Stronger Pakistan means Stable India

[Moonlight]

Well, this rule doesn't really apply only for Pakistan and India's relations. But Countries around the world need peaceful relations in their regions. But that's only possible if India stop supporting TTP or any other extremist groups against Pakistan.
Also, Pakistan should NEVER let India play the games and Pakistan keep asking for peace in region.
No when they don't want peace in region and want to mess up with Pakistan. Pakistan has to take severe actions. Not because Pakistan wants the chaos in the region, but because all the countries give priority to their benefits.
Have faced enough of the devastation already because of India.

 

[Scavenger]

Strong conventional war fighting capabilities of Pakistan and stable Pakistan is good for the stability of entire region. Peace is directly proportional with the stability and stability depends upon capacities and capabilities.

Empirical evidence suggests otherwise.

Each time Pakistan has had economic stability coupled with generous donation of offensive military weapons by US, Pakistan has sought to wage war (declared or undeclared) on India.

This happened in 1965 - when Pakistan was given massive military aid and the latest by US in offensive weapons in order to arm Pakistan against a communist bloc.

Instead Pakistan chose to use that against India.

Then Kargil - where Pakistan military chose to use a period of peace to launch a military offensive by breaking treaties of Cease Fire Line signed in 1971 and also disregarding Pakistan Government and Indian Government's serious efforts at peace - as the Indian PM was in Pakistan while Pakistan was already infiltrating its military in Kargil.

So your statement would have been considered an honest piece except for the fact that empirical evidence suggests that Pakistan Army will disregard any and all treaties that Pakistan has signed, it will disregard its own Government and run at any potential chance for self glory dooming hundreds of millions of Pakistanis.

Ergo, no - a stable Pakistan is not in India's interest. Pakistan Military will seek to convert any stability in Pakistan to once again support jihad terrorism against India and the world like it has done in the past.

That said - this is the opinion of hawks in the Govt of India. The doves believe what you wrote.
The hawks however have the support of past experience in Pakistan, which is why they dominate the "Pakistan desk" in Govt of India and our policies are formulated accordingly.

 

[Brahmaputra Mail]

A strong and stable Pakistan means increased infiltration in Kashmir. They should remain engaged in their self created quagmire. Idle minds can conceive evil intentions. It's in India's interest that GHQ Rawalpindi is busy in Western theatre.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Why would pak need F 16 to fight terrorist?

Precision Munitions Delivery.

You know destroying a Terrorist safe house while the duplex next to it isn't accidentally hit.

 

[Who.Cares]

Why would pak need F 16 to fight terrorist?

Dude your burnol seems ineffective. Try Butthurt.

 

[Pakistani till death]

Cut all this BS. A stable and strong Pakistan is in no way in India's interest. We are rivals and enemies. What is in India's interest is a weak and isolated Pakistan! Any indian who thinks otherwise is a troll or a hypocrite! This whole baloney about how a strong and stable Pakistan would reduce terrorism in India and make India better is laughable!

 

[Neutron]

For the first time..........................
I disagree that a STABLE Pakistan is GOOD for India.
Stable Pakistan means, no Terrorism, high influence of Pakistan on Afghanistan & Iran, high influence of China on Pakistan, prosperous Baluchistan, and Strong Military backed by strong economy.

Results for India? More insurgency in Kashmir, Stronger grip of Pakistan on vital issues in international community, NO land route for India to trade to Europe. ...................... Tell me how it is good for them?

They want Pakistan broken into pieces, FATA, KPK as part of Afghanistan, Azad Kashmir and GB as part of India, Independent state of Baluchistan.............. as long as our Military and Intelligence was busy against Terrorism via Afghanistan, India gained more strong grip on Kashmir................. they got chance to penetrate deeper and rise terror in Karachi and Baluchistan............ they tried their best to cripple Pakistan economy and declare it terrorists and failed state with Nuclear weapons.............. they tried their best to isolate Pakistan in international community........... all this ''randi rona'' of India is not because that Pakistan is getting some bad @$$ weapons, its because they lost their belief that they have managed to isolate Pakistan from WOrld Powers, and no one from Europe, Russia, Middle East and United States is interested in securing Pakistan its deep crisis.

Plz keep it in mind, before starting any new Honey moon, don't forget the level of low mentality they can have. They are back stabber............... and a weakling, struggling Pakistan is in India favor............... don't get carried away by Political statements and love letters of private NGOs.................

