The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Then how come Pakistan is able to build more nuclear bombs than India with that budget?
Are nuclear bombs that cheap to produce, operationalize and deploy?
Thanks
Are we sure that shitlanders are producing so many warheads or is it just a ploy by western think tanks to in a way
force India to talk to Pakistan so that they don't proliferate?
Arun Menon wrote:
Like we ever really get to know what khan does behind the scenes. There was a connection made between Modi's mellowing on porkistan and the obama visit before, now we hear it from the horse's mouth.
I responded to you earlier but I think I'll now make a stronger statement.
Akbaruddin is not your horse. Here, you were evidently in communion with your personal horse which confirmed your own smug personal prejudice, unsupported by actual evidence, about GOI's decisions and what drives them. Because, if we read Akbaruddin 's statement as normal, simple English, without the filter of any rigidly held personal prejudice, there is no other interpretation possible than the one I gave.
We have seen this kind of mindlessly twisted and illogical interpretations to suit their prejudiced opinions from political and media pundits and have seen fit to label such people traitors, sepoys ad so forth. I think now that we have to consider that, as a nation, we, including the media we despise so, all share a quality of smugness and a tendency to put reinforcement of our beliefs and prejudices ahead of actual reading, interpretation, analysis and understanding.
That is a tendency that marks an intellectually under-developed but overly self-important people who are doomed to be dominated by the first adversary that comes along with the minimal intellect needed to cross the low threshold such people set.
You need to chill man. What I posted was conjecture on my part and I have not portrayed it as anything else.
As for tendencies that "that marks an intellectually under-developed but overly self-important people who are doomed to be dominated by the first adversary that comes along," maybe hyperventilating at the drop of a hat is one of those tendencies?
shiv wrote:However it still makes a change from the earlier stance of "You cannot rise if we don't allow you" and an even earlier stance of "You will not rise at all" and an even earlier stance of "We will come and rule you"
Have these stances really transitioned from one into another? Or do they exist side by side, to be taken up when it suits.
Yogi_G wrote:Saudi funding. Deep down it's all theirs... Just like the pakeez.
And yet, the Saudi king and his cabinet stood in attention near the PIA aircraft as it landed at the King's terminal in Riyadh two weeks back, to receive the Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif and beg him for support to the illegal 10-nation coalition arrayed against the Shi'a in Yemen. That such a powerful PM, who was bestowed with a rare honour that was not even accorded to Barack Obama by the Saudis (I doubt if Bush Sr received such a welcome after Op Desert Storm), had to take final orders from his Army Chief before committing anything to the King is another story.
I think it is a bit of exaggeration, US- China know very well giving Pakis Surplus weapons will hurt them, or it could be a ruse by which China and US get business money routed through the Pakis, the Arabs/ Iran will spend huge amounts like Gadafi did to find out they got nothing in return.
Decisive Storm Update. In his fifth daily briefing, Brigadier General Asiri said the Houthis attempted to launch a Yemeni ballistic missile from a site near Sana'a, but the launch failed because of a technical error. Saudi combat aircraft destroyed the site.
He also said Saudi aircraft destroyed a Houthi operation to move Yemeni army tanks. His third major point was that the Coalition air strikes are concentrating on preventing a Houthi takeover of Aden.
Comment: The reported Houthi attempt to strike back at Saudi Arabia by launching a ballistic missile apparently failed only because of a technical problem, not because of the effectiveness of the air campaign. A missile strike on a Saudi city would stun the Saudi populace and leadership, but would justify the King calling in his marker with Pakistan to send troops to defend the Kingdom.
Pakistan-Saudi Arabia: A high-level Pakistani defense delegation will arrive in Riyadh on Tuesday, 31 March, to discuss security issues and Pakistani military support to Saudi Arabia. The visit was scheduled to begin on 30 March, but the Kingdom requested a delay for unstated reasons.
Comment:Press reports are contradictory about Pakistan's willingness to send troops to Saudi Arabia to participate in Operation Decisive Storm. The range of reports probably reflects the range of viewpoints among Prime Minister Sharif's advisors.
One set of reports claims that Pakistan will send troops to Saudi Arabia, citing an unidentified official. Another set of reports from authoritative sources claims that Pakistan only will send troops to defend Saudi Arabia, if it were attacked.
A third set of reports states that Pakistan already has a contingent of troops in Saudi Arabia for annual military maneuvers, called Samman 5. In addition, about 800 Pakistan Army personnel are in Saudi Arabia routinely for a variety of non-combat tasks.
