We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan

[prithwidw]

'We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan'

Why are we shouting here? None of us here are the voice of our Governments. Making silly willy accusations over one another would not help.

It's time to introspect and Pakistan should introspect more.

 

[karan.1970]

both these event cant be compared as they are at very different stage and of very different nature.

pak has already accepted that its land was used by 'non-state' actors. while in case of balochistan, its not the not state actors but the RAW actors who are being blamed for assisting the terrorists. if india was to blame ISI with all the evidence etc, how will it appear in a joint statement?

therefore both the issues will appear in a statement in very different way.

Now you are simply speculating..

Net Net, Pakistan admits complicity of its citizens in terror attacks in India.

India has not accepted anything of this sort.. Neither has Pakistan provided any credible evidence that they can point to.

 

[SMC]

Who cares what you or Pakistani media says unless its backed by a credible source..Enjoy your delusions..

So you have nothing to offer except personal attacks. Exactly what I expected. I have been over the credible source argument, you know what I am talking about, stop trying to fool me.

Not really.. You made a statement and I added to that commenting how it sounded childish and foolish like the kid in the story.. Upto you to react to that or not..

And I did tell you that it's a childish comparison, comparing something black and white to something that isn't.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. If you keep responding to my opinion you will have to bear my response too..

You choose to respond to my post. My post was not directed towards anyone in particular. I posted it for Pakistanis to see, and unless I say it or make it obvious, my posts are generally directed towards Pakistanis. I couldn't care less what indians have to think about this whole issue.

You are mixing 2 things.. We were discussing whether there is credible evidence of India's involvement in terror activities and the may be's, probably's that you have intertwined in your arguement..

No, your problem is you believe in ISI involvement without any concrete proof (and don't lie here, no indian doesnt believe in ISI involvement), yet use the same argument against me. Somehow you "know" that ISI is involved. I know it too. I keep my opinion to myself for the most part though, or just present it to Pakistanis. You on the other hand are something different.

I must have missed it..

That you did.

Respond to them

I have done that several times. I am not going to waste my time stating same thing several different times.

It was my arguement and show me where have I accused ISI??

You have not publicly done so, however there's no doubt you believe deep down. And it doesn't have to be about recent terrorism. It can be about past. Indian has never given concrete proof of ISI involvement. Yet I can assume fairly confidently that you believe in ISI involvement.

 

[ajpirzada]

Now you are simply speculating..

Net Net, Pakistan admits complicity of its citizens in terror attacks in India.

India has not accepted anything of this sort.. Neither has Pakistan provided any credible evidence that they can point to.

nop. im stating wat is obvious. wat you are saying is that india let the word balochistan enter the joint statement despite the fact pakistan had no evidence wat so ever.

 

[deckingraj]

nop. im stating wat is obvious. wat you are saying is that india let the word balochistan enter the joint statement despite the fact pakistan had no evidence wat so ever.

May i ask what you find wrong in two statements

a) India let Balochinstan appear in Joint Statement
b) No proof has been ginve by GOP to substantiate her claims that India is creating problems in Baloch

Are you implying that india accepted inclusion of Baloch is by any way indication that india is involved in baloch trouble???

 

[karan.1970]

nop. im stating wat is obvious. wat you are saying is that india let the word balochistan enter the joint statement despite the fact pakistan had no evidence wat so ever.

If you go thru the text, there is no mention of India in balochistan. Some cryptic statement about "some information on threats". India would require evidence if the text in the statement implicated India like the text about Mumbai implicated Pakistani citizens..

 

[karan.1970]

So you have nothing to offer except personal attacks. Exactly what I expected. I have been over the credible source argument, you know what I am talking about, stop trying to fool me.

No personal attacks dude.. I simply called your views as your delusions. If I wanted to make personal attacks, I would have have called you schizophrenic which I didn't

And I did tell you that it's a childish comparison, comparing something black and white to something that isn't.

As I said, you are entitled to your opinions and I am to mine

You choose to respond to my post. My post was not directed towards anyone in particular. I posted it for Pakistanis to see, and unless I say it or make it obvious, my posts are generally directed towards Pakistanis. I couldn't care less what indians have to think about this whole issue.

Next time, put in a disclaimer if you dont want any specific set of members to not respond to your post..

