Belarus President Arrive in Islamabad for 3 days visit

[wiseone2]

isolated doesnt mean they are less capable.they themselves are in influesnce of russia what else they want.

If you are in Europe and you are excluded by the EU you are isolated
i do not know a better term for it

 

[ali_raza]

isolated isolated kerti have tu rab se kiu ni darti ha(dehati orat)

 

[Indus Pakistan]

That is a very flawed point of view you are taking.

Thank you. I would not think anything differant coming from a Indian.

We are going all guns blazing to ensure we do not miss out on this wave for the coming 50 years.

Good for you. I hope you do really well. For a start Pakistan would be less likely to suffer from mass migration from India. I also wish Bangla does well. That would help to stop places like Karachi from turning into "Mini Indias". There are far more people of Indian/Bangla extraction in Karachi than any indigenous group. In fact I hope India does so well that some of them pack bags and head back like Tariq Fatah. And before you mention the odd celebrity who has gone the other way I am talking about millions here. I would much prefer if Afghan's or Iranian migrants took their place. It would ensure Pakistan looks west then looking east toward the Ganga.

2. The point that 'what product can Afghanistan buy from India that it cannot from China' is completely flawed. China trades with every nation on this planet. Period.

You make it look like black and white. It is not. Afghanistan is not going need IT industry. It will import electronics, cars and other fabricated goods. China is closer to Afghanistan and has the edge. As comparison of where we are going care to tell me what your exports are to Central Asia and then compare to China?

India's push to East

I love it. I hope you push and move east more. You have history as guide. There are incredible temples in Thailand etc. This might help your people to wean off the Indus delusion you people have. You know where you people start dreaming that your the children of the Indus.

more rational, more practical and less religious-drug induced Pakistan leading to long term peace.

Bleep. Wrong. I am about as unreligious as you can get. I consider religion as moronic and at best to be put up with because of historical weight. Yet I have greater antipathy toward India ten any religious zealots. Their "investment" is very spread. The West, America, Israel and somewhere at the bottom is India. I am a secularist. I also believe in being economical with investment. Antipathy reserved for for one only - India. Rest are just variables waiting to be harvested against India.

Pakistan would become a major captive like market for China.

Bingo. A captive market creates a synergestic relationship. It means the Chinese would suffer if the market collapsed. On the contrary if that captive market boomed it would equate to greater demand.

The Chinese are a bright people. Why would they want to create a monopoly in Pakistan and then suffocate it? Instead they would have every reason to provide it impetus so that it grows to absorb more of their exports. This is how common markets work.

I would rather have the entire Pakistani industry decimiated - in fact it deserves it as most of it is inefficient licenced franchise going as industry. Once it has been culled i would allow Chinese industry to move in and would nurture a new class of industrialists in Pakistan.

 

[TMA]

You said it yourself that we didn't take any side in any of your conflicts between India including those wars, so this defeats your argument. Stop shooting yourself in the foot



Good question.

- Let us ask China be as a third party to verify which soil is used against who? You say elements use Afghan soil against Pakistan and we say that elements use Pakistani soil againsts afghanistan, lets decide on China being a third party to verify all these allegations and then we take actions collectively.

Sounds good to you?

Afghanistan has used and has allowed others to use her soil against Pakistan. Ever since Pakistan came into being! Pakistan took a while to respond. Remember it was Afghanistan who was the aggressor not Pakistan.

So it is upon Afghanistan to show concretely that she no longer holds this view and fully accepts Pakistan. And not by words but by actions that Pakistan can accept.

 

[Hammad Arshad Qureshi]

Good question.

Let us put our complaints on the table, both Pakistan and Afghanistan vis-a-vis each other.
Something like TTP, BLA, India using Afghan soil, while Afghan complaints like Haqqani network, Afghan Talis... etc

Then we take action against these complaints and then we ask China to be third party to observe how we both are doing.

Sounds good to you?

If it does sound like reasonable proposition then guess what Afghanistan already offered this to Pakistan so that China can act as guarantor and Pakistan turned this offer down.

So little soul searching needed on your side my friend



Well you and others get to access our minerals, transit routes etc... so it is a win-win

That is idea of having open region. Do you know how much positive effect it will have if Pakistan opens trading routes towards India? I hear it is significant.

So think out of the box my friend

Well if you really offered this solution and wanted to put china as umpire or refree. Then I guess it is a really good solution and Pakistan should actually avail this opportunity.

