zen Posted June 7, 2015 Posted June 7, 2015 This thread is to discuss Pak related topics. Let me start with the Kashmir issue. Many in Pak, along with peaceniks in Ind, believe that Ind and Pak need to constantly talk on the issue to resolve it. To go deeper in to the issue, let's look at facts, and the perspective from the two countries: Facts: * Princely states had the option to 1) remain independent, 2) join Ind, and 3) join Pak * Pak backed militants attacked Kashmir to make it a part of Pakistan * The Maharaja quickly accessed to Ind under the same terms that governs the formation of Pak * To drive the attackers out, Nehru (a Kashmiri) went to UN vs. popular advise of using Ind's military * When you go to a 3rd party, both sides of the story are heard and resolution of the issue can get dragged * As per Shimla agreement, the dispute will be solved bilaterally UN Resolution on Kashmir: * Part 1- Pak needs to withdraw its forces and people from its occupied territory * After Part 1 - a plebiscite is to be conducted to understand the wishes of the people (under Ind's supervision) Current situation: * Pak has not withdrawn its forces from POK till date * A part of POK has been donated to China w/o the consent of the Kashmiris * Militancy is encouraged in the region by Pak * Demographics of the region are changed by Pak by a) forcing the Kashmiri pundits out or J&K, and b) settling non-natives in POK * Pak-China economic corridor has entry/exit points in POK and Balochistan, both occupied territories * People in POK (Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Balistan) are discriminated against * Article 370 in Ind gives Kashmir a special status, however it hinder prospects of major private investments in the state Ind's perspective: * Kashmir is legally an integral part of Ind * Pak stop supporting militancy * Pak end its illegal occupation of Kashmir Pak's perspective * Since Ind went to UN, the region is disputed * Conduct plebiscite (which in Pak's opinion would make Kashmir a part of Pak) Key Questions: * Despite not meeting the first criteria of the UN Resolution, why does Pak keep taking about plebiscite? * With what Pak has done in the region since 1940s, how can a plebiscite be even conducted? * Should Pak practise what it preaches by first giving the rights of self-determination to people of Balochistan, the land it illegally occupies? * If Pakistan wants to challenge Ind's legal rights over Kashmir, does it also mean that it questions its own formation under similar act? Should Ind also question Pak's formation?
zen Posted June 7, 2015 Author Posted June 7, 2015 Possibilities of war Earlier, Ind's stand was leaning towards resolution of the issue through the Shimla Agreement and may be converting the LoC in to an international border. But because of non-compliance by Pak, now many in Ind believe in re-acquiring POK, which is legally a part of Ind .... While Pak has no intention of vacating POK as can be seen through its actions since 1940s. So is an armed conflict b/w the two nations on the cards? Pak's Dirty Bomb Pak believes that its dirty bomb would act as a deterrent to any military action by India. Many of its leaders talk about a conventional war leading to a nuclear war. Traditionally, Pak (mainly its army)has been using Kashmir to achieve its own goals (including ruling Pak and maintaining its elite position in the country by portraying countries such as Ind as the major threat to Pak's existence). So how is this elite group (which is using Kashmir for its own benefits) going to risk their families and potential destruction of its major Pak cities including Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, Rawalpindi, etc. due to retaliation by Ind for Kashmir? Key Questions * Is the Pak thinking that there is no place for a conventional war in the region misplaced? * Is the Pak threat to use nuclear weapons just a bluff to prevent Ind from taking back POK through a military operation? * Because of the Pak-China economic corridor, will China play a part to in such a war? If so, which other countries could get involved? PS In Pak, discussion on war with Ind appear to be a norm Former ISI Chief threatens Ind 6N1qMZKYbRM Sensible opinion from Pak Fb5mKYV4ccU i_acOBxiT9E PPS Pak military's obsession w/ Ind: WcVFGbH7Q8o
Tiger80 Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 Both India and Pakistan now should forget history and accept what is in their possession . Border changing is not possible in today's world without war
Pravda Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 Forget war, India should have the dareness and guts to remove Article 370, and arrange a settlement for Kashmiri Pandits in Kashmir If they start with the above, sure the LOC to border conversion would be done in matter of years .... But there should be a gutsy parliament to do .... as the vote base from 13 percent population would tilt, and the opposition party would take advantage of that .............. its tricky
mishra Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 Both India and Pakistan now should forget history and accept what is in their possession . Border changing is not possible in today's world without war And war between nuclear nations isn't possible. :two_thumbs_up:
swatpulla Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 And war between nuclear nations isn't possible. :two_thumbs_up: Pakistan is an Islamic state. Jihad is an Islamic idea. Jihad makes people go suicidal. So, I won't rule out the possibility of Pakistan nuking India.
