What Girls in pak think about India

[TOPGUN]

Ineresting video! lol as i always state friendship is a way to peace these both are a better wat towards the future!

 

[khanz]

OrCDiV2sJFo[/media] - SHOAIB AKHTAR & ESHA DEOL DANCE (EK SE BADHKAR EK Finale)

sunny deol always makin anti-pakistan films and yet his sister grinding against a pak cricketer lol he musta been livid esp considering since shaoib 's reputation as a party animal/playboy i wouldn't be suprised if he nailed her
but it seems funny how cross border friendships/relationships is usually with indian actresses and pak cricketers mostly.
eh it's all good lol
On a serious note though the pak schoolgirls video just goes to show we are not as brainwashed as portrayed to be and theres a diverse range of opinions in pakistan and more open than given credit.

 

[A1Kaid]

Didn’t seem to deter the Taliban? Or, are they not considered foreign? It didn’t protect your national sovereignty from drone strikes. While Pakistan continues to spend more on enhancing its “nuclear deterrence” it diverts precious resources away from nation building. The things that were needed yesterday the things that make the lives of your people better.
Buddha smiled in 1974 and yet Pakistan is intact – how did Pakistan survive without nuclear weapons before 1998? I’d argue that Pakistan was doing far better than India in the 80’s and early 90’s.

I don’t blame Pakistan – whatever gave you that idea? And I’m certainly not a “wild pacifist”. I just dread waking up one morning and reading that several million people have been wiped off the face of the earth - including some people on this forum that I have become quite fond of. Let’s be honest, in the Pakistan - India context a nuclear war is not that farfetched.

Okay seriously your intelligence is quite amusing now...

"Didn’t seem to deter the Taliban? Or, are they not considered foreign? It didn’t protect your national sovereignty from drone strikes. While Pakistan continues to spend more on enhancing its “nuclear deterrence” it diverts precious resources away from nation building."-Death by Chocolate

First of all you cannot use Nukes within Pakistan to fight the Taliban, for obvious reasons and dangers. The Taliban is an insurgency, Nukes are mainly to deter other Nuclear Powers who threaten Pakistan.

"It didn’t protect your national sovereignty from drone strikes."

Pakistani Army and Musharraf Administration may have had an agreement with the US that drone strikes may be allowed to target Taliban fighters, so this may have been an pre-arranged agreement. And that the two countries would share intelligence and target plans.

Besides didn't I already tell you, the Nukes are not used for everything, a nation must use multilateral approach to diverse problems. We don't expect the Nukes to provide everything for us, your implications and suggestions are unwise.


"While Pakistan continues to spend more on enhancing its “nuclear deterrence” it diverts precious resources away from nation building."-Death by Chocolate

First of all you don't know much about Pakistan, Pakistan is going ahead with major infrastructure projects in Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad, and Gwadar. Nuclear weapons are not the cause for any lack of nation building, if we don't have a strong nuclear power we won't have a nation especially in the face of nuclear enemies.

The things that were needed yesterday the things that make the lives of your people better. Buddha smiled in 1974 and yet Pakistan is intact "how did Pakistan survive without nuclear weapons before 1998? I’d argue that Pakistan was doing far better than India in the 80’s and early 90’s."-Death by Chocolate

First of all prior to 1998 India was not recognized as a nuclear armed nation, but had primitive nuclear devices that's all. When India decided to go Nuclear it presented Pakistan a grave national security danger, one that conventional armed forces could not deal with alone. So this means Pakistan had to by Geo-Political and military factors GO Nuclear.


About the "Smiling Buddha" nuclear DEVICE test, that was the forerunner of the nuclear race. Of course Pakistan remained intact, because India's nuclear weapons program was in early stages and primitive stages, they were not necessarily a Nuclear Armed weapons state, but a country experimenting with Nuclear devices. Nuclear devices are not necessarily weapons of mass destruction but well developed/enriched Nuclear bombs and warheads are.

So at the time of the Smiling Buddha the risk was only beginning.



Also it is strongly believed the nuclear deterrence was brilliantly used by Pres. Musharraf during the 2001-2002 Military standoff. Pakistan threaten Nuclear first strike and massive swift Nuclear strikes on Indian major cities...This prevented war, saved lives, assured peace for the time, and safety.

 

[notsuperstitious]

First of all prior to 1998 India was not recognized as a nuclear armed nation, but had primitive nuclear devices that's all. When India decided to go Nuclear it presented Pakistan a grave national security danger, one that conventional armed forces could not deal with alone. So this means Pakistan had to by Geo-Political and military factors GO Nuclear.

