The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 RIP. BCCI should cancel Faisalabaad Wolves participation in CLT20. WTF! :hysterical::hysterical:
The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 ummm why not? I am just laughing at the triviality of the suggestion, when all other diplomatic channels are open. Pakistan has not been part of IPL for years - yeah that has really deterred them.
KeyboardWarrior Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 17K know her and check out the replies to her tweet. i just saw her in One advertise and i am telling you she is no Celeb.
randomGuy Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 It's your opinion' date=' not backed up by any facts.[/quote'] Thats common sense imho. That country is crumbling from inside. Don't know whether many of us read their news - but bomb blasts , shoot outs are day-to-day things there. They are already nude in front of international comm. , they got nothing to lose with India stopping trade(where-in as you know, India benefits more). Neither does international comm. act as per India. The cost of tit-for-tat retaliation is less than cost of losing public's confidence and army's moral. But still, you expect them to take out a man freely roaming around in Pak. If GoI wants, they can take Saeed out - this is what is believe.
The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 Thats common sense imho. That country is crumbling from inside. Don't know whether many of us read their news - but bomb blasts , shoot outs are day-to-day things there. They are already nude in front of international comm. , they got nothing to lose with India stopping trade(where-in as you know, India benefits more). Neither does international comm. act as per India. They are heavily dependent on international aid and support. How can we ask for any international sanctions when we have kept all diplomatic channels open, except the cancellation of cricket matches? The cost of tit-for-tat retaliation is less than cost of losing public's confidence and army's moral. No, it's not. You don't hedge catastrophes. But still, you expect them to take out a man freely roaming around in Pak. If GoI wants, they can take Saeed out - this is what is believe. I am not so sure.
randomGuy Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 They are heavily dependent on international aid and support. How can we ask for any international sanctions when we have kept all diplomatic channels open' date=' except the cancellation of cricket matches?[/quote'] International comm.(US, China, Middle east) doesn't act according to India's appeals. They have their own reasons to have relations with Pak in their own different way. Its useless if we stop trade. tit-for-tat retaliation at local level doesn't result in Nuclear war No tit-for-tat retaliation results in loss of public confidence and army moral.
SLICKR392 Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 i just saw her in One advertise and i am telling you she is no Celeb. What is a celebrity? "A celebrity is a person, who has a prominent profile and commands some degree of public fascination and influence in day-to-day media." In her case, she is a VJ. Never mind, TBH. I really don't give a **** what she says at the end of the day.
The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 International comm.(US, China, Middle east) doesn't act according to India's appeals. They have their own reasons to have relations with Pak in their own different way. Its useless if we stop trade. Yes, everyone acts in their self interest, but many problems have been successfully solved with hard nosed diplomacy in the past and it's rubbish to say it will not work for Pakistan without even making a half decent attempt. Middle East is irrelevant and US, China, and Europe all have much more to gain economically from India than Pakistan and if forced into a corner, most will choose India. tit-for-tat retaliation at local level doesn't result in Nuclear war No tit-for-tat retaliation results in loss of public confidence and army moral. Read up on what was the trigger for WW-I.
randomGuy Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 Yes' date=' everyone acts in their self interest, but many problems have been successfully solved with hard nosed diplomacy in the past and it's rubbish to say it will not work for Pakistan without even making a half decent attempt. Middle East is irrelevant and US, China, and Europe all have much more to gain economically from India than Pakistan and if forced into a corner, most will choose India.[/quote'] Look at current situation - US is actually talking to Pak and taliban. China is investing in their ports, arming them and middle east matters coz they give pak aid, overseas jobs, oil on cheap prices and they will be closer to pak than us because of religion. No use of stopping trade in current scenario. I need not because I know from the history of India-pak, that a war has never began from border flare-ups.
The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 Look at current situation - US is actually talking to Pak and taliban. China is investing in their ports, arming them and middle east matters coz they give pak aid, overseas jobs, oil on cheap prices and they will be closer to pak than us because of religion. No use of stopping trade in current scenario. US has its own needs from Pakistan till they are engaged in Afghanistan. They have little economic interest in the country, which would be the primary driver of their foreign policy decisions. China is ambiguous. I need not because I know from the history of India-pak, that a war has never began from border flare-ups. That's an Imran Khan like statement that terrorists will never attack cricketers.
randomGuy Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 US has its own needs from Pakistan till they are engaged in Afghanistan. They have little economic interest in the country' date=' which would be the primary driver of their foreign policy decisions. China is ambiguous.[/quote'] for a foresee-able future US is gonna need Pak for afghanistan. Give pak its due credit, they care enough to not start a full war due to cease fire violations, they never have in past either .
