A perfect time for China-Pakistan defence pact

[curious]

The pact was for explicitly for defensive purposes, yet Pakistan launched a war of conquest, its leaders citing impatience and pride.

It was a blunder on part of the Pakistani leadership to turn away from the Chinese invitation in 1962 and to later expect U.S to support it against India in 1965, which the U.S was supporting just 3 years ago against China in Sino-India war in 1962. The U.S had its own ambitions against USSR and communism, Pakistan was just meant to play a part in those ambitions, our leadership failed to see this or was unwilling to, and Pakistan paid the price.

Americans "own bloody history" does not render a moral judgment invalid when it rests upon its own merits.

Assuming right to make such moral judgments, specially done with such holier that thou attitude implies a certain amount of moral superiority on part of the judge, which in case of your country is questionable to say the least, so all this shows is arrogance on part of the judge.

 

[Solomon2]

..The U.S had its own ambitions against USSR and communism, Pakistan was just meant to play a part in those ambitions, our leadership failed to see this -

They saw just fine but they didn't see fit to teach you the truth. Still don't.

Assuming right to make such moral judgments, specially done with such holier that thou attitude implies a certain amount of moral superiority on part of the judge, which in case of your country is questionable to say the least, so all this shows is arrogance on part of the judge.

Pretty sure your view of events and nations' actions is far more distorted than mine! In my view determining moral lapses can be quite independent of the judge's own moral failures. What to do about it, however, may not be. That's one of the reasons why conviction and sentencing are separate events, rather than combined together.

That is, the criminal can't complain that the judge is a hypocrite for convicting him, but may complain if the judge is both guilty of the same crime contemporaneously yet is not punished for it.

 

[Stag112]

China is already totally in control of pakistan. Pakistan will do whatever china asks them to do.

Then what does china get from a pact where it gets obligated to support pakistan?

Pakistani rulers were always known for their monumental lack of strategic thinking. Looks like pakistani posters also suffer from the same ailment if they believe a waaayy more powerful strong nation will do the dirty work of a weak nation dependent on the strong nation. It is your job to do chinas dirty work, for that a pact is not required.

 

[muhammadali233]

So 10 C17s, 6 C130s , 22 Apache, 15 Chinook, 8 P8i is that big ?

Terrorist? Says who ?

Have you all even declared him terrorist in Pakistan lol?
Hell, your Saudi Arabian Biraders will be hosting him soon. Wanna some Anti Histamines ?

Your police officials: Narendra Modi 'allowed' Gujarat 2002 anti-Muslim riots - BBC News
hmmm yes they will make Modi as the coalition leader also,they just adore him don't they?Just take a look at the UAE visit they were more close then rose and jack in titanic.Men Love
Modi:Sheik your phone is vibrating
Sheikh:That is not my phone

 

[muhammadali233]

On 2002, well the revenge was not fulfilled, you see burning women and Children is so "ISLAMIC".

On UAE, well that yielded 72 Billion US Dollars , and 2/3rd oil we store in our strategic reserves for FREE, Wasn't it worth doing it ? Lol

Wtf?What are you trying to say?REVENGE?You martyred a mosque raped women burned children alive killed 1000+ people crippled another 2000 and say not fking fulfilled? Burning of women and what ?! seriously is that a joke?Someone please take note of this guy he is not worth being on this forum,go to some anti islamic forum and fap to death there and stay on topic it is china and pakistan why the f you draging india into every page?

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Wtf?What are you trying to say?REVENGE?You martyred a mosque raped women burned children alive killed 1000+ people crippled another 2000 and say not fking fulfilled? Burning of women and what ?! seriously is that a joke?Someone please take note of this guy he is not worth being on this forum,go to some anti islamic forum and fap to death there and stay on topic it is china and pakistan why the f you draging india into every page?

Get
" EDUCATED "
and
" IMPROVE YOUR COMPREHENSION SKILLS "
is all I would say.

By the way it was OP which brought India.Improve your Comprehension and reading skills

 

[muhammadali233]

Get
" EDUCATED "
and
" IMPROVE YOUR COMPREHENSION SKILLS "
is all I would say.

