Pakistan spreading propaganda about 1971 genocide: PM

[Pakistan First]

The B/witch can whine as much as she wants..... can't change the reality.

 

[monitor]

Who killed Mujeeb ur Rehman....?

At least you could not.

 

[Nilgiri]

They don't Fish this is surprise to me..
Eating too much rice is one of the reason for nutritional deficiency ..As rice contains small amounts of iron, phosphorus, potassium, thiamin and folate as well as several other micronutrients. Rice has very little sodium and has no vitamin C. This total absence of many micronutrients would create a nutritional deficiency if your diet consisted largely of rice.
Diversification has co-relation to neutriticous efficiency...

Yup they score terribly in micronutrient intake as well.

I wonder where the base data for all of this is from. I would be interested to see the average intake profile of a person from each of these countries.

 

[LA se Karachi]

I want to say yes, but in all honesty that is what the Witch and her party want, as this will generate more interest in this non-issue, that they can moan and cry about. News headlines will flash "Pakistan CUTS ALL ties", the Indian media will catch onto the story, and everything will be exaggerated to look much worse than things actually were.

A sense of victimhood is what carries Hasina and her party forward, and they want to expand that to a national level, so that the average Bangladeshi becomes a moaner as well, crying at made up genocides. Meanwhile real life stories of humiliation and harassment are forgotten (https://www.change.org/p/united-nations-we-are-not-animals-we-are-bangladeshi-citizens, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Felani_Khatun, https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/07/24/india-new-killings-torture-bangladeshi-border, https://www.theguardian.com/comment.../india-bangladesh-border-shoot-to-kill-policy). The best thing is to just ignore this lot, as people who have deluded themselves into a sense of victimness are best avoided. Giving them attention (indirectly by cutting ties), will just give them more ammo to cry and moan about.

I agree with you in regards to the victim-hood, and that cutting off relations will give them attention. But that's the thing---the attention will only be temporary. After a year or two, no one will remember or care. Some of them will whine forever, that's the truth.

We need to sever ties permanently. Relations cannot go on like this. Nor should they. If Bangladesh has no desire to reform itself, then we should simply move on. There is nothing to be gained from that country. Let's not waste our time.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

I wouldn't call it a "desert" province...that may be more apt description for Balochistan.

Sindh produces some of the best Mangos I have had (and they must be even better at the source than transported all the way here to Canada).



Why does this exactly matter in it being or not being a desert province? Lets say its about 25% of total Pakistan agriculture:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Sindh

25% of agriculture with about 31% of the population of Pakistan. Thats about the average agricultural "density" of Pakistan (and I guess Punjab is somewhat above it to make up for Sindh and Balochistan). Again I fail to see the point you are trying to make?

We all know BD is a very fertile country. This would mean something big if agriculture made up more than 50% of the world economy. Its less than 5%.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.AGR.TOTL.ZS

I am aware that Sindh is not all desert just like Egypt.Sindh is much like Egypt.Indus is playing same function like Nile.Their satellite map looks similar. My point was Bangladesh can not be compared with Sindh although two have similar geographic size.

Egypt

 

[monitor]

You lost 3,000,000 people and you consider that victory?

Yes we lost many yet didn't give up our right.

 

[Nilgiri]

I am aware that Sindh is not all desert just like Egypt.Sindh is much like Egypt.Indus is playing same function like Nile.Their satellite map looks similar. My point was Bangladesh can not be compared with Sindh although two have similar geographic size.

Egypt

Yes I agree, but I don't think the original person who said that was inferring it totally that way....that area of land is the be all end all. A lot matters about the people inhabiting that land too

Every part of inhabited south asia is going to be quite different esp if you select at random.

 

[hussain0216]

Yes we lost many yet didn't give up our right.

To be slaves and be taught yoga?

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Seems like some people are having a constipation for pointing the obvious.Sindh is largely desert. 68000 sq. km out of 140000 sq. km of Sindh is desert or half of the province.There are three deserts in Sindh-
Thar desert
Nara desert
Kohistan desert
Then there are semi desert region. So it seems 70-80 percent of Sindh is desert and semi desert.You can read the details in this report.
http://foreverindus.org/ie_ecosystem.php

 

[LA se Karachi]

Seems like some people are having a constipation for pointing the obvious.Sindh is largely desert. 68000 sq. km out of 140000 sq. km of Sindh is desert or half of the province.There are three deserts in Sindh-
Thar desert
Nara desert
Kohistan desert
I am not counting semi desert region. So it seems 70-80 percent of Sindh is desert and semi desert.You can read the details in this report.
http://foreverindus.org/ie_ecosystem.php

So what? It has less than half of Bangladesh's population, so not as much fertile land is needed. Sindh's deserts are absolutely beautiful, by the way. Geographic diversity is good. Secondly, Punjab alone is fertile enough to feed the entire nation.