Part of the background to this issue is that Saudi Arabia gave refuge to Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif after General Musharraf overthrew the Sharif government in 1999. Sharif lived in exile in Saudi Arabia and owes Saudi Arabia a personal debt. In addition, Saudi oil supplies, either as gifts or as concessional sales, have kept the Pakistan Army and other services operational for decades. Pakistan Army forces also were stationed in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s and the 1980s to defend the Kingdom.
Turkey, Pakistan and Egypt are the only Sunni Muslim countries with real armies. A large Pakistan Army contingent, especially in coordination with an Egyptian contingent, could be decisive in a ground invasion to defeat the Houthi militias in Yemen. Prime Minister Sharif is reluctant to make a commitment, but Chief of Army Staff General Sharif might be more open to a Saudi request with incentives.
Yogi_G wrote:Saudi funding. Deep down it's all theirs... Just like the pakeez.
And yet, the Saudi king and his cabinet stood in attention near the PIA aircraft as it landed at the King's terminal in Riyadh two weeks back, to receive the Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif and beg him for support to the illegal 10-nation coalition arrayed against the Shi'a in Yemen. That such a powerful PM, who was bestowed with a rare honour that was not even accorded to Barack Obama by the Saudis (I doubt if Bush Sr received such a welcome after Op Desert Storm), had to take final orders from his Army Chief before committing anything to the King is another story.
But why is the Pakistani press not going to town gloating over this?
SSridhar wrote:{quote="Yogi_G"}Saudi funding. Deep down it's all theirs... Just like the pakeez.{/quote}
And yet, the Saudi king and his cabinet stood in attention near the PIA aircraft as it landed at the King's terminal in Riyadh two weeks back, to receive the Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif and beg him for support to the illegal 10-nation coalition arrayed against the Shi'a in Yemen. That such a powerful PM, who was bestowed with a rare honour that was not even accorded to Barack Obama by the Saudis (I doubt if Bush Sr received such a welcome after Op Desert Storm), had to take final orders from his Army Chief before committing anything to the King is another story.
But why is the Pakistani press not going to town gloating over this?
the paki army chief has clamped down in anticipation of a saudi "goat of the desert "award for himself. looks like the paki short term economic woes are taken care of.
He was received at the airport by the King himself, and was presented with a guard of honour. . . . Crown Prince Muqrin bin Abdulaziz, Deputy Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef, Governor of Riyadh Prince Faisal bin Bandar and a number of princes and ministers — accompanied by Saudi military leadership — were also present at the airport for prime minister’s reception. . . King Salman bin Abdulaziz accompanied the Prime Minister from the airport to his Palace, where he hosted a luncheon in the honour of the prime minister and members of his delegation. The luncheon was followed by official talks with the King. . . . Prime Minister left for Jeddah after the talks. He was seen-off at the airport by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.
The Saudis have put their pride on the table in the Yemen issue. They need to win. They know that air strikes are not going to get them reach their goal. They need boots on the ground. The only worthwhile boots they can get are from Pakistan and possibly Egypt. But, both countries have their own internal problems to contend with. Saudis have more leverage and familiarity with the Pakistani armed forces than with their Egyptian counterparts. They also know that for some sumptuous monetary gain, they would do anything. The Saudi armed forces are rag tag. I know but don't ask me how. This is an open secret anyway. They are completely incapable and incompetent. They are neither capable of bravery, nor planning nor handling equipment (leave alone complex pieces of equipment). They have no experience of a war. They were never involved in Op Desert Storm though Lt. Gen Khalid bin Sultan was appointed ceremonially as the commander of the Arab forces and did his best to mess up. If the US had not intervened through Op. Desert Shield, Iraq would have swallowed KSA in no time in c. 1989, after Kuwait.
Yemen has been a source of constant problem for the Saudis. In the 1960s war, it had to fight against Nasser's Egypt which deposed the Royalty, but again the UK & US were on its side. It has a border dispute with Yemen and there is a large influx of Yemenis in Saudi Arabia. The bin Laden family is itself a Hadramout Yemeni. Except for such influential Yemenis, the Saudis, in their usual arrogance treat the Yemenis as dirt and place many restrictions on them. The Yemenis in Saudi Arabia are extremely displeased with the Saudis. Yemen had been prosperous and had a civilization and culture unknown to the Rub-al-Khali tribes before Saudi Arabia as a country was born and oil was struck.
