Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): June 30, 2011

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2011 01:34

Dipanker,

TSP still believes that the valley will be theirs someday, and their entire strategy is predicated on that. Only if TSP renounces its claim, and they don't have to do that in broad daylight, they can imply that through their actions, India will pay a huge cost both militariliy and diplomatically. Militarily, it costs a huge amount of resources to deply army to gurad against pigLeTs, not to mention the toll it takes on our brave soldiers and officers. Diplomatically, TSP provokes their proxies to pelt stones, spew venom on India at the drop of a hat, and any Indian reaction is highlighted as "human rights" abuses, putting India on the defensive.

shivajisisodia · Post by **shivajisisodia** » 28 Jul 2011 01:40

Dipanker wrote:
shivajisisodia wrote:Republic of India is a "democracy". Votes and Voters determine who rules. In its 65 year history, the citizens of the Republic of India have never, never elected a Nationalistic party, not even the one that pretends, ie., the BJP (the one time BJP did manage to form the government, it was with other parties, they never got a clear mandate from the citizens of The Republic of India).

The result ?

1. Survival of Pakistan as opposed to reunification

2. Pakistan winning on the battle field and retaining a large portion of Indian territory (POK)

.
#2 is not correct, please do some background research about how large part of POK ended up with Pakistan.

Pakistan has so far lost every single war against India.

What good is winning wars, when you cant retain territory you won on the battlefield due to political weakness or cant liberate your territory held by others ?

In any cae, please try to get my larger point without splitting hairs. I do agree that POK was lost when the Indian army did not have much of a presence in POK, due to Kashmir not having acceded to India at that time. On the other hand, after the masive genocide conducted by the Pakis the same year and the previous year during partition, Republic of India leaders should have anticipated some military action by Pakis in Kashmir, and prepared for it. Not anticipating and being prepared is also a defeat.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 28 Jul 2011 02:10

shivajisisodia wrote:
In any cae, please try to get my larger point without splitting hairs. I do agree that POK was lost when the Indian army did not have much of a presence in POK, due to Kashmir not having acceded to India at that time. On the other hand, after the masive genocide conducted by the Pakis the same year and the previous year during partition, Republic of India leaders should have anticipated some military action by Pakis in Kashmir, and prepared for it. Not anticipating and being prepared is also a defeat.

Shivajisisodia,

It's not as simple as "preparing for it."

The Indian military at that time was completely, 100% dependent on the British for *everything*... funds, equipment, ammunition, supplies, fuel. Even the field commanders and generals were British.

First of all, Claude Auchinleck (C in C of British India from 1943-47, who oversaw the division of military assets between the two countries) was completely biased towards Pakistan. He made sure that in terms of supplies, equipment etc. the Pakistan Army (despite having only 1/7 the territory to defend) was nearly equal if not superior to the Indian Army at the time of partition. There is no doubt that he did this at the express instructions of the British government, which wanted to use Pakistan as an imperial outpost even after independence.

Gen Robert Lockhart took over from Auchinleck as C in C of Indian armed forces after independence. He served only five months but his correspondence makes it clear that his directives from London were to ensure that British-led Indian army did not deploy against the British-led Pakistani army in Kashmir, no matter how grave or serious the Pakistani provocation.

Gen Roy Bucher who took over from Lockhart was even worse. He blatantly, openly defied Nehru and Patel when Nehru instructed him to deploy more units of the IA against the Pakistani lashkars, even after Kashmir had acceded to India. Reports say that he actually got up and walked out of a cabinet conference... can you imagine trying to fight a war with your chief of army staff basically showing you the finger, in response to a direct order?

In this historical context (it is history, not "hair-splitting") there is no question of "preparing." Patel and Nehru were occupied with cobbling together a workable nation from hundreds of princely states, plus former British-ruled territories reeling from communal violence, with very scarce funds and resources. In addition to this, and given the extreme opposition they faced from British commanders and suppliers on whom the IA depended in 1947... it is a miracle that they were able to save any part of J&K at all.