Thirdly, there is much more to the value of a land than its agricultural productivity. Economic production on a per capita basis and culture are more important.

 

[JazbaatiHindustaani]

What do you mean by half?

We only lost like the same size of Sindh province.

It is not embarrassing.

Remember British Raj was divided into Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and Myanmar!

How is not embarrassing?

a) part of your country didn't want to be with you.

b) your arch rivals made the independence possible without much and then the POW that were caught after surrender. I mean surely no country has had to end a war in such a disastrous fashion.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

World Average = 51.6%

Pakistan = 50% (score = 54)

India = 41% (Score = 38)

Bangladesh = 20% (Score = 0)

50 percent vs 20 percent non starchy food? I don't think it is correct.
http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_industry_by_country
Pakistan produce 3.5 million ton meat and fish(3.0m+0.5m) and Bangladesh produce 2.8 million ton meat and fish(0.6m+2.2m).Per capita wise it is almost same.Bangladesh also import substantial quantities of cattle from India and myanmar.Per capita protein intake in Pakistan is not much higher than BD.

 

[Nilgiri]

50 percent vs 20 percent non starchy food? I don't think it is correct.
http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_industry_by_country
Pakistan produce 3.5 million ton meat and fish and Bangladesh produce 2.8 million ton meat and fish.Per capita wise it almost same.Bangladesh also import substantial quantities of cattle from India and myanmar.Per capita protein intake in Pakistan is not much higher than BD.

You are welcome to not believe EIU findings just like you believe BBS is the be all end all for BD statistics and that PPP price data is wrong for BD.

Sources for EIU index:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiajtj5uaPSAhXB7oMKHcfCBJMQFggmMAE&url=http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Home/DownloadResource?fileName=EIU%20Global%20Food%20Security%20Index%20-%202015%20Findings%20%26%20Methodology.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH70fJuzkph3PAAVVeZ7kDwatBiMw&sig2=T2lnp3dCleQDHh7iSVCosg&bvm=bv.147448319,d.amc

In this case it was taken from the FAO itself.

Going right to FAO:

http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/100

http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/16

http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/165

Under Food availability:

Share of dietary energy supply derived from cereals, roots and tubers (latest year)

India = 59%

Pakistan = 50%

Bangladesh = 80%

Please note that not all protein sources provide the same level of quality. Hence you can have close protein supply per capita in absolute grams, but it need not translate into same protein quality. Also take into account supply need not equal consumption (given on what you throw away/discard/refuse to cook etc but is edible or is counted in the total catch/slaughter) Not to mention outright food wastage is apparently lot higher for BD according to EIU.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

You are welcome to not believe EIU findings just like you believe BBS is the be all end all for BD statistics and that PPP price data is wrong for BD.

Sources for EIU index:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiajtj5uaPSAhXB7oMKHcfCBJMQFggmMAE&url=http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Home/DownloadResource?fileName=EIU%20Global%20Food%20Security%20Index%20-%202015%20Findings%20%26%20Methodology.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH70fJuzkph3PAAVVeZ7kDwatBiMw&sig2=T2lnp3dCleQDHh7iSVCosg&bvm=bv.147448319,d.amc

In this case it was taken from the FAO itself.

Going right to FAO:

http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/100

http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/16

http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/165

Under Food availability:

Share of dietary energy supply derived from cereals, roots and tubers (latest year)

India = 59%

Pakistan = 50%

Bangladesh = 80%

Please note that not all protein sources provide the same level of energy.

So protein intake per capita for Bangladesh,India,Pakistan is 55gm,59gm and 64gm respectively.Than how starchy non starchy gap became so huge.You should not give reference from outdated,unreliable website.Give reference from UN data faostat.

 

[Nilgiri]

So protein intake per capita for Bangladesh,India,Pakistan is 55gm,59gm and 64gm respectively.Than how starchy non starchy gap became so huge.You should not give reference from outdated,unreliable website.Give reference from UN data faostat.

This IS FAOSTAT.

You are also forgetting the role of fats in dietary intake energy value.