I have and I will always prefer our monkeys over these duffers (I will never dare to compare them with any animal as it would be an insult to them, to animals of course). The irony is that even most of these politicians were handpicked by these duffers, no wonder they are as corrupt and dense as their mentors, but still better than them and at least we can kick them out in the next election. Hate the leaders not the system.
US is in league with India: Musharraf
- Thread starter Devil Soul
- Start date
I have and I will always prefer our monkeys over these duffers (I will never dare to compare them with any animal as it would be an insult to them, to animals of course). The irony is that even most of these politicians were handpicked by these duffers, no wonder they are as corrupt and dense as their mentors, but still better than them and at least we can kick them out in the next election. Hate the leaders not the system.
muse
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 13,006
- Reaction score
- 0
Come on now, you make it "heads I win and tails you lose"
Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
Musharraf just found this out?
Everyone knows that Zionists, Crusaders, and Hindu extremists all have a common enemy.....Muslims. India and U.S. have another common enemy and that is China.
However, India has no border with Afghanistan that's why India is useless when it comes to Afghanistan. America will try to work with India against China, but China is far stronger and India can't afford a conflict with China. India can't even afford a conflict with Pakistan thats why they never attacked after Mumbai incident.
---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------
Actually it'll be better for Pakistan if U.S. and India becomes friends, because to be America's friend is far more dangerous than to be America's enemy.
Everyone knows that Zionists, Crusaders, and Hindu extremists all have a common enemy.....Muslims. India and U.S. have another common enemy and that is China.
However, India has no border with Afghanistan that's why India is useless when it comes to Afghanistan. America will try to work with India against China, but China is far stronger and India can't afford a conflict with China. India can't even afford a conflict with Pakistan thats why they never attacked after Mumbai incident.
---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------
Actually it'll be better for Pakistan if U.S. and India becomes friends, because to be America's friend is far more dangerous than to be America's enemy.
Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
The Afghans with the real power in Afghanistan (Afghan Taliban) were never pro-india and will never be pro-india. They support Jihad in Kashmir against indian troops. Hamid Karzai is just a mayor of Kabul, even he is desperate to wanting talks with Afghan Taliban.
BATMAN
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 29,895
- Reaction score
- -28
- Country
- Location
Due to my non aquitance with oloder times, i cannot comment on F-86 but F-16 saga is all known to the world without conflict but you........... you always prove your brains are washed with falsehood or either you are guilty by yourself.
Pouring dollars in to economy is also wrong... US is not paying for the transit aid and neither india is paying for the transit aid both had benifited from the free transit facility. On top of this we have unpaid invoices in US account.
India is also running biggest smuggling network in complicity of various ministers. On top of this Pakistan has unfairly granted lower tariffs, which india is negotiating to reduce further.
It looks like you don-t read news or have no idea of ground reality....
In every other thread it is mentioned that how much our economy has suffered because of TTP operating out of Afghanistan, but you never fail to troll.
I don't know how you came to this conclusion. I will always prefer weak democratic government over a "perfect" military rule. I think you know my stance on this issue.
Perceptron
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2010
- Messages
- 834
- Reaction score
- 0
Of course, having seen how Pure your relationship has been between the Land of the Pure and the Army of the Pure, we will surely take this Purity to the next level. Pure joy, isn't it !!!
muse
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 13,006
- Reaction score
- 0
I follow your line of thinking but when you say even the politicians are army creations, you are really saying that the entire structure is malignant (which it is by the way) and that's suggests that it's not just the army to blame, after all they are dealing with what they find the situation to be -- it is without a doubt that they have muddied the waters, but it isn't like these waters were pristine.
Corrupt, criminal, inefficient, unrepresentative government claiming to be "democratic" and thus acceptable - is not and must not be, an article of faith -- I'm not suggesting that army or military govts are the way to go, just that we should be fair, in the first 5 or 6 years of Musharraf government much was achieved and even an agreement on kashmir ready.
Musharraf can be accused of being unconstitutional, but that's a tricky road, after all, so was Lincoln and in both cases we can make strong claims, but if Msharraf could have done what he achieved without a uniform on, well, that would have been ideal.
The Americans cannot do anything if Pakistanis are completely incompetent and know nothing else but bickering and moaning. India doesn't share its borders with Afghanistan. India doesn't have a sizeable Pashtun populaiton that shares its histroy, language, food or ethics with the most dominant ethnic group of Afghanistan. Afghan trade is not dependent on the mercy of India as it is the case with Pakistan. Pakistan, not India, is the home to biggest Afghan diaspora anywhere in this world. We have a sizeable Dari speaking population living in Balochistan and KP. Almost half a million Hazaras are living in Balochistan which is the third largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and we even share the same religion. We have so much in common but still it is Inida that has better relations with Afghans than us Pakistanis. It speaks volumes about the incompetency of those who are controlling Pakistan's policies regarding Afghanistan.
Screambowl
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 8,167
- Reaction score
- -39
- Country
- Location
the question should be why Pakistan is seen as a state where terrorists are safe. Or may be their diplomacy is very bad? I want to ask this musharraf that why is he blaming India for his own faults. You did the kargil and created a bad impression in our minds and the world. Trees with fruits have to bend this is the most important quote every Pakistani should understand. And the relation between India and America is purely economical and nothing.
President Camacho
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2011
- Messages
- 1,680
- Reaction score
- 0
Musharraf did Kargil neither for Pakistan, nor for India. He did it for himself, to look good in the books of those extremism loving Generals whose support was indispensable in playing the coup he did. Little did those Generals know their power too would be curtailed and in a particular case, one was fired without even a warning.
