Pakistan’s Easter tragedy highlights failed state status

[Porus]

Bro this chap " PORUS " is Indian trying to fight for Hindu cause and being a good Chanakya soldier in cyber space using deception as his armour lol. Jokers

Yup bharat mata ki jai, you've EXPOSED me wow good job

[logical]

Bro this chap " PORUS " is Indian trying to fight for Hindu cause and being a good Chanakya soldier in cyber space using deception as his armour lol. Jokers

His name give it away, Porus lol

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

That's some conspiracy theorist reasoning coming from someone calling themselves "Logical".

[logical]

Thanks captain obvious. When did I say Balochistan should handle our foreign affairs? I said it should have the ultimate authority to decide on the implementation of the CPEC project, not Punjab or Pakistan Military. You really are stupid.



Kharan & Lasbela were feudatory states within the Kalat state. Makran was actually a district of Kalat in 1947. Please read the article I've provided.



Of course! Kalat acceded under force. When did I ever deny that?

CPEC is federal project, of course it will be decided in Islamabad. Why do you expect China to deal with every district, province politician etc That is job of federal government not China. Many projects are provincial and in that case province Chief Minister can deal with anyone after getting green light from Islamabad. Because it's Islamabad which provide sovereignty guarantee to foreign companies for investing in Pakistan.

Khan of Kalat wanted to forcefully annex Lasbela, makran and Kharan which they refused and joined Pakistan. Khan of Kalat knew he didn't had any other option and joined as well. Army was never involved hindu liar.

[Firdousi]

Guys, have you ever realized that Pakistan´s map looks like a dog? I am not comparing Pakis to dogs. I am quite aware that dogs are much better and far cleaner but just give it a thought lol

http://itsfunpoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/1621883_517829624999216_1522959248_n.jpg

[Porus]

CPEC is federal project, of course it will be decided in Islamabad. Why do you expect China to deal with every district, province politician etc That is job of federal government not China. Many projects are provincial and in that case province Chief Minister can deal with anyone after getting green light from Islamabad. Because it's Islamabad which provide sovereignty guarantee to foreign companies for investing in Pakistan.

Khan of Kalat wanted to forcefully annex Lasbela, makran and Kharan which they refused and joined Pakistan. Khan of Kalat knew he didn't had any other option and joined as well. Army was never involved hindu liar.

Read:

On March 26, 1948, the Pakistan Army was ordered to move into the Baloch coastal region of Pasni, Jiwani and Turbat. This was the first act of aggression prior to the march on Kalat by a Pakistani military detachment on April 1, 1948. Kalat capitulated on March 27 after the army moved into the coastal region and it was announced in Karachi that the Khan of Kalat has agreed to merge his state with Pakistan. Jinnah accepted this accession under the gun. It should be noted that the Balochistan Assembly had already rejected any suggestion of forfeiting the independence of Balochistan on any pretext. So even the signature of the Khan of Kalat taken under the barrel of the gun, was not viable, because the parliament had rejected the accession and the accession was never mandated by the British Empire either, who had given Balochistan under Kalat independence before India.

Attack on Shah Noorani shrine in Pakistan kills dozens - News from Al Jazeera

[logical]

Read:



Attack on Shah Noorani shrine in Pakistan kills dozens - News from Al Jazeera

By 26 March 1948 these states already decided to be part of Pakistan. Army got there to defend it not invade. Kalat ruler who wanted to impose his will on other 3 states eventually realised it's best to be part of Pakistan.

"The ruler of Kharan in Baluchistan, while visiting Karachi in October 1947, issued a statement, saying: Kharan was equal to Kalat and would never suffer subordination to her; Kharan would live and, if necessary, die for Pakistan; Kalat continued to deny that either of the two feudatories could be regarded as separate states."

Page not found | Institute of Stategic Studies Islamabad

Give it a rest dude, you are liar indian/afghani.

[Porus]

By 26 March 1948 these states already decided to be part of Pakistan. Army got there to defend it not invade.

"The ruler of Kharan in Baluchistan, while visiting Karachi in October 1947, issued a statement, saying: Kharan was equal to Kalat and would never suffer subordination to her; Kharan would live and, if necessary, die for Pakistan; Kalat continued to deny that either of the two feudatories could be regarded as separate states."

Page not found | Institute of Stategic Studies Islamabad

Give it a rest dude, you are liar indian/afghani.

Nice work quoting a page which can't be found :D "logical"

[PakMan]

Yup bharat mata ki jai, you've EXPOSED me wow good job

You've let yourself down, you've let India down, and above all you've let CHANAKYA down.. LOL

" PORUS YOUR ARGUMENTS WERE ALWAYS VERY POROUS " roflmao

[Elite Pakhtun]

Basically what I've got from all this is that you hate Indian culture, Musharraf hated his forefathers (Indians from Uttar Pradesh) therefore you like him.

Lol if you hate Indian culture so much then why are you pro-Pakistan? You shouldn't even identify as Pakistani as most of our culture is Indian (Urdu, Punjabi, Sindhi)... sure there's a bit of Pashto in there, but we don't care about you guys.

You appear mistaken. I merely said he wasn't the worst (ie what you claimed), and gave some reasons why. I made no claims about how much I do or don't like him.

Your idea on Musharraf being anti-India is false. When Musharraf was in power, there was a period of good relations with India. You may have been a bit young when this happened, so it's understandable you didn't pay attention to it.

As for the Indian culture thing: It's not about hating Indian culture, it's about the absolute saturation of Indian Music and Movies. That was all they had on TV. That was all they had at video stores. Yeah, sure, they have some very attractive actresses. But c'mon... how many times can one watch the same storyline over and over again?

Every Bollywood movie:

EITHER:

2 people, a guy and a girl, fall in love. There's something blocking them from getting married. They sing and dance for 3 hours. They get married.

