We should learn from Turkey and launch an offensive to liberate Kashmir.

[Indus Pakistan]

Pakistan only fight in her defence while belligerent India is always the initiator since she thinks she can flex her muscle but ends up getting beaten..

Not quite.

• 1948 - we started it.
• 1965 - we started it
• 1971 - India started it
• 1982 - Siachin, India started it
• 1999 - Kargil, we started it

 

[war&peace]

Not quite.

• 1948 - we started it.
• 1965 - we started it
• 1971 - India started it
• 1982 - Siachin, India started it
• 1999 - Kargil, we started it

None of it was started by Pakistan... India started a war since 1947 ... we just reply from time to time in our defence

yeh buddha kyon ro raha hai ?
subah sham tv par baith kar baqwas karta hai .

It has something to do with Gangadeshi military defeats

 

[Indus Pakistan]

None of it was started by Pakistan... India started a war since 1947 ... we just reply from time to time in our defence

Oh for fcuks sakes grow up. Talking bullshit only reduces your credibility. Anybody with even marginal reading of history knows what I enumerated above. Must you live in cloud cuckoo land?

1971 - clarification. Although we began the hostilities when PAF launched air attacks on Indian targets but these can be considered as pre-emptive as India was about to launch a full scale war on Pakistan. Thus clearly India began this war as it had been preparing for some months.

Siachin was India's Kargil. As Indian Army sneaked into what was undefenced territory but ipso facto considered as Pakistan territory. Unlike Musharaf India succeeded as by the time Gen. Zia woke up India had already grabbed the heights. Ever since PA has been in a defensive posture.

 

[war&peace]

Oh for fcuks sakes grow up. Talking bullshit only reduces your credibility. Anybody with even marginal reading of history knows what I enumerated above. Must you live in cloud cuckoo land?

1971 - clarification. Although we began the hostilities when PAF launched air attacks on Indian targets but these can be considered as pre-emptive as India was about to launch a full scale war on Pakistan. Thus clearly India began this war as it had been preparing for some months.

Siachin was India's Kargil. As Indian Army sneaked into what was undefenced territory but ipso facto considered as Pakistan territory. Unlike Musharaf India succeeded as by the time Gen. Zia woke up India had already grabbed the heights. Ever since PA has been in a defensive posture.

You already admitted that Kargil, 71 and Siachin were started by Gangadesh so now do a little bit more research and you will find other wars were also started by her. She is a belligerent neighbour.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

She is a belligerent neighbour.

Indeed she is. I don't doubt and know that India was out to snuff Pakistan from day one. But Kashmir 1948 was a botched attempt by Pakistan. 1965 again was botched and poorly planned attack by Pakistan. Read Operation Gibralter. Kargil again was botched attempt by Pakistan. If we don't learn from history by having a critical look at it we will never learn and improve.

Ps. There is differance between being hostile and starting a war.

 

[war&peace]

Indeed she is. I don't doubt and know that India was out to snuff Pakistan from day one. But Kashmir 1948 was a botched attempt by Pakistan. 1965 again was botched and poorly planned attack by Pakistan. Read Operation Gibralter. Kargil again was botched attempt by Pakistan. If we don't learn from history by having a critical look at it we will never learn and improve.

Ps. There is differance between being hostile and starting a war.

Well, I have in fact expressed same thoughts but in more polite language on this forum. But still it does not change the fact that the main reason behind of the wars is the Kashmir issue which is due to the terrorism of Hindu Maha Rashtra.. a terrorist pariah state.

 

[VCheng]

As Indian Army sneaked into what was undefenced territory but ipso facto considered as Pakistan territory.

The reason that area was undefended was because it was never demarcated beyond Point NJ9842, so neither side's claim could be tested over the other's. That is also the reason India stopped at the Saltoro Ridge as the natural watershed that it could defend in an international arena if Pakistan were ever to contest the operation. Please note that Pakistan has never done that to date. It was more than just General Zia who was sleeping in this sorry saga.

 

[JohnyD]

Good idea, this Indian govmt didnt even allow mighty China to grab a tiny part of Bhutan..But it will surely let Divine power called Pakisran to snach its state and union territory....pls be our guest!

 

[Imad.Khan]

Ask -

• what empires your ethnic group built in history.
  
• then have a quick look at the conquest and empires built by Turks.
  
• then ask did your ethnic group became slaves to the English conquerers.
  
• then ask did Turks become slaves to any English/European conquerers.

I think that will answer your query very effectively.

1. Durrani Empire ( I am Pukhtoon )
2. Ottomon Empire
3. Yes
4. Yes

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Economic collapse on either side could change the picture dramatically as you say, but it is not a likely outcome.

yah..not a likely outcome..USSR said the same thing..

 

[VCheng]

yah..not a likely outcome..USSR said the same thing..

The example set by USSR may apply to Pakistan as well, please do not forget.

 

[Crusher]

Pakistan needs to be proactive and aggressive in case of war against india, we must be seen as agressors because the people of Pakistan believe in agression, we don't like being seen as "pu**ies", I don't know why a lot of people here say that Pakistan should not come across as "agressor" against gangus, I would say Pakistan must come across as aggressor, that is our culture and tradition to be aggressive, we don't believe in being defensive that is a characteristic of a gangu not a son of indus valley region of Pakistan.

 

[VCheng]

Pakistan needs to be proactive and aggressive in case of war against india, we must be seen as agressors because the people of Pakistan believe in agression, we don't like being seen as "pu**ies", I don't why a lot of people here say that Pakistan should not come across as "agressor", I would say Pakistan must come across as agressor, that is our culture and tradition to be aggressive, we don't believe in being defensive that is a quality of a gangu not a son of indus valley region of Pakistan.

So how well did Kargil work out for Pakistan?

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

The example set by USSR may apply to Pakistan as well, please do not forget.

Its easy to handle a small baron fix it and keep it running.
however an Antonov will stay grounded till its small and expensive parts are not produced.

 

[VCheng]

Its easy to handle a small baron fix it and keep it running.
however an Antonov will stay grounded till its small and expensive parts are not produced.

We all can see the relative and absolute performance of the economies on both sides of the border quite clearly already, as well as the historical trends.

But you are right, it is easier to fix a smaller economy than a larger one. Let us see how that works out for Pakistan over the remainder of PMIK's term in office. The recent IMF bailout and successful completion of the program will be important.