Read C.R. Dasgupta's "War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-8" for a very informative review of the subject.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 28 Jul 2011 02:24

Lalmohan wrote:if fai wants to be nelson mandela, perhaps he should start with spending 23 years in prison?

He will soon (perhaps not 23).

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 28 Jul 2011 02:31

Anindya wrote:- from Veena Malik
"I do plan to make India my second home. But I am not applying for an Indian passport. India is also my country and people here love me. Moreover, this is where I make money."

Jeez! That's one confused ditz. Someone needs to remind this starlet about Indian regulations.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jul 2011 02:37

Charm of Hina works, dwarfs dialogue
International News Network - ‎2 minutes ago‎
NEW DELHI: It does not happen very often in India-Pakistan talks when the looks and personality of any leader dwarfs the whole dialogue process. The stunning beauty of Pakistan's foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar got more attention among one and all

While the foreign ministers of Indian and Pakistan pledged to keep the talks going, their foreign secretaries stuck to their positions on key issues.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 Jul 2011 02:38

Hopeful guy
http://tribune.com.pk/story/218473/the- ... of-lunacy/

The irony in all this, if you can manage to consider such a tragic event with cold scrutiny, is that the killer feared the “Pakistanisation of Europe”. His understanding of that phrase was that Europe would be full of small Muslim countries with extremist views. But his actions, instead, created another form of “Pakistanisation”, in the way that we Pakistanis understand it. Norway is truly like us now in that it, too, understands that the actions of a random extremist with a head full of bad wiring is not representative of the majority. That it takes a single day planned with fanatical focus to completely redefine a nation’s sense of security and identity. And that it will require the patience and understanding of a multitude to cope with the changed world that they now exist in. It is a reality we Pakistanis struggle against every day.

The primary description of the attacker in the media is that he is a ‘lunatic’. Let us hope that the next time an act of terror on such a scale occurs anywhere in the world, the same description is applied to the culprits, regardless of religion.

shivajisisodia · Post by **shivajisisodia** » 28 Jul 2011 02:50

Rudradev wrote:
shivajisisodia wrote:
In any cae, please try to get my larger point without splitting hairs. I do agree that POK was lost when the Indian army did not have much of a presence in POK, due to Kashmir not having acceded to India at that time. On the other hand, after the masive genocide conducted by the Pakis the same year and the previous year during partition, Republic of India leaders should have anticipated some military action by Pakis in Kashmir, and prepared for it. Not anticipating and being prepared is also a defeat.
Shivajisisodia,

It's not as simple as "preparing for it."

The Indian military at that time was completely, 100% dependent on the British for *everything*... funds, equipment, ammunition, supplies, fuel. Even the field commanders and generals were British.

First of all, Claude Auchinleck (C in C of British India from 1943-47, who oversaw the division of military assets between the two countries) was completely biased towards Pakistan. He made sure that in terms of supplies, equipment etc. the Pakistan Army (despite having only 1/7 the territory to defend) was nearly equal if not superior to the Indian Army at the time of partition. There is no doubt that he did this at the express instructions of the British government, which wanted to use Pakistan as an imperial outpost even after independence.

Gen Robert Lockhart took over from Auchinleck as C in C of Indian armed forces after independence. He served only five months but his correspondence makes it clear that his directives from London were to ensure that British-led Indian army did not deploy against the British-led Pakistani army in Kashmir, no matter how grave or serious the Pakistani provocation.

Gen Roy Bucher who took over from Lockhart was even worse. He blatantly, openly defied Nehru and Patel when Nehru instructed him to deploy more units of the IA against the Pakistani lashkars, even after Kashmir had acceded to India. Reports say that he actually got up and walked out of a cabinet conference... can you imagine trying to fight a war with your chief of army staff basically showing you the finger, in response to a direct order?

