'I had the honour of flying your brave son'

[illusion8]

Uhmm,,, once again, does pakistan only consist of said persons?

Not only those people - a few more who have been silenced - i mean if you cannot see that "that" people constitute 3 pillars of your four estates.

 

[Bratva]

Not only those people - a few more who have been silenced - i mean if you cannot see that "that" people constitute 3 pillars of your four estates.

3 pillar means Institutions, not individuals, individual come and go institution still remain there . Would you like to come to Pakistan so you can see by yourself GEO is still broadcasting all around Pakistan and Geo isn't only media house in Pakistan. So If a man comparing GEO = Only media in Pakistan, Is he fit for debate one might wonder?

Some outdated info which I had to correct. Ch Ifthikhar is EX CJ now. Hussain HAQQANI is US citizen. His opinion doesn't count since he shunned Pakistani passport. It's better you come up with a little more sane argument.

 

[janon]

But indians didn't have stack in Balochistan nor it is disputed area which India claim is its Hence comparing balochistan with kashmir is comparing apple and oranges.

There are many people who dispute it and want it to be independent from Pak, which is why there is a conflict there.

 

[Bratva]

There are many people who dispute it and want it to be independent from Pak, which is why there is a conflict there.

Which is but does India claim balochistan is it's territory? No so why compare Kashmir which is a disputed territory b/w two countries with an area which is proper part of some country. Like you have maoists problems, tamil problems. Does it mean we have to compare kashmir problem with those insurgencies now?

 

[INDIC]

Which is but does India claim balochistan is it's territory? No so why compare Kashmir which is a disputed territory b/w two countries with an area which is properly part of some country. Like you have maoists problems, tamil problems. Does it mean we have to compare kashmir problem with those insurgencies now?

None of those territories were annexed by India unlike some territories in your country was annexed.

 

[Bratva]

None of those territories were annexed by India unlike some territories in your country was annexed.

Now now, another ignorant post Is Qalat === whole balochistan == whole kashmir or Qalat a part of balochistan???? I will not go in to details because some historical accuraies wala thread perfectly describes balochistan dynamics


Btw IIRC, Indian Hyderabad and Junagadh were also annexed, so what?

 

[janon]

Which is but does India claim balochistan is it's territory? No so why compare Kashmir which is a disputed territory b/w two countries with an area which is properly part of some country. Like you have maoists problems, tamil problems. Does it mean we have to compare kashmir problem with those insurgencies now?

So now it's because Pak claims it? Earlier your tune was all about what the people of Kashmir wanted, and you said it's that what matters. Suddenly the neighbour's interests enters the picture? So it's not about any 'azadi' BS, but about wanting to take our state, huh? Finally the cat is out of the bag.

For this new tune, my reply is simple. You won't get Indian states from India. Not as long as the union of India exists. And we don't care that you covete our territory - it's ours.

BTW, we don't have "tamil problems". That's in Sri Lanka, a different country.

Now now, another ignorant post Is Qalat === whole balochistan == whole kashmir or Qalat a part of balochistan???? I will not go in to details because some historical accuraies wala thread perfectly describes balochistan dynamics


Btw IIRC, Indian Hyderabad and Junagadh were also annexed, so what?

And Kashmir acceeded to India. If annexation is OK, accession should be even better. If you can say "so what" to annexation, then you should say "excellent" to accession.

 

[gslv mk3]

Negative. Do not try to be funny I was just pointing out the wrong usage of the word but if you are going to continue to use it by all means but to say that our shahids who fit the actual meaning are less noble than your fake concocted version is an insult, if we must be frank.

Anyway I think two pages on the subject is enough.



Read my previous post where I answered you, like I said make up your mind.

Mr Genius,there are words similar to shaheed (in pronunciation) in other semitic languages too.And Arabic being newest of all semitic languages,it probably inherited it from some older semitic language-It was not an 'islamic invention'

 

[Bratva]

So now it's because Pak claims it? Earlier your tune was all about what the people of Kashmir wanted, and you said it's that what matters. Suddenly the neighbour's interests enters the picture? So it's not about any 'azadi' BS, but about wanting to take our state, huh? Finally the cat is out of the bag.

For this new tune, my reply is simple. You won't get Indian states from India. Not as long as the union of India exists. And we don't care that you covete our territory - it's ours.

BTW, we don't have "tamil problems". That's in Sri Lanka, a different country.

And Kashmir acceeded to India. If annexation is OK, accession should be even better. If you can say "so what" to annexation, then you should say "excellent" to accession.

That's like a second choice of kashmiri's. Are you so ignorant of ground realities of Indian occupied kashmir? Some want Independent kashmir, Some want to be Part of Pakistan. I'm echoing both sentiments that exist in kashmir.

Come on,,, Kashmir is forcibly your territory and you don't know even what it's people want or wishes? What kind of Indian are you?

I was in a hurry, not tamil problems but ULFA (ASSAM)

And I would have said excellent to accession If Kashmiri were OKAY with it which they are not and continue to show their resolve to be liberated from indian occupation.

