Foreign Minister: A little Blunt and Hard-mouthed

[Deviant]

Saw the latest interview on TV.
Stating “It was a very positive meeting. A step in the right direction,”

Also, some days ago at a public meeting, he has said that 'we did not kneeled down to start talks, They (India) came down to us... because our case was strong and justified'

My question here is is Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi a correct person to reduce the gap between India-Pakistan or is he simply increasing it?

I mean to me he clearly is news seller..
your views



and Please do not make this as a nationalist issue or something. This is a simple question without any intention of Rivalries to be brought in.

 

[Materialistic]

Well. i dont find anytruth in these stories. Since Shah Mehmod Qureshi is the most soft spoken person in the political scene of Pakistan. I can't believe he said so and never saw him giving such words in any conference or interview.

Please provide some source, a neutral one on these words.!!

If he had said so it would have made to the headlines in Pakistan and worldwide.

we did not kneeled down to start talks, They (India) came down to us.

Nothing wrong in the first bit since he is saying that we dint kneeled down, which doesnt mean that India did. And the rest part could be Inda came to us. Maybe you heard it wrong.

 

[Deviant]

Well. i dont find anytruth in these stories. Since Shah Mehmod Qureshi is the most soft spoken person in the political scene of Pakistan. I can't believe he said so and never saw him giving such words in any conference or interview.

Please provide some source, a neutral one on these words.!!

If he had said so it would have made to the headlines in Pakistan and worldwide.

well it made headlines in India [youtube]

[/youtube]

Nothing wrong in the first bit since he is saying that we dint kneeled down, which doesnt mean that India did. And the rest part could be Inda came to us. Maybe you heard it wrong.

well the context of his words implies that other side kneeled down.And at times when both countries do need to be together.

(that quote in my 1st post is an summary of his talk and not exact sentence)

 

[James007]

sometime it is hard to handle happiness

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

if you understand from past 1-2 (more like 40+) years Pakistan's position as far as dialogue with india is concerned --then you would have no confusion on this topic

we are always open to dialogue and moving forward; it seemed that indians were never interested in any meaningful peace talks

we were never the ones trying to bury issues underneath the rug.....

 

[Meengla]

Indeed, the current Pakistani FM is one of the most soft-spoken persons in the Zardari-led PPP govt. What he said was in the mood of electioneering-like 'Jilsa-Jaloos' where the politicians get carried away sometimes. It was not a 'measured' statement.
Having said that, there are unmistakeable signs that the current Pakistani officials--both military and civilians--have been rather blunt and even aggressive in tone for, say, about 6 months or so when it comes to India. Long gone is the 'backfoot' defensive posture post Mumbai tragedy. To me that is because the Pakistani establishment has rightly sensed that the Obama administration (and especially the Pentagon) is 'sold' on a greater Pakistani role in 'AfPak'. To illustrate the gloom in jingoistic-India one may want to visit the Bharat-Rakshak forum (which is one of the most intolerant and scary forums around, by the way).
Too bad, the India-Pakistan game is always about beating each other up given a chance. And these days it is Pakistan's chance to beat up India.

 

[James007]

today he was saying that"indian pm have agreed that india will not take any step to destablize pak".i think manmohan singh is waiting 4 another bash in parl house

 

[ajpirzada]

well if u confuse international politics with domestic arena then they all are confused characters. but if u take into account the domestic audience and then look at things, ull find him to be quite a seasoned person.

 

[TechLahore]

Good speech by Shah Mahmood. Agree with the tone and the position. Talks are in the interest of the sub continent. Pakistan is not in need of talks.

I think far more incendiary than this speech was the Indian Prime Minister's pronouncements:

BBC News - India says talks with Pakistan 'conditional'

It is understandable that Mr. Manmohan Singh needs to save face domestically, but Pakistan must not allow this posturing to stand. We must dispel all Indian insinuations that these talks are being conducted on India's terms, because they are not. Shah Mehmood did the exact right thing. Kashmir will be brought up as well as other issues. No talks without these subjects are useful or meaningful.

 

[James007]

Good speech by Shah Mahmood. Agree with the tone and the position. Talks are in the interest of the sub continent. Pakistan is not in need of talks.