In this historical context (it is history, not "hair-splitting") there is no question of "preparing." Patel and Nehru were occupied with cobbling together a workable nation from hundreds of princely states, plus former British-ruled territories reeling from communal violence, with very scarce funds and resources. In addition to this, and given the extreme opposition they faced from British commanders and suppliers on whom the IA depended in 1947... it is a miracle that they were able to save any part of J&K at all.

Read C.R. Dasgupta's "War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-8" for a very informative review of the subject.

All this is true, Rudra.

Contrast this to Israel being attacked by four or five Arab nations within days of being declared a nation. Point is, we can all feel good about the soundness of our logic as to why we lost POK, but the fact is that we "lost" POK.

We had at least another twenty five years since then when Pak did not have nuclear weapons. What stopped us from attempting to liberate POK during the 48-73 period ? Again, not our fault ? The Americans this time ?

Fast foward to now. What prevents us from massive covert intervention in reviving the Northern Alliance now in Afg ? Again, not our fault, for not playing our diplomatic cards right vis-a-vis Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan etc ?

What prevents us today, from being truly and more heavily covertly involved in Balochistan ? Do you think the Indian intelligence agencies are dong justice to the Indian cause ?

My thinking is that as long as the Republic of India doesnt have a nationalistic government, we will continue to strategically lose and people like you and me can keep coming up with "sound" logical arguments to explain away our defeats. Non nationalisitc governments do not have protection of our territory as their primary strategic goal, therefore, they will never proactively plan for it and therefore, never win.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2011 03:05

Rudradev,

I think India has lost the plot becasue TSP has made this whole issue valley centric, and India has done nothing to highlight TSP perfidy. As Arnab was asking on his show, India does not even have the b@lls to talk to folks from Norhtern areas or Gigit, and forget Balochis; all for fear of offending TSP. While TSP brazenly touts antiIndia traitors in the valley is the "voice of the Kashmiri people". So now unless India makes valley-centric concessions to TSP, the "Kashmir issue" is not resolved. It is absolutely stunning as to how much TSP has achieved when the objective truth is that no matter what India's faults may have been in the valley, no matter what travails India faces with KMs, TSP through its brazen use of terror has made itself an integral part of any solution, and India has never been able to counter this perfidy.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 28 Jul 2011 03:15

CRamS:

Could you articulate in a few words what exactly has TSP achieved with relation to Kashmir?
TSP is going to be an integral part of the solution because they occupy one third of it. You can not wish it away.

India does not need to do anything to highlight TSP perfidy. It is known to anyone who is involved. Whether they act on it or not is driven by other issues which have little to do with Kashmir. All that HR stuff is rhetorical BS which has no significance.

Over the past decade TSP's case on Kashmir has lost most if not all of its sympathizers. It is coming down to face-saving measures like open borders and other such meaningless antics. Meaningless because some form of them has been tried before which exposed Indian Kashmiris to Pakistaniat (non-payment for fruits etc.), which very quickly extinguished any meaningful desire. All that remains is the rhetoric.

Of course one could argue that UPA has a dhimmi attitude towards the issue which would be very close to the truth. However they thrive on being "Osamaji" dhimmis. But that has not meant that TSP got away with anything but for some face-saving quotes.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 28 Jul 2011 03:17

CRamS wrote:Dipanker,

TSP still believes that the valley will be theirs someday, and their entire strategy is predicated on that. Only if TSP renounces its claim, and they don't have to do that in broad daylight, they can imply that through their actions, India will pay a huge cost both militariliy and diplomatically. Militarily, it costs a huge amount of resources to deply army to gurad against pigLeTs, not to mention the toll it takes on our brave soldiers and officers. Diplomatically, TSP provokes their proxies to pelt stones, spew venom on India at the drop of a hat, and any Indian reaction is highlighted as "human rights" abuses, putting India on the defensive.