Added to that is the headache of Shi'as gaining control there now. From a religious point of view and its own stability and wealth point of view, the Saudis would want to keep the Shi'as under a tight leash. That was why they sent their rag tag troops to Bahrain when riots erupted there, FWIW. However, their misadventure with the ISIS cost them a lot politically. They were so outraged with the US for discontinuing its support after promising it that they even refused the UNSC rotational membership. Obama had to re-establish the relationship by departing early from India after the R-day celebrations.
The Iran-US-IAEA denouement on the nuclear programme is another source of great constipation for KSA. The worry can be gauged from the extent to which KSA has reportedly gone, that of having some secret understanding with Israel to take out the Iranian facilities.
The oil has plummeted and the effect on the Saudi economy would be visible shortly. The new King, in order to seal his hold on the throne, has been ostentatious in giving away billions to his citizens and tribes. The next Saudi budget should reveal that though the Saudi budgets are usually efforts at masking the real monetary issues. Since Gulf War, the Saudi budgets have been deficit budgets and KSA was forced to even borrow from the IMF at times. Those woes continue. The latest efforts in Syria and Yemen must add to that as Pakistan would extract its pound of flesh.
Pakistan smells an opportunity, like a shark, in the woeful situation of KSA. I think the two Sharifs are playing the usual good cop-bad cop drama with KSA.
I O W : The Cwapistan Defence Budget in FY 2007-2008 was about US$ 7 Billion.
With the Pakistani Armed Forces Costs including Wages etc., in my opinion, higher than their Indian counterparts and with the Indian Defence Budget estimated at US$ 46 Billion I reckon that the Cwapistan Annual Defence Budget should be at least US$ 20 Billion. Of course the Cwapistanis declare their Annual Defence Budget as US$ 8 Billion.
shiv wrote:However it still makes a change from the earlier stance of "You cannot rise if we don't allow you" and an even earlier stance of "You will not rise at all" and an even earlier stance of "We will come and rule you"
Have these stances really transitioned from one into another? Or do they exist side by side, to be taken up when it suits.
They have arisen serially.
You will never rise did not exist when they said we will rule you. the question of India's rise did not "arise"
When India started rising (90s onlee) they were contemptuous. PKR was worth more in $ terms back then
As the "rise" became obvious - ie other nations started talking about it Shitlanders said "You cannot rise unless we allow you"
Now it is "Your rise will raise all of Sooth Assia"
Pakistans spends about 30% of its budget on defence. Plenty of references other than my word.
Besides how can BRFites spend decades on BRF and be unable to recall the facts in the 90 second video below. What kind of cognitive blindness do we Indians suffer from? If this is not very very well known to BRFites, it makes me despair at the time wasted on these threads
You will never rise did not exist when they said we will rule you. the question of India's rise did not "arise"
When India started rising (90s onlee) they were contemptuous. PKR was worth more in $ terms back then
As the "rise" became obvious - ie other nations started talking about it Shitlanders said "You cannot rise unless we allow you"
Now it is "Your rise will raise all of Sooth Assia"
They have indeed. But what I meant to say was that the earlier stances haven't really gone away. They simply have been shuffled around and/or appropriated to select elements within and beyond the "state" to "accommodate" the newer stances, which have been forced upon them.
So we have the Paki envoy seeking to endorse Indian growth.
Then we have ex-envoys claiming that Indian progress is dependent on Paki "benevolence"
And finally "non-state actors" such as Hafiz and Jahil Hamid and a former "state-within-a-state" actor Hamid Gul talking of Ghazwa-e-BeHind, Aitum bum and Newclear flashpoints.
All these are same only. So what I wanted to ask you Hakimji is whether they have actually changed their stance or simply pulling new stuff out of their collective musharrafs to fit in with the circumstances.
Kashi wrote:
All these are same only. So what I wanted to ask you Hakimji is whether they have actually changed their stance or simply pulling new stuff out of their collective musharrafs to fit in with the circumstances.
My personal feeling is that they will not change their stance any more than a boy who fantasized about Angelina Jolie's boobs 20 years ago will change his feelings about them today. It's just that there is bugger all he can do to get what he wanted 20 years ago. If they were out of reach but within the realm of dreams back then they are totally beyond reach now.
The new statements suggest to me the flicker of dawn and the smell of coffee in shitland.
