Pakistan And India-Water Disputes-News And Updates

[Areesh]

I find your attempts at insulting me quite entertaining.

And I found you to be a chutya. And Mods found you to be the same. A chutya. that's why they banned you.

Now f*ck off.

 

[Tuchha]

Now "niculaer powwa" Pakistan is feeling the heat running pillar to post begging help.

 

[Adhiri]

Beca

Because it ultimatley coming back to pakistan ... And it was rules by proper arbitratipn ... Its just a diversion for power consumption and not stoppage or consumption ... I suggest you to check your facts first ...

So you are ok with this.

1. How about Pakal Dul Dam on the Chenab ? Turkey is a partner for constructing the Damn and pakistan has objected it as a violation of the IWT.

Its going to be a massive 10 km long, with a capacity of 108,000,000 cm and is a concrete face rockfill dam.

Are you going to blow that up ?

2. How about Kiru Dam and Kwar Dam ?

These too is a concrete Dam on the Chenab River and again pakistan considers it an violation of the Indus river treaty.

Are you gong to blow that up ?

3. How about the massive Sawalkot Dam ?

It has a capacity of 1.2 GW i.e. 1,200 MW and is a Concrete Dam. It is a massive 646-foot in height.

Are you going to blow this up ?

4. How about the Bursar Dam ?

This is the biggest of them all.

Its has a height of 829ft having the capacity of 2,00,000 acre water storage. ( i.e. Dam is Almost 1 KM in height)

Its going to be Massive right on the Chenab river.

Are you going to blow it up ?

 

[Adhiri]

They did not go to supa powa china and ask them to stop brahmaputra ?

Do they have more faith in world bank than their deep as ocean and high as mountain friend ? shame on china for not helping pakistan.

 

[IceCold]

This not international treaty but a bilateral one and it's not binding because it is not recognised. World bank is broker not enforcement

And Pakistan has no benefit its India which not taken it share the treaty states water 50:50 but we let river flow 83% of the he water into Pakistan

Secondly Bilateral treaty BTW two countries like in past we do signed many such treaty
Simla agreement ,Lahore agreement
Agra agreement

But did Pakistan following any treaty so
why they expect generosity from India

So there is no harm for India to end this bilateral agreement since it's not binding
And there is not international Law for transactionally flowing river bodies enforcement read treaty my friend

I asked you simple questions to which you replied with nothing actually other then getting off topic in which i am not interested and not going to get into it. Besides i have already replied to another member of your country on it.
There was a reason this accord survived the past 3 wars and that reason wasnt India's good will alone otherwise we would had seen the ending of this treaty a long ago. So definitely there is a third party who is playing the role of not only a broker but also an enforcer which the keyboard warriors across the border do not get.
Also since i asked if China and India had a similar treaty and you off topic response showed there is none so again there is simply no comparison between India and China and India and Pakistan.
Anything else on topic?

 

[cerberus]

I asked you simple questions to which you replied with nothing actually other then getting off topic in which i am not interested and not going to get into it. Besides i have already replied to another member of your country on it.
There was a reason this accord survived the past 3 wars and that reason wasnt India's good will alone otherwise we would had seen the ending of this treaty a long ago. So definitely there is a third party who is playing the role of not only a broker but also an enforcer which the keyboard warriors across the border do not get.
Also since i asked if China and India had a similar treaty and you off topic response showed there is none so again there is simply no comparison between India and China and India and Pakistan.
Anything else on topic?

Third-party why if Pakistan following Simla agreement

And you expecting us to comply a other bilateral treaty which not binding and has no implications on India please tell us how one side effects of Scraping IWT other than rhetorics internationally

 

[IceCold]

You are right, you say you are upholding the treaties so India too is upholding the treaty on paper.

The only thing we have done is suspended the Indus water commission till the time we are satisfied that terrorism has ended. Since you too are fighting terror, this should be welcomed by you.

You have ended the Indus water commission and than you say India too is upholding the treaty on Paper? Did Pakistan ended any of the accords unilaterally even if it were on Paper only as per you or did we suspended any part of it? No we did not and still open for any form of dialogue with India but shouldn't be preconditioned.
Now when India takes such unilateral decisions, you will have to keep in mind that they will have repercussions. Pakistan is no pushover that India can just bully its way and make Pakistan do whatever India wishes. Just like in the past India has come to its senses, it will come now as well. This in my opinion is public posturing and for domestic audience who believed in Modi's myth about Pakistan.

Third-party why if Pakistan following Simla agreement

And you expecting us to comply a other bilateral treaty which not binding and has no implications on India please tell us how one side effects of Scraping IWT other than rhetorics internationally

Please do scrap it at the earliest, that is if you can, rhetoric or no rhetoric. Obviously if this was so easy it would had been done a long ago. Didn't happen because its not simply a thing between India and Pakistan.

 

[Adhiri]

I asked you simple questions to which you replied with nothing actually other then getting off topic in which i am not interested and not going to get into it. Besides i have already replied to another member of your country on it.
There was a reason this accord survived the past 3 wars and that reason wasnt India's good will alone otherwise we would had seen the ending of this treaty a long ago. So definitely there is a third party who is playing the role of not only a broker but also an enforcer which the keyboard warriors across the border do not get.
Also since i asked if China and India had a similar treaty and you off topic response showed there is none so again there is simply no comparison between India and China and India and Pakistan.
Anything else on topic?

Even IF the treaty survived an earlier age due to 'unknown' enforcers, the treaty nor the enforces have survived today.

Today is a new day and Today the treaty survives ONLY on Indian good will.

So talking about the past is good time pass, but is of no Practical value.