 

[A-Team]

Afghanistan has used and has allowed others to use her soil against Pakistan. Ever since Pakistan came into being! Pakistan took a while to respond. Remember it was Afghanistan who was the aggressor not Pakistan.

So it is upon Afghanistan to show concretely that she no longer holds this view and fully accepts Pakistan. And not by words but by actions that Pakistan can accept.

You are changing the topic, Afghanistan offered that both Afghanistan and Pakistan target each others enemies and China will be the guarantor but Pakistan declined. Pakistan declined because it knows that Afghanistan is not purposely hosting TTP others and even if it does it will stop hosting them and ask China to verify but other hand how will Pakistan stop or hid this industrial scale insurgency that its supporting, we are not idiots, chinese are not idiots.

Anyways we have principled stance and the world just provided us 15 billion assistance which shows that the world believes in the Afghan project, whether Pakistan plays ball its up to hear but I can tell you this that there is no returning back for us back to the Talis, nor there is a chance of us being under your influence. Treat us with respect and you will be treated the same. We are no lesser or better than you and the same applies to pakistan.

Well if you really offered this solution and wanted to put china as umpire or refree. Then I guess it is a really good solution and Pakistan should actually avail this opportunity.

But Pakistan chose not to accept this propsation. We Afghans cant decide for Pakistan, it is people like you my friend that needs to stand up and call spade-a-spade and ask their leadership to make peace with her neighbours

How can Pakistan prosper when its being run as a security state.

 

[ghauri05]

I don't think anybody fail to understand anything here. You too understand it very well but you draw the wrong conclusion.
1. India and Russia have no reason to be each other's enemies.
2. India doesn't have problems with Russia making good relations with Pak. We all know why.
3. Russia doesn't have problems with India making good relations with USA as they know it's not directed at them.
4. No reason to be "enemies"
5. Now point is , is their any reason to be friends??? Answer will be and should be YES. Russian economy runs on 2 things Arms and oil/gas. Russia simply doesn't and won't lose the worlds largest importer of weapons for no reason. So Russia won't break the relations
6. Now from India side , India too won't break relations with Russia cause of past and no need to do so. But India might scale down its dependence on Russia if Russians cooperate with PAK on larger defence deals that might cause India trouble. But I don't think they will do it and Pak simply doesn't have economy to buy it. Plus if Pak can buy anything then I guess first option would be China and not Russia.
7 anyways India has reduced its dependence on one single country for decade now.
8. MKIs are made from scratch since years now and FGFA is join project so sharing is on table.
9. India can maintain and manage N power plant without Russian help. Doing it for decades now.
There is more but I guess this is sufficient

You and I, both are saying same thing, but u have gone to extreme point...becoming enemies. I haven't said that russia n india are going to be enemy, but relations with india won't dictate terms for russiaa-pak relations..and on the same note, pak n russia r not going to be friends overnight. both r improving relations cautiously. And for pak buying the russian weaopns is quite logical here....the problem at hand is pak needs heavy fighter on urgent basis. the option are su-35 or typhoon for direct purchase..typhoon is very expensive n a lot of diplomacy required. even if pak goes to china's J series heavy fighter..again pak needs russia's approval for that.... pak's procurement will not be in huge numbers. we r looking at roughly 40 units right now...even these 40 may be procured in small numbers steps by steps..after learning lessons from america's f16 sales.
n the way india is reducing dependence on single buyer, pak is also doing so....still in many other fields china will be major supplier.
both pak n india r maintaining n running N power plants on their own for years but still we need to buy them from others, so one way or other we r dependant on others.

 

[Hammad Arshad Qureshi]

You are changing the topic, Afghanistan offered that both Afghanistan and Pakistan target each others enemies and China will be the guarantor but Pakistan declined. Pakistan declined because it knows that Afghanistan is not purposely hosting TTP others and even if it does it will stop hosting them and ask China to verify but other hand how will Pakistan stop or hid this industrial scale insurgency that its supporting, we are not idiots, chinese are not idiots.

Anyways we have principled stance and the world just provided us 15 billion assistance which shows that the world believes in the Afghan project, whether Pakistan plays ball its up to hear but I can tell you this that there is no returning back for us back to the Talis, nor there is a chance of us being under your influence. Treat us with respect and you will be treated the same. We are no lesser or better than you and the same applies to pakistan.



But Pakistan chose not to accept this propsation. We Afghans cant decide for Pakistan, it is people like you my friend that needs to stand up and call spade-a-spade and ask their leadership to make peace with her neighbours

How can Pakistan prosper when its being run as a security state.