OR

2 guys/girls are after 1 girl/guy. They're sorta competing for attention. They sing and dance for 3 hours. 1 of the competitors dies. The remaining one marries the love interest.

[Porus]

You appear mistaken. I merely said he wasn't the worst (ie what you claimed), and gave some reasons why. I made no claims about how much I do or don't like him.

He was pretty bad, worst is subjective but for me all those aforementioned things add up. Boosting the economy marginally whilst creating an insurgency and starting a war is just shameful. Especially if you look at the record of military leaders in Pakistan's history, they've all been famous for starting wars that have ended in disaster.

It's not my fault Pakistanis here think that 1971 or 1999 was a victory. :D

Your idea on Musharraf being anti-India is false. When Musharraf was in power, there was a period of good relations with India. You may have been a bit young when this happened, so it's understandable you didn't pay attention to it.

There was a 'period' but that all lead up to the Kargil War which was disastrous for both countries. Yet again sending footsoldiers disguised as 'militants' just like 1948 under Operation Badr. Good relations are always on the surface with Indo-Pak anyway.

As for the Indian culture thing: It's not about hating Indian culture, it's about the absolute saturation of Indian Music and Movies. That was all they had on TV. That was all they had at video stores. Yeah, sure, they have some very attractive actresses. But c'mon... how many times can one watch the same storyline over and over again?

Not sure what to say to this. Every big industry including Bollywood and Hollywood regurgitate ****. The best films come from Bangladesh (Bengalis), Iran, China and Japan. India isn't exceptional, it's mostly crap but it comes out with good films too, like Gangs of Wasseypur or Dehli Belly. Plus Pakistan at the time didn't have much cinema of its own, if it did no one cared about it. Now we're stepping up with films like Manto, Dukhtar, Namaloom Afraad and
Quetta: City of Forgotten Dreams. But this is recent.

[logical]

Porus,

Musharraf didn't start insurgency, if you wanted Pakistan to sit back like Taliban Khan then today Pakistan would look bit more like Afghanistan if not completely in ruins like them.

Just like in 80's Zia didn't wanted to get involved in Afghan war but Pro-India government in Afghanistan backed by Soviets tried to instigate civil war in Pakistan in the name of pashtunistan. Zia was left with no choice but support jihad in Afghanistan against our enemies.

Now when I look back it's clear as day what ever Zia did was good for Pakistan including nuclear program. Hindsight is 20/20 but alternative would have been much worst. Narrative can change in few years. We will get through this extremist phase as well. Pakistan have succesfully changed narrative on afghani refugees in couple of years because of Kabul support to India. But in reality Kabul has always been in bed with since India 1947 yet refugees were welcomed like brothers. Because at that time it was in interest of state to welcome them.

[Adam]

Just like in 80's Zia didn't wanted to get involved in Afghan war but Pro-India government in Afghanistan backed by Soviets tried to instigate civil war in Pakistan in the name of pashtunistan. Zia was left with no choice but support jihad in Afghanistan against our enemies.
.

Can I have a source for the above paragraph?

[Porus]

Can I have a source for the above paragraph?

Yes ditto, give us a credible source saying Soviet-Afghanistan was pushing for Pashtunistan. Don't bring Daud Khan into it. Give evidence that the Soviet government in Afghanistan was trying to break up Pakistan.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Porus,

Musharraf didn't start insurgency, if you wanted Pakistan to sit back like Taliban Khan then today Pakistan would look bit more like Afghanistan if not completely in ruins like them.

Just like in 80's Zia didn't wanted to get involved in Afghan war but Pro-India government in Afghanistan backed by Soviets tried to instigate civil war in Pakistan in the name of pashtunistan. Zia was left with no choice but support jihad in Afghanistan against our enemies.

Now when I look back it's clear as day what ever Zia did was good for Pakistan including nuclear program. Hindsight is 20/20 but alternative would have been much worst. Narrative can change in few years. We will get through this extremist phase as well. Pakistan have succesfully changed narrative on afghani refugees in couple of years because of Kabul support to India. But in reality Kabul has always been in bed with since India 1947 yet refugees were welcomed like brothers. Because at that time it was in interest of state to welcome them.

Let's just say for the sake of argument, that they were trying to "instigate Pashtunistan".

Did this involve terrorism? Did this involve murdering civilians indiscriminately? Did this involve sabotaging infrastructure and economic sectors in attempts to cut off people from needed facilities and resources?

In all cases, there's no strong and/or independently verifiable any of that happened. (key words here, because Pakistani Establishment indocrtinated Cyber-drones like yourself love cooking up claims ...sort of like the U.S. rapes in Afghanistan thing you threw out a few days ago, no independent verification of that either).

If it was simply motivation and inspiring Pashtun groups in Pakistan, then well that can't happen unless those groups already existed in Pakistan, and in that case this is only moral support.

How does this in any way validate terrorism or suppirting terrorists who :Murdered civilians indiscriminately, sabotaged infrastructure, attempted to cut off people from needed facilities and resources?

The comparison is incongruent. You're being disingenuous and ideologically driven here, Not "logical" ....Mr. "Pretending to Be" Logical. And don't even try to play the ISLAM-card here; you already outed yourself in the "Strip Bars and Clubs" thread. You probably would have embraced the Soviets yourself so you could have Vodka and have chance to your sisters and aunts dance in Moscow for Russian troops and calling it "women's liberation" or justify cuckoldry in some euphemistic sort of way.

Also as noted by [MENTION=18484]Porus[/MENTION] and [MENTION=1669]Adam[/MENTION], where are your sources? Indepdently verfiable sources. Like from scholarly sources? Daud Khan was Soviet Ally, yes, but not Soviet-backed. Najibullah was Soviet-backed.