What you are saying is known to all of us and has been known for a long time, Pakis are our enemy since 1947. We have a ongoing war since 1947, sometimes hot sometimes not so hot. But make no mistake about it. Even in a relative lull period like the last few years we still have been killing 1/2 a dozen or so Paki PigleTs a week. That is war.

As long as we have this ongoing war with Pakis, we must guard our borders. Freedom does not come free, we have to pay the price. And Even if there is no war with the Pakis we still have to guard our borders and we still have to maintain a strong military befitting to our size as a nation of 1.2 billion people. We are a big nation, we can handle the cost.

You know very well that Pakis can't win this game with us. Overall it is easy to see that their losses have been far greater than ours (loss of 1/2 the nation), society is radicalized beyond repair, and the only trajectory they have is downward (if they don't correct their course). You see fighting India comes with its own price tag.

As far as "Human rights" are concerned, I wouldn't worry too much about it, anybody who says pelting stone on law enforcement officials is part of "Human Rights" should not be taken seriously.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 28 Jul 2011 04:11

Kashmir sours India-Pakistan talks: Indian govt source

NEW DELHI: Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar’s meeting with Kashmiri separatists soured the atmosphere ahead of peace talks with her Indian counterpart, an Indian government source said Wednesday.

The Himalayan region of Kashmir is divided between India and Pakistan, which have fought two of their three wars over it since independence in 1947.

Separatists in the Indian-administered part of Kashmir have waged decades of protests demanding self-rule, while New Delhi considers the whole of the territory an integral part of the country.

Khar, after arriving in New Delhi on Tuesday afternoon, met Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the chairman of the separatist Hurriyat Conference and leader of mass protests against Indian rule last year.

“It was not a good idea at all,” a senior government source told AFP on condition of anonymity.

“Since we have already said we are willing to have discussions on all issues with Pakistan, including the Jammu and Kashmir issue, no useful purpose can be served by such exercises,” said the source.

He added that the meeting, at a time when the countries are trying to build trust and confidence in each other, “does not help the process at hand.”

India and Pakistan’s foreign ministers held their first talks in a year on Wednesday, looking to breathe fresh life into a peace process still stifled by the trauma of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

India suspended contacts with Pakistan after the attacks and their peace dialogue has struggled to gain any real traction since its formal resumption earlier this year.

Observers expect little to emerge from Wednesday’s meeting beyond some modest confidence-building measures connected to relatively uncontentious issues such as cross-border trade and people-to-people contacts.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2011 04:26

VikramS wrote:CRamS:

Could you articulate in a few words what exactly has TSP achieved with relation to Kashmir?

It conducted innumerable terrorist attacks with the goal of briging India to the negotiating table and disucss Kashmir. Have they not achieved this?

And now you answer my question? Why is India talking to TSP after having said no talks till TSP moves on 26/11?

KJo · Post by **KJo** » 28 Jul 2011 04:29

Acharya wrote: While the foreign ministers of Indian and Pakistan pledged to keep the talks going, their foreign secretaries stuck to their positions on key issues.

Any clips of Hina opening her mouth during this visit? Or was she for show only?

R_Kumar · Post by **R_Kumar** » 28 Jul 2011 04:44

KJoishy wrote:
Acharya wrote: While the foreign ministers of Indian and Pakistan pledged to keep the talks going, their foreign secretaries stuck to their positions on key issues.
Any clips of Hina opening her mouth during this visit? Or was she for show only?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDAp8HbKLXk

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 28 Jul 2011 04:45

CRamS wrote:
VikramS wrote:CRamS:

Could you articulate in a few words what exactly has TSP achieved with relation to Kashmir?

It conducted innumerable terrorist attacks with the goal of briging India to the negotiating table and disucss Kashmir. Have they not achieved this?

And now you answer my question? Why is India talking to TSP after having said no talks till TSP moves on 26/11?

Do I need a degree in Lahori Logic to understand what you are trying to say.

India says it will not talk till TSP acts on terrorists.
But then India talks. So that means that Pakistan has succeeded by using Terrorists?