Now they are getting/buying 8 submarines from China. When Paki military wants buy something they go and buy and the civilian government says OK. So where are they getting the money from and how can a mere 7 billion dollar budget support these kinds of purchases? May be SA gifting them for the cannon fodder Pakistan is providing it?
KLNMurthy wrote:
Pakis have no ability or interest in participating in the growth in any constructive way. It is either a narrative lead-in to crying about cash-mere, or it is about getting mere-cash as parasites. We already called their bluff many years ago and gave them MFN. They can't even reciprocate something so basic. QED.
This is true that they are not interested.
but they are preview to some other geo political plans of the west for a long time. The entire south asia project of HK and others are still unfolding and things may not go in favor of them in the future.
There is a independent thinking elite which has developed in Pak which is taking control over the country. But they are a client state and a rentier state.
What elite and what takeover? Can you please elaborate?
Ultimately the Indian nation, and the Indian armed forces will become bigger and more powerful than they would ever have been if Pakistan had never had any assistance from the US and China. This has to end somewhere - and either there will be catastrophic war that seriously affects the economy and environment of the entire world including the US and China - or Pakistan fades away leaving India as a powerful challenger of the US and China.
shiv wrote:Ultimately the Indian nation, and the Indian armed forces will become bigger and more powerful than they would ever have been if Pakistan had never had any assistance from the US and China. This has to end somewhere - and either there will be catastrophic war that seriously affects the economy and environment of the entire world including the US and China - or Pakistan fades away leaving India as a powerful challenger of the US and China.
A_Gupta wrote:
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 385_1.html
India does have a wherewithal and resolves to step to the plate and ensure that it achieves its economic goals because if India rises we are confident the entire region will rise with India,"
The Paki who said that is such a hilarious oiseaule that he can get away with it only because the people whom he is addressing are bigger oiseaules.
If literacy in India rises and literacy in the Islamic Republic of Shitistan remains stagnant, the average literacy of the "whole region" will still rise. The same holds true for economy. In other words Pakistan needs to do nothing - they will simply bask in reflected glory. However it still makes a change from the earlier stance of "You cannot rise if we don't allow you" and an even earlier stance of "You will not rise at all" and an even earlier stance of "We will come and rule you"
That is not change or progress. Simply observation of different logical implications of the consistent parasitic relationship pakis have had with India, dating back to Md bin Qasim. A sentient parasite can make any and every one of these statements about its host at any time during their relationship.
By way of proof, there is no substantial change visible, of which the words (different-appearing) can be said to be an expression. The trend is in fact towards a deeper commitment to parasitism.
saip wrote:Now they are getting/buying 8 submarines from China. When Paki military wants buy something they go and buy and the civilian government says OK. So where are they getting the money from and how can a mere 7 billion dollar budget support these kinds of purchases? May be SA gifting them for the cannon fodder Pakistan is providing it?
This kind of doubt arises only if one is naive enough to believe that Pakis spend 3.5% of GDP on defence. Pkistan uses up 1/3rd of its annual budget on the military
The claimed annual budget of Pakistan is USD 35 billion. At least 10 billion goes to the military. Add US and Saudi aid to that. 70% of 25 billion has gone to the military.
I think most of us simply spend time on this thread doing benis things and not reading the info that has been made available for over a decade on BRF. Why are people surprised at the size and clout of the Pakistan military. In fact our naivete shows when people worry about Taliban or ISIS from Pakistan. Those forces are cissy pipsqueaks compared to the power of the Paki military.
KLNMurthy wrote:
That is not change or progress. Simply observation of ..
The progress is Indian. The observations are Pakistani.
The point is that the promise that India would be taken over or prevented from progressing has not worked. Saying that "Indian progress will blah blah blah" is the first Paki acknowledgement I have seen of the fact that India is progressing and a downhill ski from the position that India cannot progress unless Pakistan allows it.
KLNMurthy wrote:
I responded to you earlier but I think I'll now make a stronger statement.
Akbaruddin is not your horse. Here, you were evidently in communion with your personal horse which confirmed your own smug personal prejudice, unsupported by actual evidence, about GOI's decisions and what drives them. Because, if we read Akbaruddin 's statement as normal, simple English, without the filter of any rigidly held personal prejudice, there is no other interpretation possible than the one I gave.