I used to have one teacher in national defense academy. He is currently the policy maker for GHQ foriegn policy. I would really ask him why isn't Pakistan availing this opportunity. Lets see what he replies

 

[Khan_21]

Afghanistan has internal issues no doubt but the bulk is externally supported proxy force.
Corruption or internal rivalries doesn't make people cross from the border and run a complete war against the Afghan people

So yes Internatl problems needs to be solved but its with Pakistan that we need to have peace and not the Talis.

Ashraf Ghani has said several times, that we don't want peace from Pakistan ( i.e. bringing talis to negoation table ) but we want to make peace with Pakistan

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...-chapman-perspec-1006-jm-20161005-column.html


Steve ChapmanMinority of One
News Opinion Steve Chapman
Column:
Afghanistan, the 15-year failure
Steve ChapmanContact Reporter


There is a perverse symmetry on display in Afghanistan right now. Fifteen years ago, American warplanes bombed targets there, beginning an offensive against the Taliban government and al-Qaida precipitated by the 9/11 attacks. This week, they were in action once again.

There was, of course, a big difference in the two operations. In 2001, our forces were opening a campaign that would end quickly in victory. Today, they are part of a war that has no victory, or conclusion, in sight.The original triumph came quickly. By the end of 2001, the Taliban had surrendered in the capital, a new, pro-American government was in place, and Osama bin Laden was running for his life.

It was a thrilling turn of events. PresidentGeorge W. Bush said of our enemies, "They saw liberty and thought they saw weakness, and now they see defeat." British Prime Minister Tony Blair proclaimed "a total vindication of the strategy that we have worked out from the beginning." Things went so well that the Bush administration felt free to start planning another war, in Iraq.



Obama's deadly missteps in prolonging unwinnable wars
Despite sacrificing more than 2,300 lives and some $800 billion, we no longer expect anything but bleak reports from Afghanistan. Even the rare item of good news is bad. On Tuesday, for example, the government said it had reclaimed central Kunduz from Taliban units and was fighting to drive them out of other neighborhoods.

What's bad about that? Until last year, the city hadn't fallen to the Taliban since 2001. Then, militants seized it and held it for two weeks. Their latest assault on the city — even if it can be reversed — indicates that security is still up for grabs.

All this fighting comes at the end of a bloody summer, in which Afghan forces took record casualties from a resilient foe. Only two-thirds of the country is under government control.

Unemployment is estimated at 40 percent. Millions of desperate Afghans have given up and fled, turning up as refugees in Pakistan, Iran or Europe. This week, the Kabul government, a perpetual charity case, sent representatives to ask for $3 billion in aid from other nations at a conference in Brussels.
Obama's journey from hope to hard reality
Any money is likely to be wasted. The watchdog group Transparency International rates Afghanistan one of the most corrupt nations on the planet. A unity government that is anything but unified has proved unable to act decisively on the grave problems afflicting the country.

No one dreamed in 2001 that in 2016, the United States would still be mired in Afghanistan. But some 9,800 American troops remain, along with 5,000 more troops from allied countries. Barack Obama, the anti-war candidate of 2008, can't bring himself to leave.

A report last month by the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction amounted to a chronicle of folly. It found that pervasive corruption has stymied our efforts, helped the enemy and sapped public support for the government. It quoted an Afghan official who in 2010 argued that "corruption is not just a problem for the system of governance in Afghanistan; it is the system of governance."

Ryan Crocker, a former ambassador to Kabul, told the investigators that "the ultimate point of failure for our efforts ... wasn't an insurgency. It was the weight of endemic corruption." The people in the regime we were helping were the true enemy.

Looking back, it's clear the U.S. took on a project far beyond its capabilities. Arriving in a backward, war-torn country where we didn't speak the language, know the history, share the religion or understand the culture, we assumed that Marines, money and good intentions would produce a happy outcome.

So far, that approach hasn't worked. What makes us think it ever will?

There is hardly any encouraging news report from Afghanistan ever. Kunduz fell twice. Notice how chicago tribune says the $3 billion brussels aid will go down the drain . So any country that invests will probably think 10 times before jumping in.

 

[Sergi]

You and I, both are saying same thing,

Yes but different conclusions

but u have gone to extreme point...becoming enemies. I haven't said that russia n india are going to be enemy,

I was indeed painting extreme cases for comparison which are needed for conclusion

but relations with india won't dictate terms for russiaa-pak relations..