About the "Smiling Buddha" nuclear DEVICE test, that was the forerunner of the nuclear race. Of course Pakistan remained intact, because India's nuclear weapons program was in early stages and primitive stages, they were not necessarily a Nuclear Armed weapons state, but a country experimenting with Nuclear devices. Nuclear devices are not necessarily weapons of mass destruction but well developed/enriched Nuclear bombs and warheads are.

So at the time of the Smiling Buddha the risk was only beginning.

So, it took India 24 years to make a bomb AFTER we conducted a test

OK

 

[A1Kaid]

So, it took India 24 years to make a bomb AFTER we conducted a test

OK

How many nuclear warheads did you have at the time you tested the Smiling Buddha?

And you are making a mistake many make, and that is the Smiling Buddha was a Nuclear Device not a nuclear bomb that could threaten Pakistan.

Nuclear warheads, bombs, and missiles are different from small nuclear devices which is what India tested in 1974.

And During the time of the Smiling Buddha India had basic nuclear technology nothing sophisticated enough to deploy Nuclear weapons and harm Pakistan.


Got it, good...

 

[dbc]

So, it took India 24 years to make a bomb AFTER we conducted a test

OK

Yes of course, and the bomb that brought Japan to its knees was very sophisticated

 

[A1Kaid]

Yes of course, and the bomb that brought Japan to its knees was very sophisticated

Well as you said the weapons used against Japan was a "Nuclear bomb", the Smiling Buddha was a "Nuclear Device". You obviously fail to understand the lethality and difference of the two technologies.

Here's something for you to read up on.

"While touring the Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC) on 7 September 1972 Prime Minister Indira Gandhi gave verbal authorization to the scientists there to manufacture the nuclear device they had designed and prepare it for a test ."

"Throughout the development of this device, more formally dubbed the "Peaceful Nuclear Explosive" or PNE, but commonly called Smiling Buddha, very few records of any kind were kept either on the development process or the decision making involved in its development and testing."

Source: India's Nuclear Weapons Program - Smiling Buddha: 1974


"development process" indicates India was in the early stages of it's Nuclear program and path to Nuclear armament, this means India had the full intention of Nuclear weapons. This presents a Nuclear threat to Pakistan beyond what our conventional armed forces can handle.

"The only appropriate response to a Nuclear threat is an equal and counter Nuclear threat."-A1Kaid.

Japan's Hiroshima and Nagasaki WWII experience is a testimony to that.


Further points I would like to add, is the "Little Boy" Nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima was developed by the US and was relatively an advanced nuclear bomb, especially considering the time. It was also very heavy and contained more enriched uranium than the Indian nuclear device, or Smiling Buddha ever did.

"As the observation and photography escorts dropped back, the Enola Gay released a 9,700-pound uranium bomb, nicknamed Little Boy, at approximately 8:15 a.m. Hiroshima time"

Source: Hiroshima | The Manhattan Project: Making the Atomic Bomb | History of the Atomic Age | atomicarchive.com

Notice how the source clearly says uranium bomb, and not Nuclear device. Nuclear device isn't really 'weaponized'.


You haven't proven to be intelligent in this debate at all, but you have succeeded in making emotional and sentimental arguments about why Pakistan should not have nukes, not strategic, defense, military, scientific, and down right survival arguments...

It's also quite funny how Indians love to support your position, wonder why? Because it's exactly what they want a non-Nuclear Pakistan that cannot defend against India's Nuclear arsenal.


Nothing else to say to someone like you.

You may complain all you want but Pakistan will remain a Nuclear power.

 

[S-2]

"I'm young and I desire war. I want to smell and taste blood. I want to bathe in the blood of my enemy. I want to hold Indian heads as trophies in my hand." BaberCM

"I second that." saadahmed

Animals.

Go find your war and quit hiding behind words. Both of you. May you drown in that much-desired blood.

How little you actually know.

 

[Elmo]

"I'm young and I desire war. I want to smell and taste blood. I want to bathe in the blood of my enemy. I want to hold Indian heads as trophies in my hand." BaberCM

"I second that." saadahmed

Animals.

Go find your war and quit hiding behind words. Both of you. May you drown in that much-desired blood.

How little you actually know.

Finally! I thought I was the only one who was disgusted by that desiring war statement. There is a thick line between patriotism and barbarism. Please understand that before passing or seconding statements about "bathing in your enemy's blood" or "holding their heads as trophies". The image that is conjured when one reads that statement is revolting to say the least!
Saad I have seen you do some really good posting, never expected you to be supportive of brutality.


As for the video link provided earlier, they are young, confident, articulate girls who are needless to say naive. Stop nitpicking on what these girls have to say --- give them credit for being able to express themselves well. They aren't geo-political/geo-strategical analysts whose opinion will change the worldview of our politicians.

