretation of both the governments to address their respective audiences.

While the officials and the ruling Congress party were gloating that Singh had succeeded in keeping the Kashmir issue out of talks and narrowed focus on terrorism, a section of experts and the opposition maintained that de-linking terrorism from the talks was disappointing. Security expert Manoj Joshi believed Pakistan had succeeded in getting what it wanted from the talks, saying it almost seemed as if the joint declaration between the two countries was made “just for the sake of it”. There is no credibility in (Pakistani Prime Minister) Gilani’s commitments to India, he added. Former diplomat G Parthasarthy, however, reacted cautiously, but said the PM would lose face in case of another terrorist attack. Officials in India were, however, rejoicing that for the first time since the composite dialogue process’ format was agreed upon between the two sides in June 1997, Kashmir would not be a major factor.

After the Simla agreement in 1973, Kashmir had almost disappeared from the India-Pakistan discourse. But it made a comeback in the early 90s after India agreed to discuss Kashmir, interpreting it as discussing issues related to militancy and cross-border terrorism. After the exit of the Narasimha Rao government, the next Indian prime minister IK Gujaral and then Pakistani premier Nawaz Sharif, agreed to form a separate working group on Kashmir in 1997 on the sidelines of a SAARC summit. The arrangement continued until Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Islamabad in 2004 and agreed to find a solution to the Kashmir issue. While Pakistan considered it a huge success – finding a lasting solution to Kashmir had reappeared in the dialogue process – India took solace in Pakistan’s commitment not to allow its territory to be used against India. At the last interaction of leaders on April 18, 2005 in New Delhi, the joint statement said the two leaders addressed the Kashmir issue and agreed to continue dialogue in a sincere and purposeful way for a final settlement.

Goals clear: Noted expert on Kashmir and Pakistan affairs AG Noorani believed both sides had travelled a distance and were now clear of their goals. There was not much to do on Kashmir except to implement the understanding, he added.

On the inclusion of Balochistan and other areas in the joint statement, senior Indian officials said they had nothing to hide. If Pakistan believed someone from the Indian side was creating trouble for them, they were more than willing to clear the misunderstanding, they added.

Meanwhile, both sides had also agreed on sharing credible and actionable information on any future terrorist threats with intelligence agencies of both countries remaining constantly in touch.
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[insas91]

What's the fuss about. Manmohan Singh said nothing wrong. Delinking terrorism and talks was never mentioned in the joint statement. It was more what Gilani said to Pakistani press.

Second, delinking terrorism with other issues is absolutely impossible. India suffers from terrorism emanating from Pakistan carried out be state-backed(proven to the world, not just alleged) Pakistani terrorists. And as long as Pakistan continues to sponsor terror, dialogue will not resume.

 

[duhastmish]

Solve Kashmir issue, terrorism will finish automatically. your indian fellows wont be then crying for terrorism.

whAT do u mean by solve kashmir issue - see for india - the kashmir issue it diffrent than pakistan. the issue is not : whther to give up kashmir or not. india will never give away kashmir even if it has to come to - world war and wiping of india and pakistan from planet earth. so no point hitting aroudn the bush . and we both side know this.

For india kashmir issue : is terrorism in kashmir . we need to kill and crush all these terorist activity there. and for them a strong step needs to be taken on the foot prints of ISRAEL !!

 

[haawk]

Please understand the difference between the leaders of two nations getting together for talks with their assistants, and issuing a joint statement at the end after exhaustive discussions and arguments lasting over hours, and a President merely suggesting that he would send XYZ individual to another country for talks.

so you mean to say that everystatement your president makes on his own does not represent official statement of pakistan!!!!!

so by your words !!how do the indians !!(the world for that matter) know that what your prime minister or president represents pakistan s official statement?...... this would mean that there is no one in the govt who can make pakistan's "official statements ".....any statement made is his own views!!. this is why the indian govt does not know who has the power in pak and who we should talk to!!!!! you have just confirmed our doubts that there are more than one centre of power in pak!!!!!!

AM .....you are not making any sense here !!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Either way , its a comment coming from a head of state. Does this suggest that the Pres can make sweeping statements & get away with it ?

so you mean to say that everystatement your president makes on his own does not represent official statement of pakistan!!!!!

so by your words !!how do the indians !!(the world for that matter) know that what your prime minister or president represents pakistan s official statement?...... this would mean that there is no one in the govt who can make pakistan's "official statements ".....any statement made is his own views!!. this is why the indian govt does not know who has the power in pak and who we should talk to!!!!! you have just confirmed our doubts that there are more than one centre of power in pak!!!!!!

