Search results

What was the reply from MSF. Pakistan sends letters on kashmir to everyone but no one replies.

Because foreign companies pay bribe to some officials and initiate the deal. But later they meet some honest official who point out the deficiencies. Thats why deal with India get stuck. Honest deals like P8i, c-17, c-130, apache, chinook gets signed quickly.

Thats what I said earlier too. You will be defeated logically as your defending the indefensible. I also said no point in arguing with you as you will not accept the facts as you loose your argument.

Logically I defeated you. Now you have moved to rhetoric.

Manchus were Chinese. But it goes against you logic that China is a nation of majority of Hun people because it was ruled by a single ruler who is a Manchu. So as per you logic as Maurya Dynasty was the largest dynasty to rule south asia, lets have a nation as defined by maurya dynasty. but...

Thats why I say make a excel sheet for both India & China with ruler; area ruled and period. You will not find any difference in India and China. Yes. So a unified China was formed by a minority Manchu but usurped by majority Han. In Indian context it is like an unified India formed by...

That was for 100-200 years in history of 2000 years. Indian subcontinent was also ruled by Maurya Dynasty for few centuries.

You are saying that India did not exist as a nation as it was not ruled by a single ruler for whole subcontinent for majority of time. I am saying by same logic China is also not a nation as it was not ruled by a single ruler for majority of time. But you are not giving any proof that China...

I am disputing your logic.

You are avoiding the issue by giving some random links. As I said. Your argument is logically flawed and my argument is correct. You are defending the indefensible.

Dont give me links. Make an excel sheet. Name of ruler; Area ruled; Period of rule.

What you have said about China is factually incorrect. Thats what I mean by defending the indefensible. Do some research and give me names of rulers who ruled whole of China for past 2000 years.

My logic is right. China was also not ruled by a single ruler for most part of history. Yet it is a nation defined by a majority culture. No point in have an argument with you people as you will never accept logic. Just will give frivolous argument to defend the indefensible.

By your own logic no single ruler ruled Pakistan at a single time. So Pakistan should not be a nation but be divided into Sindh, Punjab, Balochistan. Kashmir, Pashtun etc.

You concept of a nation is not true. Just because nations in europe became republics on some date does not mean they were not a nation before. India was a country since 5000 years with Hinduism as defining factor. It became a republic in 1947 that too under forced boundaries defined by...

All were defeated by marathas before britishers came. so irrelevent to discussion. Creation of Pakistan was by an act passed in British parliament. it is illegal.

not outsiders. part of india but not with right to ask for seperate nation.

Right legal solution by British in 1947 would have been to have a referendum in subcontinent with following option. 1. Whole subcontinent stays as one nation. 2. Partition on basis of princely states. Given the political mood of that time the referendum vote would have resulted in a single nation.

Indian subcontinent is a Hindu land since ages. Muslims are outsider. The formula for division of India was taken by British without taking any referendum from people of Indian subcontinent if they want a partition. So partition has no legal basis. India has right to take back land of Pakistan...

India