 

[fhassan]

I'm young and I desire war. I want to smell and taste blood. I want to bathe in the blood of my enemy. I want to hold Indian heads as trophies in my hand. What does that tell you about me?

Salaam O Alaikum

I commend your honesty, and I enjoy your postings, however I urge you to ponder over what Allah has ordained in the Qur'an. I believe that you have gone slightly OTT with your remarks, especially your slanders against these school girls.

We as muslims should honour and respect the dignity of our fellow sisters, not mock them publically.

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. - Quran 2:190

“ O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Informed of what ye do.” (Al-Maidah: 8)

Your "war" would not be Jihad; rather it would be the fulfilment of your own ego. Your fight would be to quench your lower self etc

In fact, I am sure you have heard of the story where an enemy of the Muslims spat on Aazrat Ali (radiaAllahhuan) during a great battle. Hazrat Ali could have easily chopped his head off, but he refrained from doing so, and commented that if he were to kill him it would be due to personal reasons rather than for Allah (so he did not kill him).

War, and the taking of human life is not a nice thing my friend. It is only permitted in instances when not fighting would be worse than fighting ie to give opressors free reign etc

Hope you understand my point.

Allah Hafiz

 

[Patriot]

It's not about religion Fhassan.If India ever attacks Pakistan i would not mind killing them.No love for India.They are our enemies period.You can't have love for your enemies.How many Americans had good wishes for Soviet Union?Most of the Americans wanted breakup of Soviet Union.

 

[Jihad]

If India did not go for nukes, then Pakistan wouldn't have them either.
Don't ****** at us Pakistanis for this, it's not our fault that we have a neighbour much bigger in size and in almost everything, they left us with no choice, mainly because they aren't as peaceful as they claim.
I stand with Bezerk and BaburCM and a few others on this one, when the time is there, these Nukes will protect our soil, and these girls will still be able to live in a free Pakistan without the anger or fear of any Indian or other foreign agression.
Nukes are perhaps not the best option, but in our current world, they are our deterrance, and nobody on this planet has the right to tell us what to do and what not to do.
These girls must be influenced aswell by the Bollywood movies, I mean, ofcourse India isn't a bad country, but on a geo political level, these girls and the rest of Pakistan owe our pride, our existance and our main protection to these Nukes.

I don't want to see these girls walking around the streets just like the girls from Lebanon after it was bombed to smithereens by the Israelis.

 

[dbc]

Robert McNamara (former Secretary of Defense): "It appears to me to be weakly constructed and weakly argued" that nuclear weapons can deter conventional military action by lesser powers - when modern conventional weapons hit targets precisely and overwhelm most opponents.

General Colin Powell: "I think there is far less utility to these (nuclear) weapons than...some think...because what they hope to do militarily...I can increasingly do with conventional weapons, and far more effectively".

Former Presidential Advisor Paul Nitze: "The deterrent effect of nuclear arms on (irrational) parties is questionable ... rational thinking is necessary for deterrence to work".

 

[third eye]

Don't you worry my sworn enemy. I'll meet you one day on the battlefield and your head will be mine. I'll quench my thirst. Mark my words.

Relax, you would be well advised to meet those who are actually tearing your country apart from within(if you could somehow muster the courage ) for if you don't there may not be a country to defend.

As regards ' quenching thirst & hold the head in your hands etc.." .. such juvenile remarks stand ignored for thats the best attention they can get.

Nations do not improve by punching keys on forums..go bell the cat if you can

 

[Durran3]

Hey, on a different note, I'm young and I desire war. I want to smell and taste blood. I want to bathe in the blood of my enemy. I want to hold Indian heads as trophies in my hand. What does that tell you about me?

I am not quiet sure if you really meant that or were you being sarcastic towards someones reply... but if you really meant it.. there are certain things that i can tell from this post..

You seriously need to limit your video game time as i see its having a rather sociopathic, anti personal, delusional effect on your brain no different than the very Taliban who behead police officers in the main Bazaar or use a knife to 'Halal' a human being. I wonder why the Pak Army isn't pointing the end of an Artillery cannon on your face kiddo..

Now i suggest you go out and socialize with some decent people and stop acting like the Joker in Batman. It seems you've been pretty influenced by him but frankly speaking your not him.. your just a little boy sitting behind a 14 inch view sonic monitor on the Pak defense forum sitting in the Netherlands enjoying the life and liberty handed to you on a plate.. You really want to see blood?? head over to your local family physician to give you a Vitamin B12 shot mixed with some ADHD medication.... now run along and play with the 'Batman' outside your lawn