zen Posted June 8, 2015 Author Posted June 8, 2015 On war, there appears to be two different lines of thinking: a) Rationality will prevail - So no nuclear wars, etc. Countries don't even bother w/ North Korea, which has nukes .... Nukes would serves as deterrent, status quo will be maintained, etc. b) Irrationality and emotions will prevail - Backed by various wars in the history, terrorism, jihad, etc. Both the cases above build a case for a strong military action by Ind against Pak as: 1. If Pak is rational, there would be no nuclear war and the issue would be settled through a conventional conflict 2. If Pak is irrational, sooner or later someone will pull the nuke trigger so there is no point for Ind in waiting for the inevitable. Ind would need to act proactively to take military action to counter the Pak nukes However, before Ind initiates military action against Pak: a) Ind would need sticker control over J&L w/ militancy cleaned out b) Separatist should be put behind bars or kicked out of Ind c) Ensure president rule is in place so center's decision can be easily implemented d) Have the right military equipment and training programs in place Initially, Ind can start its operations by going into POK, with support divisions on the Western border ready to liberate both Sindh and Balochistan if required or if situation escalates
mishra Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Pakistan is an Islamic state. Jihad is an Islamic idea. Jihad makes people go suicidal. So, I won't rule out the possibility of Pakistan nuking India. Pakistanis have historical relatins with us. Mind you at toimes of partition, Muslims were relatively wealthier and most welathiest moved to Pakistan. So they had that feeling of superiority complex over Indians and specially Hindus. 1. Generation which thought they were better than Hindus and India is dead now. 2. The next generation which felt they were militarily superior could contain India by attacking its border from both side was proven wrong when they got stabbed in back by less intelligent and physically challenged Bengalis. They are still alive and hope that their kids will atleast take Kashmir for them. 3. Current generation is just angry with India. Reason- actually no reason at all, apart from envy and baggage of hatred. 4. Next generation Pakistanis of Naya Pakistan may probably question as to why are they unhappy with us, offcourse unless current generation Indians do a Indiraji or something similar and screw them big time.
zen Posted June 9, 2015 Author Posted June 9, 2015 Pakistanis have historical relatins with us. Mind you at toimes of partition' date=' [b']Muslims were relatively wealthier and most welathiest moved to Pakistan. So they had that feeling of superiority complex over Indians and specially Hindus. 1. Generation which thought they were better than Hindus and India is dead now. 2. The next generation which felt they were militarily superior could contain India by attacking its border from both side was proven wrong when they got stabbed in back by less intelligent and physically challenged Bengalis. They are still alive and hope that their kids will atleast take Kashmir for them. 3. Current generation is just angry with India. Reason- actually no reason at all, apart from envy and baggage of hatred. 4. Next generation Pakistanis of Naya Pakistan may probably question as to why are they unhappy with us, offcourse unless current generation Indians do a Indiraji or something similar and screw them big time. Do you have any data or generally accepted truth(s) for the comments that you are making? If NOT, let's not post such on this thread. "In rallying Muslim support for his political party, Muhammad Ali Jinnah claimed that Muslims could not progress in their various spheres of life without pakistan. It was impossible, he claimed, "to live under Congress authority on account of acts of injustices." Muslims, he warned, would be "reduced to the status of Shudras [low castes]." He added that he would "never allow Muslims to be slaves of Hindus." Jinnah said that he wanted the Muslims of India to develop to the fullest of "our spiritual, cultural and economic life in consonance with our own ideals, and according to the genius of our own people." Link" PS What do you mean by suggesting that Indira screwed "them" big time? Are you implying that the liberation of BD was the not right thing to do? Link ^ dead bodies of Bengali intellectuals
mishra Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 ^ What? Are you disputing above Pakistani fact/mentality? Muslims ruled India didnt they? Watch old movies of Bollywood? You will half of them were based on Muslim Zamidars. Do hell, Even land we own in our village belonged to Muslim Zamidar
randomGuy Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Pakistanis have historical relatins with us. Mind you at toimes of partition, Muslims were relatively wealthier and most welathiest moved to Pakistan. So they had that feeling of superiority complex over Indians and specially Hindus. 1. Generation which thought they were better than Hindus and India is dead now. 2. The next generation which felt they were militarily superior could contain India by attacking its border from both side was proven wrong when they got stabbed in back by less intelligent and physically challenged Bengalis. They are still alive and hope that their kids will atleast take Kashmir for them. 3. Current generation is just angry with India. Reason- actually no reason at all, apart from envy and baggage of hatred. 4. Next generation Pakistanis of Naya Pakistan may probably question as to why are they unhappy with us, offcourse unless current generation Indians do a Indiraji or something similar and screw them big time. Pakis don't have superiority complex. They make stupid claims to boost up their moral and to dump the securities. Most have Hindu forefathers and were converted during Islamic rule...