Why dont you articulate what different course of action India should take and do a cost-benefit analysis instead of

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 28 Jul 2011 04:47

As GoI is busy counting Ms. hina's teeth, an army officer dies fighting infiltrating

A junior commissioned officer of the army was killed and two troopers were wounded in a fierce gunfight with a group of infiltrating militants in Shamsnag area on the Line of Control [ Images ] in north Kashmir's [ Images ] Kupwara district on Wednesday.

shivajisisodia · Post by **shivajisisodia** » 28 Jul 2011 05:23

VikramS - Could you articulate in a few words what exactly has TSP achieved with relation to Kashmir?
TSP is going to be an integral part of the solution because they occupy one third of it. You can not wish it away.

TSP has achieved the following:

1. Has managed to survive as a nation despite heavy odds. Unlike India, when Pak was formed it really didnt have an identity. Of course the separate Pak movement had been spewing the rhetoric about "a homeland for subcontinental muslims, which has a different ethos from the Hindus" garbage for a while, but the masses were still "Indian muslims" and they did not emotionally feel "Pakistanis". They felt like Punjabis, Balochis, Sindhis, etc, but not really a separate "subcontinental muslims" or "Pakistanis. Indians too had regional identities, but were far more deeply invested in the idea of India because of Hinduism acting as a glue, than the muslims. Indians could have taken advantage of this lack of identity and created havoc via smart covert operations all over Pak, creating and exploiting existing fissures, at a time, when Pak was too weak to retaliate in a cohesive manner. India's weakness of not doing so at the time, was fully taken advantage of by Paki and they at this point have been able to define for themselves an identity, negative though it may be, but a far stronger idea of Pakistan than when they were formed. Not saying that there are not still great fissures within Pak. There are, and India can still take advantage of these fissures, if it plays its cards right, which it nevers seems to do.

2. Created trouble for India well beyond its absolute weight and certainly well beyond its relative weight vis-a-vis India.

3. Change the narrative from "is Pakistan a legitimate nation" and "is the concept of a narrow theological based nation", something that the modern world should accept, to "Kashmir". Even in teh context of Kashmir, the narrative now is not"the status of POK", but "that the entire state of JK is disputed territory". This narrative has not only been accepted by the international community, but also more or less the government of Republic of India.

I think Pak has achieved a lot, partly because of its own "do anything, stoop to any level" policy to fight India and survive, but equally because of the innumerable self goals scored by India in this regard.

If anyone is interested, I would be happy to discuss, what can be done from this point forward, so we have a chance. But to give you a clue, in our current system of government, the people of India do not have nationalism and protecting our territorial integrity as even their "top ten" priority. As long as that continues, and we continue our current system of government, whatever I suggest of anyone else suggests, is highly unlikely to be put in practice.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 28 Jul 2011 05:54

^

The individuals value (the qualities) what the society rewards. When nationalism is rewarded by the society, the individuals too will seek it. The rot started as early as independence movement.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jul 2011 06:03

shivajisisodia wrote:
Contrast this to Israel being attacked by four or five Arab nations within days of being declared a nation. Point is, we can all feel good about the soundness of our logic as to why we lost POK, but the fact is that we "lost" POK.

We had at least another twenty five years since then when Pak did not have nuclear weapons. What stopped us from attempting to liberate POK during the 48-73 period ? Again, not our fault ? The Americans this time ?

Sir - you are the latest in a long line of people who have come to this forum to annouce that India lost PoK . There is - as you have amply demonstrated no argument that can be made against this statement of fact. However India "lost" West Punjab and Sindh as well a little earlier, also East Bengal. India also "lost" parts of Afghanistan earlier. What is so goddam sacrosanct about Pakistan occupied Kashmir that makes you whine about Indian weakness regarding POK when you choose to ignore the elephant in the room - a civilizational weakness of India that is gradually causing it to shrink.