Disagree. The volume of trade between Ind-Rus will dictate the terms for Pak-Rus relation. Russia can't will not such trade volume as she doesn't have any other option

and on the same note, pak n russia r not going to be friends overnight. both r improving relations cautiously.

No permanent friends and enemies in international politics. Permanent interests only. Russian interest in Pak & Afagan is known for decades. Russia is just tring to fill up the gap left by USA

And for pak buying the russian weaopns is quite logical here....the problem at hand is pak needs heavy fighter on urgent basis.

transport. May be. Fighter jet- That will never happen. Russia will never do such thing and risk more than 10 billion dollars business with India over next decade. Fig is just a guess it will be more.

the option are su-35 or typhoon for direct purchase..typhoon is very expensive n a lot of diplomacy required.

You will never get 35 and you answered the typhoon yourself.

even if pak goes to china's J series heavy fighter..again pak needs russia's approval for that.... pak's procurement will not be in huge numbers. we r looking at roughly 40 units right now...even these 40 may be procured in small numbers steps by steps..

That can happen. Russia can give permission to China to export J series with Russian engine.

after learning lessons from america's f16 sales.
n the way india is reducing dependence on single buyer, pak is also doing so....still in many other fields china will be major supplier.
both pak n india r maintaining n running N power plants on their own for years but still we need to buy them from others, so one way or other we r dependant on others.

I don't know about Pak but India can manufacture its own N reactors and maintain it. The point of import was capacity. Russian/US plants have higher output comapaired to India so import and tech data for developing higher capacity in house.

 

[wiseone2]

Thank you. I would not think anything differant coming from a Indian.

Good for you. I hope you do really well. For a start Pakistan would be less likely to suffer from mass migration from India. I also wish Bangla does well. That would help to stop places like Karachi from turning into "Mini Indias". There are far more people of Indian/Bangla extraction in Karachi than any indigenous group. In fact I hope India does so well that some of them pack bags and head back like Tariq Fatah. And before you mention the odd celebrity who has gone the other way I am talking about millions here. I would much prefer if Afghan's or Iranian migrants took their place. It would ensure Pakistan looks west then looking east toward the Ganga.

Karachi has a lot of Urdu speaking immigrants from time of partition. there is little immigration from India since 1971.
You still have not taken back several hundred thousand "Biharis" from 1971

 

[A-Team]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...-chapman-perspec-1006-jm-20161005-column.html


Steve ChapmanMinority of One
News Opinion Steve Chapman
Column:
Afghanistan, the 15-year failure
Steve ChapmanContact Reporter


There is a perverse symmetry on display in Afghanistan right now. Fifteen years ago, American warplanes bombed targets there, beginning an offensive against the Taliban government and al-Qaida precipitated by the 9/11 attacks. This week, they were in action once again.

There was, of course, a big difference in the two operations. In 2001, our forces were opening a campaign that would end quickly in victory. Today, they are part of a war that has no victory, or conclusion, in sight.The original triumph came quickly. By the end of 2001, the Taliban had surrendered in the capital, a new, pro-American government was in place, and Osama bin Laden was running for his life.

It was a thrilling turn of events. PresidentGeorge W. Bush said of our enemies, "They saw liberty and thought they saw weakness, and now they see defeat." British Prime Minister Tony Blair proclaimed "a total vindication of the strategy that we have worked out from the beginning." Things went so well that the Bush administration felt free to start planning another war, in Iraq.



Obama's deadly missteps in prolonging unwinnable wars
Despite sacrificing more than 2,300 lives and some $800 billion, we no longer expect anything but bleak reports from Afghanistan. Even the rare item of good news is bad. On Tuesday, for example, the government said it had reclaimed central Kunduz from Taliban units and was fighting to drive them out of other neighborhoods.

What's bad about that? Until last year, the city hadn't fallen to the Taliban since 2001. Then, militants seized it and held it for two weeks. Their latest assault on the city — even if it can be reversed — indicates that security is still up for grabs.

All this fighting comes at the end of a bloody summer, in which Afghan forces took record casualties from a resilient foe. Only two-thirds of the country is under government control.

Unemployment is estimated at 40 percent. Millions of desperate Afghans have given up and fled, turning up as refugees in Pakistan, Iran or Europe. This week, the Kabul government, a perpetual charity case, sent representatives to ask for $3 billion in aid from other nations at a conference in Brussels.
Obama's journey from hope to hard reality
Any money is likely to be wasted. The watchdog group Transparency International rates Afghanistan one of the most corrupt nations on the planet. A unity government that is anything but unified has proved unable to act decisively on the grave problems afflicting the country.