AM .....you are not making any sense here !!!

What sweeping statements? The guy said he might send XYZ official over and then changed his mind about that.

How on earth can you guys compare that with an official joint statement crafted after the two leaders and their officials met for several hours.

You make no sense.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

whAT do u mean by solve kashmir issue - see for india - the kashmir issue it diffrent than pakistan. the issue is not : whther to give up kashmir or not. india will never give away kashmir even if it has to come to - world war and wiping of india and pakistan from planet earth. so no point hitting aroudn the bush . and we both side know this.

Who is asking you to give up kashmir? What is being called for, and India agreed to in the UNSC several times, is the right of the Kashmiris to determine their own destiny as promised to them and as is their right.

 

[MFI]

^^ That's not going to happen as Kashmir is an integral part of India

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Lets not get confused here. Pakistan is no angel. You accuse India of hypocrisy?

Oh yes I accuse India of hypocrisy here - it is obvious.

Have we forgotten Kargil already?

Have we forgotten Siachen already?

It has been the state policy of Pakistan for close to two decades to train, arm and infiltrate terrorists across the LoC,

No different than India's 'state policy' to support terrorists in undisputed East Pakistan and Baluchistan, along with supporting proxies in Afghanistan (Norther Alliance warlords) and Sir Lanka (LTTE).

You talk as if Pakistan has been nothing less than a forthcoming and sincere neighbor trying its best to work together, but alas, India has been sooo 'uncooperative'. The GoP needs evidence against people they've trained, armed and who live within your country? Don't insult my intelligence.

I think I have made it amply clear above that India has been 'sooo uncooperative'. Pakistan is not the one that violated its commitments in the UNSC and refused to resolve the disputed territory of Kashmir through dialog.

I wonder where a bunch of kids would learn such sophisticated tactics?

Same place Taliban, Baluch militants and the East Pakistani insurgents learned them.

There has been no change in state policy,

The support Pakistan has provided in almost eliminating cross-border infiltration and the insurgency in Kashmir belies your assertion. As of now it appears that there has been a change in state policy, based on events on the ground.

Terrorism will not be legitimized, therefore dismantling it will remain a prerequisite to any dialogue.

No one said anything about legitimizing terrorism, and your dialog was with Pakistan not terrorists, hence the joint statement delinking terrorism from dialog.

"Action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process and these should not be bracketed."

I think the above statement is clear enough and justifies my point.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

^^ That's not going to happen as Kashmir is an integral part of India

Not per the international community, the UN, according to the multiple UNSC resolutions, all of which India agreed to (at an official level, not as a statement in a personal capacity such as, 'I will send XYZ official over to talk with you')

According to the Prime Minister of India Nehru:

""I wish to draw your attention to broadcast on Kashmir which l made last evening. have stated our Government's policy and made it clear that we have no desire to impose our will on Kashmir but to leave final decision to people of Kashmir. l further stated that we have agreed on impartial international agency like United Nation', supervising any referendum."

 

[MFI]

No said anything about legitimizing terrorism, an your dialog was with Pakistan not terrorism, hence the joint statement delinking delinking terrorism from dialog.

"Action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process and these should not be bracketed."

I think the above statement is clear enough and justifies my point.

Pretty hypocritical since it is Pakistani soil being used for terrorism.
You actually expect India to talk when were attacked by Pakistani elements?
Unless Pakistan takes steps to dismantle it's terror network there should be no talks. De linking Composite dialogue is akin to letting Pakistan go scot free.

 

[MFI]

Not per the international community, the UN, according to the multiple UNSC resolutions, all of which India agreed to (at an official level, not as a statement in a personal capacity such as, 'I will send XYZ official over to talk with you')

According to the Prime Minister of India Nehru:

""I wish to draw your attention to broadcast on Kashmir which l made last evening. have stated our Government's policy and made it clear that we have no desire to impose our will on Kashmir but to leave final decision to people of Kashmir. l further stated that we have agreed on impartial international agency like United Nation', supervising any referendum."

You expect India's internal affairs to be dictated by a decades old resolution.Trust me if Kashmir was to have been resolved it would have been.