The proof is that we have unilaterally suspended the Indus Water Commission for an indefinite time frame, and the commission was the mechanism that kept the treaty alive.


If you are saying that these 'enforcers' of old will now magically appear to save pakistan, then there s nothing more to be said but wait for these jinn's and genies.

 

[cerberus]

You have ended the Indus water commission and than you say India too is upholding the treaty on Paper? Did Pakistan ended any of the accords unilaterally even if it were on Paper only as per you or did we suspended any part of it? No we did not and still open for any form of dialogue with India but shouldn't be preconditioned.
Now when India takes such unilateral decisions, you will have to keep in mind that they will have repercussions. Pakistan is no pushover that India can just bully its way and make Pakistan do whatever India wishes. Just like in the past India has come to its senses, it will come now as well. This in my opinion is public posturing and for domestic audience who believed in Modi's myth about Pakistan.


Please do scrap it at the earliest, that is if you can, rhetoric or no rhetoric. Obviously if this was so easy it would had been done a long ago. Didn't happen because its not simply a thing between India and Pakistan.

Please check your facts and check out about
May be not from you side but it started from our side
kishan ganga project Google it

Recently you parliament yourself consider to revision of treaty

 

[Adhiri]

You have ended the Indus water commission and than you say India too is upholding the treaty on Paper? Did Pakistan ended any of the accords unilaterally even if it were on Paper only as per you or did we suspended any part of it? No we did not and still open for any form of dialogue with India but shouldn't be preconditioned.
Now when India takes such unilateral decisions, you will have to keep in mind that they will have repercussions. Pakistan is no pushover that India can just bully its way and make Pakistan do whatever India wishes. Just like in the past India has come to its senses, it will come now as well. This in my opinion is public posturing and for domestic audience who believed in Modi's myth about Pakistan.

The IWT is dead for all practical purpose. It is alive only on paper. That is what I said and meant.

The equivalence is the Simla Agreement.

If you are claiming that pakistan is no pushover, we will wait and see.

You can continue to hope that its India who is a pushover and will 'come to its senses' or you can restart the negotiations.

You are entitled to your opinion, but from where I stand Modi has no need for public posturing and has never bent to popular demand. If he had, he would have apologised for the Gujarat riots. He has refused to do so on a matter of principle.

That should give you an insight into his character.

If he has taken a decision , it is because he believes in it, not because the public wants him too.

 

[PatriotLover]

The world will support us, normal humans don't cut of water to fellow humans.

 

[Adhiri]

The world will support us, normal humans don't cut of water to fellow humans.

Don't you see the irony in talking to the world bank, but not to India ???

What do you think the world bank will tell you ? ...... it will ask you to talk to India. LOL.

 

[IceCold]

Even IF the treaty survived an earlier age due to 'unknown' enforcers, the treaty nor the enforces have survived today.

Today is a new day and Today the treaty survives ONLY on Indian good will.

So talking about the past is good time pass, but is of no Practical value.

The proof is that we have unilaterally suspended the Indus Water Commission for an indefinite time frame, and the commission was the mechanism that kept the treaty alive.


If you are saying that these 'enforcers' of old will now magically appear to save pakistan, then there s nothing more to be said but wait for these jinn's and genies.

Our past serves as a historical data for the future. If not no body would study history. Uri attack even if you pin it on Pakistan like always, is no bigger than we going to wars with each other, Parliament attack, Mumbai attack etc. So how exactly is this a new day? Because of Modi and his 56" chest? Didnt you guys get it when Modi promised during the election years and what he is following? Yes he has suspended Water commission but commission wasnt working either, Pakistan took its dispute to the international court, so commission was as good as dead long before this. What remains to be seen is how it impacts Pakistan share of water. We have already made it clear that we will take is no less than an act of war. If India wants to prevent a war yet teach Pakistan a lesson, how will this serve a purpose because it will lead to a war eventually.

The IWT is dead for all practical purpose. It is alive only on paper. That is what I said and meant.

The equivalence is the Simla Agreement.

If you are claiming that pakistan is no pushover, we will wait and see.

You can continue to hope that its India who is a pushover and will 'come to its senses' or you can restart the negotiations.

You are entitled to your opinion, but from where I stand Modi has no need for public posturing and has never bent to popular demand. If he had, he would have apologised for the Gujarat riots. He has refused to do so on a matter of principle.

That should give you an insight into his character.

If he has taken a decision , it is because he believes in it, not because the public wants him too.

Than let us agree to disagree. He was also the same man who said we will teach Pakistan a lesson and for that one needs a 56" chest. Anyway i will not dwell into the topic anymore. Pakistan has made it clear how we will view if India tries to unilaterally suspends the treaty.
And no we dont take India for a pushover nor do we start blaming India the moment a bird enters into Pakistan. It is only the other way round. For every wrong in India, Pakistan is responsible. This is BS of the highest order and we are not going to take it irrespective of what threats India wants to put on the table.

 

[Salahuddin Ayyubi]

Apart from rhetorics and jingoism screwed into your head, any points to make ??
Now tell me why you want to rob Kashmiries off 15000 MWs of hydro electricity ??

If Pakistan is obligated to sacrifice the treaty to help the Kashmiris. Then why not give us Kashmir?. So according to ur idiot logic. Kashmir is a part of India but it is Pakistan's responsibility to make sure that the welfare of its people is secured. Indian patwaris

 

[PatriotLover]

Don't you see the irony in talking to the world bank, but not to India ???

What do you think the world bank will tell you ? ...... it will ask you to talk to India. LOL.

Not only the world bank but whole world will slap you for this move.