No, your problem is you believe in ISI involvement without any concrete proof (and don't lie here, no indian doesnt believe in ISI involvement), yet use the same argument against me. Somehow you "know" that ISI is involved. I know it too. I keep my opinion to myself for the most part though, or just present it to Pakistanis. You on the other hand are something different.

I can say the same that my opinion is for Indians and not pakistanis like you.. Your call if you want to react to it or not.. I may have quoted your post in mine, but that doesnt make it mandatory for you to react..

Also arent statements blaming ISI on this forum responded to by asking proof??

I have done that several times. I am not going to waste my time stating same thing several different times.

As I said, then dont waste your time responding to me either who has not even made the statement you are responding to ...

You have not publicly done so, however there's no doubt you believe deep down. And it doesn't have to be about recent terrorism. It can be about past. Indian has never given concrete proof of ISI involvement. Yet I can assume fairly confidently that you believe in ISI involvement.

Didnt know you were a mind reader.

 

[SMC]

No personal attacks dude.. I simply called your views as your delusions. If I wanted to make personal attacks, I would have have called you schizophrenic which I didn't

And more personal attacks. Well one thing I can say is that personal attacks are normally a sign of desperation.

As I said, you are entitled to your opinions and I am to mine

Right, so don't post your personal opinion against my post as some sort of an empirical fact.

Next time, put in a disclaimer if you dont want any specific set of members to not respond to your post..

I have told you several different times about this. Actually, you're right, I should put that in my signature.

I can say the same that my opinion is for Indians and not pakistanis like you.. Your call if you want to react to it or not.. I may have quoted your post in mine, but that doesnt make it mandatory for you to react..

Also arent statements blaming ISI on this forum responded to by asking proof??

You're replying to my post, which makes it glaringly obvious that your opinion was directed towards me. In which case I do not hold back.

As far as asking for prove for ISI involvement, sure some are doing that, but the problem is it doesn't have to be about recent allegations. If you go to the past, India has never provided proof for ISI involvement. But indians somehow know that ISI is involved. So the same logic here.

Didnt know you were a mind reader.

As I said, it's a reasonable enough assumption to make.

 

[karan.1970]

And more personal attacks. Well one thing I can say is that personal attacks are normally a sign of desperation.

Dude... Where are the personal attacks.. You can call an arguement hypocratic and its all right. But if some one calls your point as delusional, its a personal attack?? C'mon SMC, who is being hypocritic now??

Right, so don't post your personal opinion against my post as some sort of an empirical fact.

Didn't call it an empirical fact.. Did I?

I have told you several different times about this. Actually, you're right, I should put that in my signature.

For once we agree....

You're replying to my post, which makes it glaringly obvious that your opinion was directed towards me. In which case I do not hold back.

Not replying but quoting.. hell of a difference...

As far as asking for prove for ISI involvement, sure some are doing that, but the problem is it doesn't have to be about recent allegations. If you go to the past, India has never provided proof for ISI involvement. But indians somehow know that ISI is involved. So the same logic here.

Replace India with Pakistan, and ISI with RAW and you have my response...

As I said, it's a reasonable enough assumption to make.

Nah!

 

[SMC]

Dude... Where are the personal attacks.. You can call an arguement hypocratic and its all right. But if some one calls your point as delusional, its a personal attack?? C'mon SMC, who is being hypocritic now??

Pointing out hypocrisy is not a case of personal attack. I have shown the hypocrisy so it's again an irrelevant thing. Calling someone delusional, not showing how they are delusional, is a clear cut case of a personal attack.

Didn't call it an empirical fact.. Did I?

You dont have to explicitly say it. It was implied in your post.

Not replying but quoting.. hell of a difference...

It's not much difference. By quoting someone in your post and tackling their points, you're replying to them.

Replace India with Pakistan, and ISI with RAW and you have my response...:

Yes, fair enough, but the point is that something like this throws out all the counter-arguments that indians have made against indian involvement statements.

 

[ajpirzada]

If you go thru the text, there is no mention of India in balochistan. Some cryptic statement about "some information on threats". India would require evidence if the text in the statement implicated India like the text about Mumbai implicated Pakistani citizens..

so u are saying that in india-pak joint statement balochistan simply propped up bec of some third country's involvement? lik i said its only debatable. we are wasting our time debating on it with incomplete information. things are not how they meet our eye.
but its fine. no need to discuss it anymore. with afghan game coming to an end, hopefully, balochistan situation will itself improve.

peace.... was nice to have flameless discussion with you