Clarke Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 International and diplomatic pressure does work on many occasions. Am I sure it will work? No. But right now we are in no position to even ask other countries for some sort of sanctions when we are happily engaging in trade and all kinds of diplomatic relationship with them. What pressure & sanctions ? Its not happening on India's request and you're naive to think along those lines. China will veto any such UN based move & assuming the West independently decides on that point of view post 2014 (can't see that with Kerry around), the middle east is there to provide the dole. I don't know much about our covert warfare abilities, but if they are weak then they should be strengthened. Conventional warfare is too risky and costly in terms of human lives. Which is why we should do nothing until we have a strong intelligence, espionage and special operations framework. Sounds bold & courageous and respectful of our sovereignty against a smaller neighbor :two_thumbs_up:
The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 for a foresee-able future US is gonna need Pak for afghanistan. The scenario changes in 2014. Give pak its due credit, they care enough to not start a full war due to cease fire violations, they never have in past either . Please read up on the final trigger to the official engagement in the '71 war. What pressure & sanctions ? Its not happening on India's request and you're naive to think along those lines. China will veto any such UN based move & assuming the West independently decides on that point of view post 2014 (can't see that with Kerry around), the middle east is there to provide the dole. This is getting tiring. We haven't even tried the most basic elements of diplomatic pressure and you are so sure that it will not work, when there are well documented precedents on the success of diplomatic pressure. Yes, it might not work, but it's foolish to dismiss it without trying. Which is why we should do nothing until we have a strong intelligence, espionage and special operations framework. Sounds bold & courageous and respectful of our sovereignty against a smaller neighbor :two_thumbs_up: Yes, it is called prudence. Any action which presents even a 0.0000001% chance of turning the entire North India into a nuclear wasteland is not worth it. BTW, the zeroes were put in randomly before someone asks me about the mathematical formula I used to get the probability.
Clarke Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 This is getting tiring. We haven't even tried the most basic elements of diplomatic pressure and you are so sure that it will not work, when there are well documented precedents on the success of diplomatic pressure. Yes, it might not work, but it's foolish to dismiss it without trying. So are the regular killings. Could you share some insights into how India can force Pakistan to back off diplomatically ? You claim USA & Israel cannot attack Iran which is completely untrue; the fact is Iran hasn't stopped its nuclear program despite massive sanctions. We cannot muster anything close to that level of sanctions and Pakistan isn't really led by sensible people to care about sanctions that impact common people. How exactly will they back off diplomatically with India leading the charge is beyond me. Yes, it is called prudence. Any action which presents even a 0.0000001% chance of turning the entire North India into a nuclear wasteland is not worth it. BTW, the zeroes were put in randomly before someone asks me about the mathematical formula I used to get the probability. You're paranoid about Pakistani nukes being used officially.
The Outsider Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 So are the regular killings. Could you share some insights into how India can force Pakistan to back off diplomatically ? You claim USA & Israel cannot attack Iran which is completely untrue; the fact is Iran hasn't stopped its nuclear program despite massive sanctions. We cannot muster anything close to that level of sanctions and Pakistan isn't really led by sensible people to care about sanctions that impact common people. How exactly will they back off diplomatically with India leading the charge is beyond me. I did not claim US or Israel cannot attack Iran. I said that they are not attacking Iran before exhausting diplomatic and covert operations options because of the nuclear threat, despite the fact that they don't even share a border with Iran. Regarding sanctions, they are certainly a more viable alternative than gunning down some soldiers at the border once a month or downing the occasional aircraft which enters Indian airspace. Pakistan lost half their country in 1971 - did that deter them? They lost hundreds of soldiers in 1999 - did that deter them? They did not even accept their dead bodies. You're paranoid about Pakistani nukes being used officially. Yes, I am paranoid because the consequences are horrendous. This is not some Warcraft video game where you can click the reset button if things don't go according to your plan.
Clarke Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 I did not claim US or Israel cannot attack Iran. I said that they are not attacking Iran before exhausting diplomatic and covert operations options because of the nuclear threat, despite the fact that they don't even share a border with Iran. Regarding sanctions, they are certainly a more viable alternative than gunning down some soldiers at the border once a month or downing the occasional aircraft which enters Indian airspace. Pakistan lost half their country in 1971 - did that deter them? They lost hundreds of soldiers in 1999 - did that deter them? They did not even accept their dead bodies. If losing half their nation due to military loss didn't stop them, sanctions certainly are a lesser being. In short nothing will deter them, other than being preoccupied by insurgency. That might be the only answer. Yes, I am paranoid because the consequences are horrendous. This is not some Warcraft video game where you can click the reset button if things don't go according to your plan. Not much left to discuss, but you do remind me of the nuclear threshold: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX_d_vMKswE]Yes, Prime Minister - Nuclear deterrent - YouTube[/ame]
Crookbond Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 Some relevant news to this thread RAW duped jihadis into killing Hafiz Saeed’s security chief :phehehe: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2013/08/07/news/national/raw-duped-jihadis-into-killing-hafiz-saeeds-security-chief/ Intelligence sources told Pakistan Today that the plot to assassinate Saeed and his close aides was hatched in Dubai allegedly by a RAW agent identified only by one name – Vinod. :hmmm:
Clarke Posted August 8, 2013 Posted August 8, 2013 Paki celeb cheering Indian deaths. Eid Mubarak indeed. Remember what Tharoor had written: A Pakistani liberal is a Pakistani first and a liberal later. The former often comes with a natural hatred for India. Case in point, former governer of Punjab Salman Taseer. He was openly against the blasphemy law. Guess what, he openly cheered one of ISRO's failed missions on twitter. Bhikharis can't launch a sputnik of their own and have the nerve to mock ISRO.
Recommended Posts