We have seen this kind of mindlessly twisted and illogical interpretations to suit their prejudiced opinions from political and media pundits and have seen fit to label such people traitors, sepoys ad so forth. I think now that we have to consider that, as a nation, we, including the media we despise so, all share a quality of smugness and a tendency to put reinforcement of our beliefs and prejudices ahead of actual reading, interpretation, analysis and understanding.
That is a tendency that marks an intellectually under-developed but overly self-important people who are doomed to be dominated by the first adversary that comes along with the minimal intellect needed to cross the low threshold such people set.
You need to chill man. What I posted was conjecture on my part and I have not portrayed it as anything else.
As for tendencies that "that marks an intellectually under-developed but overly self-important people who are doomed to be dominated by the first adversary that comes along," maybe hyperventilating at the drop of a hat is one of those tendencies?
What you posted was flat-out gross misreading of a clear statement by the MEA spokesman. Your conjecture was reinforced by that misreading. The MEA statement obviously had nothing to do with Obama, but not only did you fail to see it, you went ahead and asserted that it was corroboration of your conjecture about Obama's role. To spell it out, Delhi parade was not the only R-Day event and Obama was not the only foreign guest. Your misreading suggested that you forgot to consider both facts--stated implicitly but not at all cryptically by the spokesman--in your blind haste to assign to Obama the role of arbiter of Indian policy, the conjecture part being limited to just what might have transpired with Obama.
It is a kind of pervasive and casual intellectual carelessness that I am very concerned about. At this point, I have no expectation that you will see what I am saying or understand why I would be concerned for India on this score. Pleasant surprises are always welcome of course.
KLNMurthy wrote:[Arun Menon]It was Obama after all. Modi needs business from US of A and therefore he compromised on Porkistan. He is in it for the long run and has to look at the bigger picture. That is all there is to it.[Arun Menon]
how do you conclude that "it was Obama after all?" According to my understanding of English, what the spokesman is implying is that someone of the level of Minister of State from Pakistan had attended Indian Republic Day event in Indian Embassy in Pakistan; therefore reciprocity required that we send someone of the same level to their equivalent of Republic Day celebration in their embassy.
This is news to me. Who is this MOS level porki guest at the Republic Day celebrations? Would you care to share that?
I don't have any more information than what was clearly stated by the spokesman and which I tried repeatedly to spell out to you. The particular identity of the paki guest at Indian Embassy is irrelevant to what I am attempting to get across. It is all just protocol only, as per MEA.
Yogi_G wrote:Saudi funding. Deep down it's all theirs... Just like the pakeez.
And yet, the Saudi king and his cabinet stood in attention near the PIA aircraft as it landed at the King's terminal in Riyadh two weeks back, to receive the Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif and beg him for support to the illegal 10-nation coalition arrayed against the Shi'a in Yemen. That such a powerful PM, who was bestowed with a rare honour that was not even accorded to Barack Obama by the Saudis (I doubt if Bush Sr received such a welcome after Op Desert Storm), had to take final orders from his Army Chief before committing anything to the King is another story.
OT but Saudis must be desperately worried about shias if they are kowtowing so much to miskeen bakis.
SSridhar wrote:The Saudis have put their pride on the table in the Yemen issue. They need to win. They know that air strikes are not going to get them reach their goal. They need boots on the ground. The only worthwhile boots they can get are from Pakistan and possibly Egypt. But, both countries have their own internal problems to contend with. Saudis have more leverage and familiarity with the Pakistani armed forces than with their Egyptian counterparts. They also know that for some sumptuous monetary gain, they would do anything. The Saudi armed forces are rag tag. I know but don't ask me how. This is an open secret anyway. They are completely incapable and incompetent. They are neither capable of bravery, nor planning nor handling equipment (leave alone complex pieces of equipment). They have no experience of a war. They were never involved in Op Desert Storm though Lt. Gen Khalid bin Sultan was appointed ceremonially as the commander of the Arab forces and did his best to mess up. If the US had not intervened through Op. Desert Shield, Iraq would have swallowed KSA in no time in c. 1989, after Kuwait.
Yemen has been a source of constant problem for the Saudis. In the 1960s war, it had to fight against Nasser's Egypt which deposed the Royalty, but again the UK & US were on its side. It has a border dispute with Yemen and there is a large influx of Yemenis in Saudi Arabia. The bin Laden family is itself a Hadramout Yemeni. Except for such influential Yemenis, the Saudis, in their usual arrogance treat the Yemenis as dirt and place many restrictions on them. The Yemenis in Saudi Arabia are extremely displeased with the Saudis. Yemen had been prosperous and had a civilization and culture unknown to the Rub-al-Khali tribes before Saudi Arabia as a country was born and oil was struck.