zen Posted June 9, 2015 Author Posted June 9, 2015 ^ What? Are you disputing above Pakistani fact/mentality? Muslims ruled India didnt they? Watch old movies of Bollywood? You will half of them were based on Muslim Zamidars. Do hell' date=' Even land we own in our village belonged to Muslim Zamidar[/quote'] What type of an argument is this? Before you get in to "Thakurs in the movies were actually muslims", let me clarify that even though this thread is in chit chat, the topic is designed for mature discussion based on data or generally accepted truth(s) (and not how things in your village could be applicable at a macro level) You even tried to imply something negative about the liberation of BD :headshake:
Texan Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Pakistan performs 150 executions in 6 months, more than Saudi Arabia http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pakistan-performs-150-executions-in-6-months-more-than-Saudi-Arabia/articleshow/47604643.cms
zen Posted June 10, 2015 Author Posted June 10, 2015 Pakistan performs 150 executions in 6 months, more than Saudi Arabia http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pakistan-performs-150-executions-in-6-months-more-than-Saudi-Arabia/articleshow/47604643.cms Looking at how law works in Pak, I hope that innocent people or those who oppose what's wrong in Pak don't get executed
Texan Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Looking at how law works in Pak' date=' I hope that innocent people or those who oppose what's wrong in Pak don't get executed [/quote'] All it takes is a fake blasphemy case.
mishra Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Pakis don't have superiority complex. They make stupid claims to boost up their moral and to dump the securities. Most have Hindu forefathers and were converted during Islamic rule... IIRC pre Narsimha Rao era, Pakistan had better infrastructure, More wealth and GDP per person was higher(allthough kids per household was more). It was only after Our MMS opened ecoomy and IT boom, that we started overtaking these guys.
Kalia_Test Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Looking at how law works in Pak' date= I hope that innocent people or those who oppose what's wrong in Pak don't get executed Reminds me of a joke that got forwarded... A Pakistani minister level delegation goes and visits Afghanistan and introductions start. The Afghan PM introduces some Al-Bashir-ul-Aibak-bin-Tughlaq as Afghan Sea and Port Minister. The Pakistani delegation is confused and asks "Where is Sea and Ports in land-locked Afghanistan?" The Afghan PM replies " What do you mean? Don't you have Law and Order Minister in Pakistan?" :cantstop:
Book_Worm Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 What type of an argument is this? Before you get in to "Thakurs in the movies were actually muslims"' date=' let me clarify that even though this thread is in chit chat, the topic is designed for mature discussion based on [u']data or generally accepted truth(s) (and not how things in your village could be applicable at a macro level) You even tried to imply something negative about the liberation of BD :headshake: So according to you, Muslims were poor and downtrodden when the British ruled us!! Look, the parts or provinces which make up of pakistan now punjab sindh etc were traditionally rich places even during the british time, agriculturally fertile etc. Also when partition happened the cream of muslim from india highly educated people left for pakistan leaving behind muslims who were poor , intellectually bankrupt. karachi,sindh was very developed and hindus domianted the business class there they fled and it was easy to resettle the muslims from india . it is no surprise that pakistan was doing well cause they never had a substantial poor population like india and add to that racially also the people are homogeneous and language wise also there are more similarities plus they had/have very less non mulsim population so less conflicts etc. India inherited a very large tribal population , large % of minority who were poor and uneducated plus large areas of the country were very backward and no development look place even when the british ruled. Pakistan should have done well considering it has a smaller population and many many times smaller in size than india that it is not doing so now is because they created problems for themselves because of their hatred for india/non muslim and their proxy war with india. Plus afghanistan/9/11 etc . For 2 countries to compare economically we nee to take into account atleast the size of the country and population, it is a shame really that pakistan is near india more or less despite it's samller size and population. And yet they gloat taking about millions of poor in india as if there aren't millions of poor in pakistan itself..
zen Posted June 10, 2015 Author Posted June 10, 2015 So according to you' date= Muslims were poor and downtrodden when the British ruled us!! Look, the parts or provinces which make up of pakistan now punjab sindh etc were traditionally rich places even during the british time, agriculturally fertile etc. Also when partition happened the cream of muslim from india highly educated people left for pakistan leaving behind muslims who were poor , intellectually bankrupt. karachi,sindh was very developed and hindus domianted the business class there they fled and it was easy to resettle the muslims from india . it is no surprise that pakistan was doing well cause they never had a substantial poor population like india and add to that racially also the people are homogeneous and language wise also there are more similarities plus they had/have very less non mulsim population so less conflicts etc. India inherited a very large tribal population , large % of minority who were poor and uneducated plus large areas of the country were very backward and no development look place even when the british ruled. Pakistan should have done well considering it has a smaller population and many many times smaller in size than india that it is not doing so now is because they created problems for themselves because of their hatred for india/non muslim and their proxy war with india. Plus afghanistan/9/11 etc . For 2 countries to compare economically we nee to take into account atleast the size of the country and population, it is a shame really that pakistan is near india more or less despite it's samller size and population. And yet they gloat taking about millions of poor in india as if there aren't millions of poor in pakistan itself.. My point is that Muslims were by and large as rich or as poor as many of the other communities during pre-independence India .... The poster that I replied to claimed that Muslims were way wealthier and thus had superiority complex. However, speeches by Jinnah (the founder of Pak) claims otherwise. So if people want to show that Muslims were considerably wealthier than other communities, you need to show relevant data or what is generally accepted as truth If parts of Muslims dominated India were rich, so were parts of areas dominated by other communities. Punjab had rich Hindus as well for example. And your per your Sindh example shows that business class was dominated by non-Muslims .... Who can be considered as intellectuals is a different topic
Recommended Posts