Once he became President, he changed his tone, and apparently his views, completely. He tried his best to broker a peace deal with India, and focused on the economy of Pakistan than on the 'strategic assets' that would harm others but do nothing for the people of Pakistan.
People say he bent down for the US, and even fudged the books to make Pakistan look progressive. But it is a fact that Pakistan was told "Either you are with us, or against us", and it is also true that Pakistan's GDP showed continuous growth under him.
In today's time, when Osama was found living in Abbotabad (throughout the period when Kayani was the ISI chief), no General has the courage to do another Lal Masjid to crackdown the extremists like he did.
Musharraf certainly did Kargil, but as a dictator from the Pakistani Army, for this region he was any time better than his predecessors.
@ muse
Are you implying that Lincoln was a tinpot military dictator who had usurped power through the barrell of a gun? Some actions that he took during the civil war are considered unconstitutional but comparing him with Musharraf is way off the mark. Musharraf or orther military dictators can be compared with Oliver Cromwell at best, although this comparison would also be incongruous. Cromwell was against Monarchy, our tinpot military dictators despise democracy. Cromwell wanted England to be a Republic, our Napoleons have no idea whatsoever what they acutally want. Cromwell won many wars, whereas our Tamerlanes got their bvtts royally kicked in every single war. Ayub grabbed power with the help of bureaucrats and the rest is history. These self-proclaimed messiahs plunged Pakistan into senseless wars, made mockery of constitution, destroyed every single democratic institution, manipulated political parties, rigged the elections, imposed their chosen lackeys as PM on us and here you are saying that both should be blamed equally. Musharraf was another dumb wardiwala who was responsible for the Kargil adventure that had brought two nuclear powers on the brink of total war, he alone is responsible for the gun politics of Karachi, he badly mishandled the pure political problem of Balochistan and now the young Balochs want nothing but freedom, his policies are the reason why FATA has become a living hell for its people and so on and so forth. First few years of his tenure were disastrous for Pakistan's economy though it improved once he was forced to joing Bush's WOT.
Politicians are corrupt but I am sure once the democracy is allowed to take roots the institutions will automatically get stronger and thus we will be able to curb corruption.
Are you implying that Lincoln was a tinpot military dictator who had usurped power through the barrell of a gun? Some actions that he took during the civil war are considered unconstitutional but comparing him with Musharraf is way off the mark. Musharraf or orther military dictators can be compared with Oliver Cromwell at best, although this comparison would also be incongruous. Cromwell was against Monarchy, our tinpot military dictators despise democracy. Cromwell wanted England to be a Republic, our Napoleons have no idea whatsoever what they acutally want. Cromwell won many wars, whereas our Tamerlanes got their bvtts royally kicked in every single war. Ayub grabbed power with the help of bureaucrats and the rest is history. These self-proclaimed messiahs plunged Pakistan into senseless wars, made mockery of constitution, destroyed every single democratic institution, manipulated political parties, rigged the elections, imposed their chosen lackeys as PM on us and here you are saying that both should be blamed equally. Musharraf was another dumb wardiwala who was responsible for the Kargil adventure that had brought two nuclear powers on the brink of total war, he alone is responsible for the gun politics of Karachi, he badly mishandled the pure political problem of Balochistan and now the young Balochs want nothing but freedom, his policies are the reason why FATA has become a living hell for its people and so on and so forth. First few years of his tenure were disastrous for Pakistan's economy though it improved once he was forced to joing Bush's WOT.
Politicians are corrupt but I am sure once the democracy is allowed to take roots the institutions will automatically get stronger and thus we will be able to curb corruption.
MilSpec
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Messages
- 12,931
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
"F16 Saga" I hope you realise that f16 is and for quite some time will remain your top fighter jet.
your major chunk of artillery is based on M110, M109, m198 and M148
your primary attack heli is Ah1F/S
your entire utility heli are bell 407/412models
In 1957 the Pakistan Air Force received 100 American-built F-86 Sabres under the U.S. aid program
Pakistan was the first non-NATO country to be equipped with the F-104
Out of your 12 frigates 7 are used bristish/US origin crafts in addition 12 Gulf Crafts and, 5 patrol boats USA delivered as donation
Pakistan Navy is expected to place a formal request to the U.S. for six Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates
In addition you also operate a long list of American made radars and Airbourne Recce platforms like P3C's
Are you still sure you want to pull out of US alliance ?
As far as it for WoT is concerned : you as an ally of USA, for all the above mentioned things should have providethat for free.As far as Indo-Afghan trade routes are concerned , afghanistan is a landlocked country, please refer to transit rights of land locked states according to UNCTAD
Why the Americanos helped Pakistan
1953/ May 1, 1960 Francis Gary Powers (can't rely on india )
1965 sanctions
1971 total sanctions no more sales/aid till 80.
27 December 1979 15 February 1989
october 1989 _ 2004 Pressler Amendment
9/11 <--> 2002~2003~2004 ongoing
= 37,000 dead civilians, 4,000 security/army forces 8,000 injured and tens of $$$$ of losses (ongoing)
The U.S. OF A doesnt give a **** about its allies and partners!
It only uses them to its own advantages and then dumps them when its all over
But now the seeds of evil it planted have come back to hurt her badly from all directions
What ever maybe , fact is the biggest hypocrites are the Pakistanis themselves who
for a few dollars more have sold their V******** for a days wage.
Peace
Similar threads