India is a weak nation and a civilization that knowns how to survive by bending, kowtowing, changing and doing anything other than fight. Ask for anything from India. Don't ask for fighting and war. If your history teachers have convinced you that India was some kind of "powerful presence" in the ancient world on the lines of the British empire or the USA today - they have lied to you. Only the anger of cognitive dissonance, an a mistaken belief that this nation is capable of being more than a dying mouse makes you protest India's lack of ability to handle Pakistan. India's only good fortune is that Pakistan, as a fragment of India is as incompetent as powerless as India, give or take a few degrees.

These are conclusions that many reached years ago. Can we move forward from there please? The fact that Pakistan has done well is old information on this forum.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jul 2011 06:07

shivajisisodia wrote:
If anyone is interested, I would be happy to discuss, what can be done from this point forward, so we have a chance. But to give you a clue, in our current system of government, the people of India do not have nationalism and protecting our territorial integrity as even their "top ten" priority. As long as that continues, and we continue our current system of government, whatever I suggest of anyone else suggests, is highly unlikely to be put in practice.

This is the wrong thread for such a discussion. Besides any governments that this useless set of people who call themselves "Indian" create will never be strong. We need to break India up into smaller parts and balls to the more useless parts - they should be Karnataka's slaves. I am talking about free Karnataka. I would be happy to discuss that with you in another thread if you are game.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 28 Jul 2011 06:11

The stunning beauty of Pakistan's foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar got more attention among one and all

Great News for our Desi politicians!! GET READY!!! Instead of Chai-Biscoot we are slowly progressing towards Daru-Kabaaab session!! You might be getting a Strip tease and free lap dances straight out of Heera Mandi of Lahore in another 1-2 years.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Jul 2011 06:15

the problem is we will be doing the stripping and she playing the flute

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 Jul 2011 06:35

X Posted from the Pakistani Economic Stress Watch thread.

Reuters via Dawn reports today that the Pakistan Rupee is plumbing a new bottom:

Pakistani rupee hits record low of 86.58 due to oil payments

The Economic Times on the other hand today reports that the Indian Rupee is close to a three year high:

Rupee hits near 3 year high on weak dollar and US debt fears, exports to gain

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 28 Jul 2011 06:45

SSridhar wrote:
abhishek_sharma wrote:Mani Shankar Aiyar on Pakistan’s History and Identity

Q: Next up is Farzana Shaikh’s Making Sense of Pakistan, which is again about this issue of Pakistan’s identity.

Ans: Yes, it is the very best book I have read on Pakistan.
For the very first time, I am in agreement with Mr. Aiyar.

Why is ManiShankar Aiyar adorning this new tone ? He was as anti-Indian WKK as they come until recently when he started making some sense.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 28 Jul 2011 07:01

Ambar wrote:quote="SSridhar"quote="abhishek_sharma"Mani Shankar Aiyar on Pakistan’s History and Identity

Why is ManiShankar Aiyar adorning this new tone ? He was as anti-Indian WKK as they come until recently when he started making some sense.

MSA is smart Salwar and taking evasive manuovers now to avoid meeting or facing the wrath of Desi Bereivik.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jul 2011 07:20

Ambar wrote: Why is ManiShankar Aiyar adorning this new tone ? He was as anti-Indian WKK as they come until recently when he started making some sense.

Sometimes BRF only displays ignorance in order to stick to ideas that are assumed to be true. MSA - for all his sliminess wrote a book in 1994 where he figured out Pakistaniyat perfectly well. He notes that Pakistan =="not India" and nothing more. He also notes the "Hindu kutta" story in his book. So imagining that he has had a change of heart due to some temporary disability is actually deep ignorance. He was clued in before the name "bharat-rakshak" was a registered domain.