I think far more incendiary than this speech was the Indian Prime Minister's pronouncements:

BBC News - India says talks with Pakistan 'conditional'

It is understandable that Mr. Manmohan Singh needs to save face domestically, but Pakistan must not allow this posturing to stand. We must dispel all Indian insinuations that these talks are being conducted on India's terms, because they are not. Shah Mehmood did the exact right thing. Kashmir will be brought up as well as other issues. No talks without these subjects are useful or meaningful.

india is intersted in pak sponsored terror in india,which is top most agenda,every indian expects from this govt to do so atleast.even on kashmir isuue govt has told that every thing accept freedom is acceptable,this is the utmost thing that india can digest.i dont find out the reason y govt is hanging this issue as they know indians will never accept kashmir to go free or under pak rule.india has done a lot for this region financially and frm others point of view

 

[EjazR]

Wait, the issue is not that India just wanted to stop dialogue because it felt like it. Its because dialogue and terrorist attacks do not go together.

You can't have militants infiltrating from Pakistan into India and then talk dialogue. Now Pakistani PM has given assurances that there will be no use of Pakistani soil for terrorism against India. So can we accept that there will be no terrorists attacks by Pakistani based militants in Kashmir? This is not the first time such an assurance was given.

Time will tell who was honest.

 

[ARCHON]

nice move towards normalcy of the relationship.

 

[TechLahore]

Wait, the issue is not that India just wanted to stop dialogue because it felt like it. Its because dialogue and terrorist attacks do not go together.

You can't have militants infiltrating from Pakistan into India and then talk dialogue. Now Pakistani PM has given assurances that there will be no use of Pakistani soil for terrorism against India. So can we accept that there will be no terrorists attacks by Pakistani based militants in Kashmir? This is not the first time such an assurance was given.

Time will tell who was honest.

Can we expect that Indian sponsored terrorism in Pakistan will stop?

Will India repeat incidents such as asking the Sri Lankan team to not go to Pakistan and then sponsoring a terrorist attack in Lahore when the Sri Lankans refused to adhere to Indian "advice"? It is high time that India stop arming and funding terrorists in northwest Pakistan and infiltrating agents across the eastern border if it wants peace for itself.

India's RAW behind Lahore Attack

RAW Agent Caught Near Pakistan Nuclear Site — Pro-Pakistan

RAW agent arrested from Quetta. - The Nation (Karachi, Pakistan) | HighBeam Research - FREE trial

RAW agent arrested from Lahore. - Free Online Library

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...gents-infiltration-sabotage-pakistan-raw.html

Once Indian sponsored terrorism in Pakistan stops, your own troubles will also subside.

I do agree with your last line though.

 

[James007]

Can we expect that Indian sponsored terrorism in Pakistan will stop?

Will India repeat incidents such as asking the Sri Lankan team to not go to Pakistan and then sponsoring a terrorist attack in Lahore when the Sri Lankans refused to adhere to Indian "advice"? It is high time that India stop arming and funding terrorists in northwest Pakistan and infiltrating agents across the eastern border if it wants peace for itself.

India's RAW behind Lahore Attack

RAW Agent Caught Near Pakistan Nuclear Site — Pro-Pakistan

RAW agent arrested from Quetta. - The Nation (Karachi, Pakistan) | HighBeam Research - FREE trial

RAW agent arrested from Lahore. - Free Online Library

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...gents-infiltration-sabotage-pakistan-raw.html

Once Indian sponsored terrorism in Pakistan stops, your own troubles will also subside.

I do agree with your last line though.

have u ever provided evidences of indias involvement even a single time.india has given u dossiers many times.even ur govt agreed that captured terrorist was ur country men.wat else u need !!!!!!!!!.i also with ur last line

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

have u ever provided evidences of indias involvement even a single time.india has given u dossiers many times.even ur govt agreed that captured terrorist was ur country men.wat else u need !!!!!!!!!.i also with ur last line

Which dossier points out Mr.Hafiz Saeed as a criminal?
Which dossier proves Pakistan funded Sikhs militants?
Also india isnt tht of a clean angel,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,who created mukti bhani?who talked about playing sindh card?why BLA bastards bluntly boast of recieving indian help and living in indian counsalates?
Why indian weapons,ammo and surgical equipment(meds) are captured from Pak-afgan border?
I say fuk the state sponsored terrorist?
If ur so sure india isnt behind terrorism say FUK THE HANDLERS OF TERRORISM IN PAKISTAN