 

[INDIC]

Now now, another ignorant post Is Qalat === whole balochistan == whole kashmir or Qalat a part of balochistan???? I will not go in to details because some historical accuraies wala thread perfectly describes balochistan dynamics


Btw IIRC, Indian Hyderabad and Junagadh were also annexed, so what?

Update your history, Diwan Shahnawaz Bhutto, daddy of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto invited Indian troops to take control of Junagadh and if you have any complain ask the Bhutto family why they did that, not us. Anyway, there is no problem nor there was any revolt in Junagadh and Hyderabad when they merged in India unlike the revolt of Prince Karim Khan after the conquest of Kalat, so no need to rope in them in the discussion.

 

[janon]

That's like a second choice of kashmiri's. Are you so ignorant of ground realities of Indian occupied kashmir? Some want Independent kashmir, Some want to be Part of Pakistan. I'm echoing both sentiments that exist in kashmir.

Come on,,, Kashmir is forcibly your territory and you don't know even what it's people want or wishes? What kind of Indian are you?

I was in a hurry, not tamil problems but ULFA (ASSAM)

And I would have said excellent to accession If Kashmiri were OKAY with which they are not and continue to show their resolve to be liberated from indian occupation.

...as do Balochis. We can play this game all day.

At the end of the day, no sovereign nation simply gives up its territories simply because a few people demand it. Every nation state tries its best to crush insurgencies, whether home grown or foreign funded. The oath that every member of the United States' seven uniformed services takes, has a line about defending the country against all enemies, domestic and foreign. And they have done that too, beginning right from the 'Whiskey rebellion', which the fledgling US army crushed with an iron hand. (George Washington became the first and last POTUS to personally lead a battle, charging on a galloping horse with a sword and rifle).

Also, as I explained several times before, only a few Kashmiris want independence, and even fewer want to be part of Pakistan. (I hardly need to point out that your country is not exactly the most desirable place on earth as of now.) There are millions of Kashmiris who are happy being Indians.

 

[Bratva]

...as do Balochis. We can play this game all day.

At the end of the day, no sovereign nation simply gives up its territories simply because a few people demand it. Every nation state tries its best to crush insurgencies, whether home grown or foreign funded. The oath that every member of the United States' seven uniformed services takes, has a line about defending the country against all enemies, domestic and foreign. And they have done that too, beginning right from the 'Whiskey rebellion', which the fledgling US army crushed with an iron hand. (George Washington became the first and last POTUS to personally lead a battle, on a galloping horse with a sword and rifle).

Also, as I explained several times before, only a few Kashmiris want independence, and even fewer want to be part of Pakistan. (I hardly need to point out that your country is not exactly the most desirable place on earth as of now.) There are millions of Kashmiris who are happy being Indians.

Update your history, Diwan Shahnawaz Bhutto, daddy of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto invited Indian troops to take control of Junagadh and if you have any complain ask the Bhutto family why they did that, not us. Anyway, there is no problem nor there was any revolt in Junagadh and Hyderabad when they merged in India unlike the revolt of Prince Karim Khan after the conquest of Kalat, so no need to rope in them in the discussion.

Balochistan = ULFA. No question on acceding those integral lands.But Kashmir is not integral part of India if it were, Pakistan would not had some part of it with us.

Update your history, Diwan Shahnawaz Bhutto, daddy of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto invited Indian troops to take control of Junagadh and if you have any complain ask the Bhutto family why they did that, not us. Anyway, there is no problem nor there was any revolt in Junagadh and Hyderabad when they merged in India unlike the revolt of Prince Karim Khan after the conquest of Kalat, so no need to rope in them in the discussion.

Errrr,,,, so what was 5 day war that Nizaam fought with Indian army?

and hyderabad had 85 percent hindu population and those hindu population wasn't living as tribe let alone warrior tribes who ferociously defends their land.

 

[INDIC]

Errrr,,,, so what was 5 day war that Nizaam fought with Indian army?

That was a war, not an insurgency and there was no revolt after the police action, everyone was happy with the liberation.

Balochistan = ULFA. No question on acceding those integral lands.But Kashmir is not integral part of India if it were, Pakistan would not had some part of it with us.

Assam wasn't annexed by India unlike Kalat, it was legally inherited by India as a province and Assam was the part of India's freedom struggle under popular Congress Leader Gopinath Bordoloi.

 

[Bratva]

That was a war, not an insurgency and there was no revolt after the police action, everyone was happy with the liberation.

Emmm,, would you read that post again. Adding something more. Just like hindu population of Hyderabad was content with Indian liberating it due to supposed massacre of hindus by muslims. Likewise similar things were being perpetuated By dogra raaj in kashmir where Hindu Muslim civil conflict were brewing and Kashmir being muslim majority area, Pakistan had every right to did what India did with Hyderabad.

That was a war, not an insurgency and there was no revolt after the police action, everyone was happy with the liberation.



Assam wasn't annexed by India unlike Kalat, it was legally inherited by India as a province and Assam was the part of India's freedom struggle under popular Congress Leader Gopinath Bordoloi.

So was Balochistan which was legally inherited to us. Like I said, Qalat is not whole balochistan but a part of balochistan

 

[NKVD]

**** these News channels of they never show such things in Even Main stream media.Election BS all they worry about Trp's so much never take stories like these in public Viewshame on them