And no I am not a supporter or fan of Mani Shankar Iyer. I merely read his book in 1998. I still have it with me and have quoted from it in my own Pakistan e-book.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 28 Jul 2011 07:25

The worst part of that Mani Shankar Aiyar interview is:

It has actually already happened many times before. There have been these back-channel talks between Ambassadors Lambah and Tariq Aziz during Musharraf’s period and it is clear that almost all the major outstanding issues between Pakistan and India, including Kashmir, were on the verge of resolution. It just so happens that I was a classmate at Trinity Hall, Cambridge of Khurshid Kasuri, who served as Musharraf’s Foreign Minister. Since the fall of Musharraf, I have had Kasuri over to India and in public speeches he has detailed what the progress registered. Private conversations I have had with the Indian side show that what Kasuri said about the progress registered in the back-channel talks was substantially true. That is why I am convinced that when we engage, we can move far forward. The only reason that we are not moving forward is that we so often break the engagement and take such a long time to re-engage.

I think this is the first confirmation from the Indian side that they were "close" to "solving" Kashmir.

shivajisisodia · Post by **shivajisisodia** » 28 Jul 2011 07:38

Shiv - These are conclusions that many reached years ago. Can we move forward from there please? The fact that Pakistan has done well is old information on this forum.

I am sorry sir. Going over the posts on this topic and other topics on this forum, I got the sense that people dont realize that Pakistan has done well. I am sorry to state sir, that the posts here suggest a tremendous amount of hubris vis-a-vis Pakistan. The forum is replete with posts that talk about how failed a state Pakistan is. How economically it is on the verge of collapse. How their nuclear weapons dont work and how it is just about to disintegrate. There is even an entire thread that seriously discusses how "India should manage the disintegration of Pakistan". I am sure you will forgive a new comer for thinking that the idea that Pakistan has done well, politically, diplomatically, militarily vis-a-vis India is not the dominant narrative on this fourm.

But, if it is, I will happily correct my thinking, as I would like nothing better than to realize that people live in the real world and see it as it is, not the way they think it oughta be. So, I put this topic to rest.

I would be happy to discuss what we need to do going forward. What you suggest about a breakup of India is one idea. But that cannot happen within the current setup of governance that we have. But I agree, something like that or some other radical surgery is required to fix the problem.

The big question I keep worrying about is, that given the fact that an overwhelming majority of Indians dont really put national security and territorial integrity and preservation of our cultural and religious ethos very high on their priority list, how do you move forward towards accomplishing these goals ? I am afraid that people in India who pursue these goals within the current climate and current system will first face resistance and be promptly destroyed by masses of other Indians from within, way before the Pakis or our other enemies ever get to them.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 28 Jul 2011 07:45

Krishna unhappy over Hurriyat meet

devi-ji is meeting PM

http://pib.nic.in/release/phsmall.asp?phid=35899

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Jul 2011 07:54

abhishek_sharma wrote:Krishna unhappy over Hurriyat meet

This unhappiness is a farce. GoI could very easily have stopped Hurriyat leaders from going anywhere near the Pakistani embassy, if only they had wanted to. GoI is hoodwinking Indians by pretending to be angry with TSP.

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 Jul 2011 08:23

In the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the worlds first IEDological Muslim State, we learn that there exists such a thing as “Un-Islamic Cloth”

:

Pakistan Taliban make bonfire of ‘un-Islamic’ cloth

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 28 Jul 2011 08:49

KJoishy wrote:
Acharya wrote: While the foreign ministers of Indian and Pakistan pledged to keep the talks going, their foreign secretaries stuck to their positions on key issues.
Any clips of Hina opening her mouth during this visit? Or was she for show only?

She opened her mouth.

Everytime she opens her mouth, I cringe. She sounds like a man.....or somewhere inbetween.

saip · Post by **saip** » 28 Jul 2011 08:55

Strange, but I find these photos in Paki paper. No comment about Siachen, illegally occupied by etc.

Snapshots from India: Training in Siachen

Link

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2011 09:24

VikramS wrote: Do I need a degree in Lahori Logic to understand what you are trying to say.

No, simple common sense and self respect

India says it will not talk till TSP acts on terrorists.
But then India talks. So that means that Pakistan has succeeded by using Terrorists?