By the way it was OP which brought India.Improve your Comprehension and reading skills

I admire your writing and reading skills as i am not much of learned guy you know i grew up in a village(not kidding) but one thing annoys me is that why do you peeps take so much interest in Pak?When ever i get to see your news it is that how pakistan will be destroyed in 15 days and how will India thal sena will conquer pakistan and how taliban will take control of islamabad isn't that childish?Is that an educated media?please focus on your internal affairs and lets us focus on ours leg pulling isn't working for both of us and has held the growth of two full of potential countries.

 

[curious]

One doesn't have to act so high and mighty, almost to the point of being contemptuous to point out what they perceive lapses in others. All it shows is assumption of superiority or arrogance on part of the would-be judge. Such a person's conviction of his superiority will undoubtedly cloud his judgment.

Pretty sure your view of events and nations' actions is far more distorted than mine! In my view determining moral lapses can be quite independent of the judge's own moral failures.

I doubt a judgment of a serial killer will command much respect if he presides over a murder case.

That is, the criminal can't complain that the judge is a hypocrite for convicting him, but may complain if the judge is both guilty of the same crime contemporaneously yet is not punished for it.

A very serious conviction indeed. Because we did the crime of launching a "war of conquest" in territories which were disputed to begin with we are handed a conviction:

So who wants to sign a pact with leaders - or a nation - that is so morally corrupt it lacks the honor necessary to uphold such a pact in good faith? With such people it's better to rely on gifts, hospitality, and mutual vague non-binding statements of principle as foundations of international investment and cooperation rather than treaties and pacts.

If such is the criteria, then where does that leave your own nation? for which launching wars is as routine as taking a walk. What is it that Pakistan has done that is so evil that such a harsh judgment is handed to it? while what it has done does not even begin to compare to your own nation's adventurism.
Yet America presents itself as the defender of human rights, the force of good, leader of the free world etc. All this shows is a height of arrogance.

 

[Airdef95]

Does being a Major non-NATO ally prevent Pakistan from having a formal pact with China?.

What formal pact??

 

[dadeechi]

What formal pact??

Does being a Major non-NATO ally prevent Pakistan from having a formal defense pact with China?.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Pakistan's conduct is the result of Pakistan's decisions. Just read the FRUS South Asia 1965 account of the Indo-Pak conflict: Pakistan used mutual-defence pacts to empower it to launch a war of expansion, then squawked in protest when the U.S. failed to support its ambitions. Bhutto then marketed the U.S. refusal as damaging to Pakistan's national pride - the foundation of Pakistani anti-Americanism.

Few Pakistanis ever expressed anything but support for this conduct by their leaders, yes? So who wants to sign a pact with leaders - or a nation - that is so morally corrupt it lacks the honor necessary to uphold such a pact in good faith? With such people it's better to rely on gifts, hospitality, and mutual vague non-binding statements of principle as foundations of international investment and cooperation rather than treaties and pacts.

Thus China, unlike the U.S., is on the right course with Pakistan now: despite providing far less military, humanitarian, and economic aid than the U.S. it is China, not the U.S., that Pakistanis consider their friend, yes? A formal pact - either public or secret - would threaten all that.

I AGREE WITH YOU 100%. You are spot on.
It's quite funny,weird and interesting though. The Chinese seem to be quite smart in adopting a rather low public profile in their support for Pakistan by making just vague statements of support, gifts and hospitaility to Pakistan while avoiding any form of alliance/defence pact unlike western powers. This means China avoids any form of entanglement/responsibility in case Pakistan was to ever go to war with India and they will never be blamed for this,UNLIKE the U.S who will take all the blame for not helping Pakistan. Lol even though the U.S provided far more military,economic aid to Pakistan than any other country these past decades.

Here is anothet interesting thing: The U.S and U.K almost went to war with India during the 1971 war between Pakistan and India. If not for the SOVIET Union who sent its nuclear subs/warships in the bay of bengal to dissuade our militart from intervening then we would have definitely intervened to repel India from the region.
.
.
.you can guess, China was nowhere to be seen. lol