Strong conventional strength means less chances of Nuclear war

 

[cloud4000]

sta·ble1
ˈstābəl/
adjective
adjective: stable; comparative adjective: stabler; superlative adjective: stablest

1. not likely to change or fail; firmly established.
   "a stable relationship"
   synonyms: secure, solid, strong, steady, firm, sure, steadfast, unwavering, unvarying, unfaltering, unfluctuating; More
   established, abiding, durable, enduring, lasting, permanent, reliable, dependable
   "a stable relationship"
   antonyms: rocky, changeable
   • (of a patient or a medical condition) not deteriorating in health after an injury or operation.
     "he is now in a stable condition in the hospital"
   • (of a person) sane and sensible; not easily upset or disturbed.
     "the officer concerned is mentally and emotionally stable"
     synonyms: well balanced, of sound mind, compos mentis, sane, normal, right in the head, rational, steady, reasonable, sensible, sober, down-to-earth, matter-of-fact, having both one's feet on the ground;
     informalall there
     "a stable person"
     antonyms: unbalanced
   • (of an object or structure) not likely to give way or overturn; firmly fixed.
     "specially designed dinghies that are very stable"
     synonyms: firm, solid, steady, secure, fixed, fast, safe, moored, anchored, stuck down, immovable
     "a stable tent"
     antonyms: rickety, wobbly

Thank you for the definition. I, too, own a dictionary, but I was looking for specifics.

 

[CHD]

@Neutron No sir you are wrong, they have deep inferiority complex issues due to the fact that first they were under the rule of muslim kings and then the british.
As you can see from the fact that as soon a hindu dominated party came into power they banned muslims from eating beef and their are increased in voilence against muslims.They believe in a made up story of Akhand bharat and considers themselves the heirs of south asia, well atleast the upper castes hindus(aka humans) dont know about the lower caste.Indian muslims have done nothing to hindus in current times but still their is large amount of hatred among hindus for muslims as can be seen from the affection of indian hindus for Israel.

I have met Jews,christians,bhudists,aethiests,sikhs and hindus and found that hindus hate muslims the most.

India fate will be similar to USSR, is its not a one country, they have quite different demographics and muslims when get in larger numbers will rise again and another ALLAMA MUHAMMAD IQBAL will be borned.

 

[cloud4000]

Cut all this BS. A stable and strong Pakistan is in no way in India's interest. We are rivals and enemies. What is in India's interest is a weak and isolated Pakistan! Any indian who thinks otherwise is a troll or a hypocrite! This whole baloney about how a strong and stable Pakistan would reduce terrorism in India and make India better is laughable!

Setting aside military and nuclear weapons, Pakistan is weak compared to India, especially in economics and diplomacy.

 

[CHD]

Setting aside military and nuclear weapons, Pakistan is weak compared to India, especially in economics and diplomacy.

Diplomacy how and where?

 

[cloud4000]

Diplomacy how and where?

Do you seriously have to ask? How is Pakistan doing on internationalizing Kashmir issue? How is Pakistan doing convincing India is a terrorist state by passing out dossiers to whomever wants them? Pakistan is diplomatically weak compared to India. It doesn't even have a full time foreign minister.

 

[ito]

I feel the spill over of an unstable Pakistan on India is minimal, given that the borders are virtually sealed.

No matter what Pakistan do, they cannot match India's conventional capabilities, hence Pakistan will always resort to nuclear blackmail.

 

[CHD]

Do you seriously have to ask? How is Pakistan doing on internationalizing Kashmir issue? How is Pakistan doing convincing India is a terrorist state by passing out dossiers to whomever wants them? Pakistan is diplomatically weak compared to India. It doesn't even have a full time foreign minister.

Grow up and think bigger and broader.
Now regarding point scoring.
Modi comes into Government and announces that we will isolate Pakistan and will only talk on terrorism and not kashmir, two years after this india not Pakistan annuonces that we are gonna resume dialogue with Pakistan including kashmir and after a month modi after coming to his senses comes to Pakistan without a proper formal invitation and arrives in Pakistan.

So the points table position now is Pakistan 1 India 0

 

[Guynextdoor2]

I feel the spill over of an unstable Pakistan on India is minimal, given that the borders are virtually sealed.

No matter what Pakistan do, they cannot match India's conventional capabilities, hence Pakistan will always resort to nuclear blackmail.

I think we deliberately do this to keep them obsessed with f 16. Pretty soon these jets will belong to a museum. And they'll fight extremely hard to keep the museum pieces.

I feel the spill over of an unstable Pakistan on India is minimal, given that the borders are virtually sealed.

No matter what Pakistan do, they cannot match India's conventional capabilities, hence Pakistan will always resort to nuclear blackmail.

I think we deliberately do this to keep them obsessed with f 16. Pretty soon these jets will belong to a museum. And they'll fight extremely hard to keep the museum pieces.

 

[CHD]

I feel the spill over of an unstable Pakistan on India is minimal, given that the borders are virtually sealed.

No matter what Pakistan do, they cannot match India's conventional capabilities, hence Pakistan will always resort to nuclear blackmail.

And no matter how many guns india buys it cant buys the needed pair of balls and will resort to just hot air flying from its ministers, as it wasn't Pakistan but india that threatened war both in 2002 and 2008 then chickened out.So tell me what good is your greater conventional strength if you cant use it?

I think we deliberately do this to keep them obsessed with f 16. Pretty soon these jets will belong to a museum. And they'll fight extremely hard to keep the museum pieces.


I think we deliberately do this to keep them obsessed with f 16. Pretty soon these jets will belong to a museum. And they'll fight extremely hard to keep the museum pieces.

The only kill your Su 30 mki ever had was a ballon from Pakistan while F-16 the fighting falcon dont needs any introduction