Yes. TSP and its apologists have time and again said that TSP uses terorrists becasue India refuses to engage it on so called "disputes".

If India is a so called "emerging superpower" and TSP is a "failed state", any self respecting "emerging superpower" will not sit and talk at gun point with a "failed state". Thus, by persisting with terror and insulting India by calling for talks and dialouge after every terrorist machination, TSP has rubbed India's nose to the ground by bringing India to the negotiating table after India huffed and puffed about no talks until TSP acts on terrorists. Where is the Lahori logic in this?

And India is doing more than talking. The shameful spectacle of fawning over Hina, while Indian soldiers and officers are dying fighting the Paki pigLets in J&K ought to make any self respecting India puke in disgust. Finally, India is now pretty openly accepting that "all issues" include Kashmir & terrorism. In other others, India has accepted a linkage between so called "resolution" of Kashmir and TSP's use of terror as an instrument of state policy. Game & set, if not match to TSP on this count. Thanks to MMS.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 Jul 2011 09:50

SSridhar wrote:
abhishek_sharma wrote:Krishna unhappy over Hurriyat meet
This unhappiness is a farce. GoI could very easily have stopped Hurriyat leaders from going anywhere near the Pakistani embassy, if only they had wanted to. GoI is hoodwinking Indians by pretending to be angry with TSP.

Well obviously India allowed Hurriyat leaders to meet Paki FM. The only reason I can think of, is that they wanted to strengthen her standing within Pakistani Establishment.

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 28 Jul 2011 09:57

SSridhar Garu, IIRC these hurriat leaders were protesting fai's arrest in DC and were subsequently kept under house arrest. It was withdrawn the day earlier and they were allowed to travel to New Delhi to meet HRK.

Had GOI wanted, it could have no doubt prevented this meeting. But as you rightly pointed out, this "getting angry over the meet" BS is totally farce.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 28 Jul 2011 10:01

But Then when has GoI stopped Hurri-Rats from meeting Paki establishment in New Delhi ?
Anyways it hardly serves any purpose stopping those buffoons meeting or not meeting their masters. Khar will be FM for tops 2 years and then it will be beast after the beauty..

PS: Again why is her gender and age such important criteria as far as talks go. Are we not falling into the Paki trap of image management.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Jul 2011 10:12

okay guys, that's enough on voice quality of you know who, it's coming across as a bit sexist.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jul 2011 10:18

shivajisisodia wrote: I am sorry sir. Going over the posts on this topic and other topics on this forum, I got the sense that people dont realize that Pakistan has done well.

This is a forum. People express views. You seem to selectively pick up views that contradict yours and talk as if you are a lone crusader who knows about Pakistan that othes have no inkling about.

You are not. There are dozens of people on this forum who know as much, if not more than you do about Pakistan on this forum and do not need the sort branding that you are doing. Clearly if you know a lot about Pakistan and others also know something and if your view and others views are different - there is a difference of opinion. To call Pakistan an utter failuire may be a lie, but calling it a resounding success is also a lie.

Watch out for people like SSridhar, Rudradev, Jrjrao, Rangudu, Airavat, ramana and others who are all experts on Pakistan in their own right. I apologize to dozens of others - some semi-lurkers whose names I have left out. So your characterization of the forum is nonsense. This forum has sparked off several very informed and informative blogs and sub-sites about Pakistan. You are not dealing with novices here.

In 2007 or so I wrote an e-book on Pakistan that has been online since then. It is called "Pakistan- Failed State". It is a 600 kb, fully refereced, 120 page pdf based on published media and scholarly articles from Pakistan and about Pakistan downloadable off BR. Have a look at it if you wish to see my views on Pakistan. There can be no "black or white" All gone or all well statement about Pakistan. But the balance is more towards failed than success. The topic has been discussed and followed on here for over a decade.

My ebook
Pakistan - Failed State