No one dreamed in 2001 that in 2016, the United States would still be mired in Afghanistan. But some 9,800 American troops remain, along with 5,000 more troops from allied countries. Barack Obama, the anti-war candidate of 2008, can't bring himself to leave.

A report last month by the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction amounted to a chronicle of folly. It found that pervasive corruption has stymied our efforts, helped the enemy and sapped public support for the government. It quoted an Afghan official who in 2010 argued that "corruption is not just a problem for the system of governance in Afghanistan; it is the system of governance."

Ryan Crocker, a former ambassador to Kabul, told the investigators that "the ultimate point of failure for our efforts ... wasn't an insurgency. It was the weight of endemic corruption." The people in the regime we were helping were the true enemy.

Looking back, it's clear the U.S. took on a project far beyond its capabilities. Arriving in a backward, war-torn country where we didn't speak the language, know the history, share the religion or understand the culture, we assumed that Marines, money and good intentions would produce a happy outcome.

So far, that approach hasn't worked. What makes us think it ever will?

There is hardly any encouraging news report from Afghanistan ever. Kunduz fell twice. Notice how chicago tribune says the $3 billion brussels aid will go down the drain . So any country that invests will probably think 10 times before jumping in.

Do you know what sort of publication is Chicago Tribune? You should do your homework before you start googling for random articles

If Afghanistan was this big a failure then no-one would be pledged 15 billion yesterday, no one is pledging that much for Somalia, Syria, Lebanon, you know why because people think its a lost cause.

Do better my friend

 

[ghauri05]

Yes but different conclusions
I was indeed painting extreme cases for comparison which are needed for conclusion
Disagree. The volume of trade between Ind-Rus will dictate the terms for Pak-Rus relation. Russia can't will not such trade volume as she doesn't have any other option

No permanent friends and enemies in international politics. Permanent interests only. Russian interest in Pak & Afagan is known for decades. Russia is just tring to fill up the gap left by USA
transport. May be. Fighter jet- That will never happen. Russia will never do such thing and risk more than 10 billion dollars business with India over next decade. Fig is just a guess it will be more.

You will never get 35 and you answered the typhoon yourself.

That can happen. Russia can give permission to China to export J series with Russian engine.

I don't know about Pak but India can manufacture its own N reactors and maintain it. The point of import was capacity. Russian/US plants have higher output comapaired to India so import and tech data for developing higher capacity in house.

you still can't understand the basic thing...just give me one answer can india replace Russia with US in next 15-20 years..IMO a big NO....and the argument about trade is mutual here n technically more in favour of russia..india is buying all the high tech components for defence n energy from russia...what does india has to offer only money...can u say that if russia decides to do trade n have huge defence deals with pak today..india will terminate all the projects with russia..no...the point is it's india caught in russia's nest not the other way round...

yes russia needs money...n even if for 1 moment we assume that indian-russian projects are called off..there is a whole world out there ready to buy russian products....it will give the customers all over the globe a competitor, particularly to those who are relying on western products a new option will be available for them, that's how the basic economy works...n russia will be more than happy to sell its products to anyone....u truly need to understand that yes india is a big economy but world still doesn't revolve around india

few years back,indians also said that there will never be russian-pak military cooperation n defence deals, but see now things are moving gradually...pak doesn't expect overnight shift in russia's interests..bcoz pak is pragmatic in her approach not like india who thinks she holds everyone on her side..n no one can leave her ever...as u mentioned in ur post its interests which matter...if indian interests r shifting towards USA then what's stopping russian interests to shift...Modi ji think???
plz come out of ur super human indian dreams for once...u will find out some new realities in the world.

Pak also makes its N reactor...but not for power production....i think u understand what i mean

 

[Malik Usman]

Literal meaning of "Belarus" is "White Russia"

What's his business there ???? Anything important???

No he just came to say Hi........

 

[ali_raza]

Do you know what sort of publication is Chicago Tribune? You should do your homework before you start googling for random articles

If Afghanistan was this big a failure then no-one would be pledged 15 billion yesterday, no one is pledging that much for Somalia, Syria, Lebanon, you know why because people think its a lost cause.

Do better my friend

u said 8 billion the other day.who is the new donor today?