Added to that is the headache of Shi'as gaining control there now. From a religious point of view and its own stability and wealth point of view, the Saudis would want to keep the Shi'as under a tight leash. That was why they sent their rag tag troops to Bahrain when riots erupted there, FWIW. However, their misadventure with the ISIS cost them a lot politically. They were so outraged with the US for discontinuing its support after promising it that they even refused the UNSC rotational membership. Obama had to re-establish the relationship by departing early from India after the R-day celebrations.
The Iran-US-IAEA denouement on the nuclear programme is another source of great constipation for KSA. The worry can be gauged from the extent to which KSA has reportedly gone, that of having some secret understanding with Israel to take out the Iranian facilities.
The oil has plummeted and the effect on the Saudi economy would be visible shortly. The new King, in order to seal his hold on the throne, has been ostentatious in giving away billions to his citizens and tribes. The next Saudi budget should reveal that though the Saudi budgets are usually efforts at masking the real monetary issues. Since Gulf War, the Saudi budgets have been deficit budgets and KSA was forced to even borrow from the IMF at times. Those woes continue. The latest efforts in Syria and Yemen must add to that as Pakistan would extract its pound of flesh.
Pakistan smells an opportunity, like a shark, in the woeful situation of KSA. I think the two Sharifs are playing the usual good cop-bad cop drama with KSA.
shiv wrote:Ultimately the Indian nation, and the Indian armed forces will become bigger and more powerful than they would ever have been if Pakistan had never had any assistance from the US and China. This has to end somewhere - and either there will be catastrophic war that seriously affects the economy and environment of the entire world including the US and China - or Pakistan fades away leaving India as a powerful challenger of the US and China.
It could be also a bit of both, or something in between, or a series of somethings. A significant military victory by India in an era when US keeps failing militarily would shift India from potential threat to threat.
KLNMurthy wrote:
It could be also a bit of both, or something in between, or a series of somethings. A significant military victory by India in an era when US keeps failing militarily would shift India from potential threat to threat.
Interesting, if off topic speculation. My personal guess is that the US and India are likely to come closer. I don't know why I am saying this, but it's just a hunch.
Pakistan believed that the US was an "ally" in the way NATO allies stick together. Pakistanis possibly believed that the US would jump up and defend them directly. But the US actually hedged its bets when it came to Pakistan India conflicts.
In contrast - in Korea the US jumped in with alacrity to support the South against communism. In Vietnam the US jumped in to take the place of the French to fight communism again. Pakistanis probably tried to pass India off as Soviet bloc and hence communist, but for some karmic reason that did not work. Other than assholes like Yeager deputed to Shitistan and the USS Enterprise dramabaazi the US did not jump in to help Pakistan as it did even in later years - to protect Kuwait.
RamaY wrote:My guess is Paki Army absorbs 10% of Paki GDP. At this rate, Pakistani Army cannot compete with India beyond 2035.I give Pakistan 20 more years at most. This is when Pakistan will try to do mass suicide with India.
By 2035, I Indian defence budget will exceed that of whole Paki economy though Paki will be Many Moons ahead in GDP= Gross Dumbness Phenomenon/People.
A_Gupta wrote:
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 385_1.html
India does have a wherewithal and resolves to step to the plate and ensure that it achieves its economic goals because if India rises we are confident the entire region will rise with India,"
The Paki who said that is such a hilarious oiseaule that he can get away with it only because the people whom he is addressing are bigger oiseaules.
If literacy in India rises and literacy in the Islamic Republic of Shitistan remains stagnant, the average literacy of the "whole region" will still rise. The same holds true for economy. In other words Pakistan needs to do nothing - they will simply bask in reflected glory. However it still makes a change from the earlier stance of "You cannot rise if we don't allow you" and an even earlier stance of "You will not rise at all" and an even earlier stance of "We will come and rule you"
If literacy in India rises and literacy in the Islamic Republic of Shitistan remains stagnant, the average literacy of the "whole region" will still rise. The same holds true for economy. In other words Pakistan needs to do nothing - they will simply bask in reflected glory.
Exactly!! Because they are salivating at the moolah currently India is saving up., expecting just like their forefathers they will eventually loot it all!! So!! DEFENSE IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT!
