Pakistanis condemning Pulwama terror strike on social media

[bafxet]

Not only social media Pakistanis generally condemn this kinda attacks every where, no matter where it happened as Pakistanis have suffered a lot due to terrorism and we know how it feels. as our PM said its indian govt and media rhetoric against Pakistan to gain political leverage in india which ignite Pakistanis to retaliate.

This is insane. Why would Pakistani condemn such an attack. Condemning such an attack wiuld mean that giving Indians a licence to kill the innocent and armless people.

 

[Daghalodi]

We want to make sure ouro dearly neighbor Pakistan saves some of their foreign exchange reserves
There are many other nations who can buy our tomatoes. Thanks for your concern

Sabzikal Strike

 

[kris]

Sabzikal Strike

More than enough

 

[Daghalodi]

More than enough

Thats all you cucks can do

 

[Kao Boy]

Normally I repsect your views Joe, but you are clearly only espousing Indian view here. A view that we Pakistanis reject.



I have already given my evidence, you ignored it, so I don't need to re-sate it.
Countries that have democratically seperated: South Sudan, East Timour, Checko-Slovakia, you can even argue that the soviet union break up was democratic since they all became democracies.

Do you know English? or how life works?

People don't install dictators, but they can certainly remove them.

It was the Pakistani people who removed all dictators.
India can't even remove one butcher so I would not expect you to understand.

Gen Zia was killed and not removed. Awaam could have not removed him at all he was that powerful and wicked

 

[ZAC1]

Everybody in pakistan is happy that attacked happened and 45 of ur soldiers died...when u kill innocent people and u expect peace n love from them then world thinks ur nation should visit mental hospital.

 

[kris]

Thats all you cucks can do

Since 47 years

 

[scorpionx]

Okay let me teach you some history.
During our freedom, all states were given choice of India, Pakistan, or freedom.
Both India and Pakistan (hypocritically) did not allow the thrid option
Hydrabad exercised her rights and voted Paksitan. India then invaded, violating the agreement.
Kashmir wanted independence, but Pakistan made that claim that it was Muslim majority so it invaded.

But India in its full retard mode got itself involed for no reason.
Now here we are 70 years later and you and you are making an innocent face and asking "What can India do, we are stuck "


No one is sympathetic to India here, she made this mess only by herself and and she alone has the power to end it by a simple vote.

Of course, mentally ill hindutva won't allow people any true freedom so the killings and murders will continue.



1. No you are wrong.
And 2.
India promised Kashmir a vote as part of the treaty with the Maharaja.
This vote has nothing to do with Pakistan or the UN.
You are legally obligated to give a vote.

But again, we know that India really a Religious-Fascist state and not a true democracy.

Are you aware of the chronology of events, if in case you are implying invasion of Kashmir was justified in the backdrop of Operation Polo? Hyderabad never voted for Pakistan, on the contrary in a secret letter to Mountbatten Nizam refuted any possibility of joining Pakistan. It signed a stand still agreement with India just alike, the State of J & K signed with Pakistan. I do not need to remind a history scholar like you, what Mehr Chand Mahajan wrote to the British Prime Minister on 15th October.

I am sure, history classes in Pakistan teach you what does a stand still agreement signify and how the signing parties adhered to it's principles in 1947-48? If operation Polo was a violation of stand still agreement, read up a bit further and look what Hyderabad did in violation of that agreement. And then ask yourself, had the State of Hyderabad dared to do before transfer of power that it did in '47-'48, what would have been the Britisher's response to it.

 

[Rusty]

Gen Zia was killed and not removed. Awaam could have not removed him at all he was that powerful and wicked

So if we could not remove him why did a democracy take control after? Should not another dictator take his place?

So you would agree that you were the only ones who brought those weak leadership which was eventually taken over by Army multiple times....

Just like you we have a new and weak democracy. We went dictator route, you sent butcher route.

We have learned our lesson, did you?

 

[Daghalodi]

Since 47 years

 

[kris]

View attachment 540880

Ok

 

[Daghalodi]

Ok

Looks like your media is making a fool out of you!!

 

[kris]

Looks like your media is making a fool out of you!!

Ok