What's new

India and Pakistan Are Edging Closer to War in 2020

There very well could be a war between India and Pakistan in 2020. Anything is possible. But it won't be started by India. Last year, India finally achieved the goal of many successive Indian governments, to repeal article 370 with the world's support. As of now the curfew is slowly being removed, internet is being restored, normalcy is returning, an terrorist attacks are at an all time low. India has defeated Pakistan, both diplomatically and strategically. So there is absolutely no reason for India to escalate to a war-like situation unless Pakistan does something first.
 
If Pakistan wouldn't have attacked Kashmir first, maybe Kashmir might have joined Pakistan sooner. And if Pakistan really wanted Kashmir, they should have attacked with full force. Pakistan could have taken whole of Kashmir and the case would have rested just like India took over Junagarh or Hyderabad. After attacking Kashmir, calling them unruly militants also did not help. Pakistan should have been decisive but wasn't. India was decisive in 1971. Who would have even thought Bangladesh would get independent? After all, East and West Pakistan were Muslim right? East and West Pakistan would have been a big headache for India. But Indira Gandhi was a strong PM who took the risky decision of declaring war on Pakistan with America breathing down her neck.





If Pakistan wouldn't have attacked Kashmir first, maybe Kashmir might have joined Pakistan sooner. And if Pakistan really wanted Kashmir, they should have attacked with full force. Pakistan could have taken whole of Kashmir and the case would have rested just like India took over Junagarh or Hyderabad. After attacking Kashmir, calling them unruly militants also did not help. Pakistan should have been decisive but wasn't. India was decisive in 1971. Who would have even thought Bangladesh would get independent? After all, East and West Pakistan were Muslim right? East and West Pakistan would have been a big headache for India. But Indira Gandhi was a strong PM who took the risky decision of declaring war on Pakistan with America breathing down her neck.




The creation of bangladesh was inevitable. They are nearly 3000 kms away from us and are racially the same as indians. They have your DNA. They are not racially Pakistani and have 0 Pakistani DNA. They have NOTHING in common with Pakistanis either. The creation of bangladesh was as certain as the creation of Pakistan. You CANNOT form a sustainable nation with a people who have NOTHING in common with you in terms of race, DNA, genetics, heritage, culture etc. Doesn't matter if it happened in 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011 or 2021 for the matter. The creation of bangladesh was ALWAYS a certainty.
 
The creation of bangladesh was inevitable. They are nearly 3000 kms away from us and are racially the same as indians. They have your DNA. They are not racially Pakistani and have 0 Pakistani DNA. They have NOTHING in common with Pakistanis either. The creation of bangladesh was as certain as the creation of Pakistan. You CANNOT form a sustainable nation with a people who have NOTHING in common with you in terms of race, DNA, genetics, heritage, culture etc. Doesn't matter if it happened in 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011 or 2021 for the matter. The creation of bangladesh was ALWAYS a certainty.

I strongly disagree. Let’s take your arguments seriously for a moment, What is common between Balochi and Punjabi culture or Sindhi and Pashtun culture? For your information Pakistani is not race.
it seems like you are genetics expert.
What is Pakistani DNA? What do you mean nothing common? First of all, they are a Muslim and their culture is same as Indian sub-continental culture. Since you are an expert on culture, please tell us specific reason for your above statements.
most pindos don’t know that Bengali Muslims struggle for the creation of Pakistan. They were most educated, cultured and civilized people.
Real struggle was done by Mohajir and Bengalis for the creation of Pakistan.
 
I strongly disagree. Let’s take your arguments seriously for a moment, What is common between Balochi and Punjabi culture or Sindhi and Pashtun culture? For your information Pakistani is not race.
it seems like you are genetics expert.
What is Pakistani DNA? What do you mean nothing common? First of all, they are a Muslim and their culture is same as Indian sub-continental culture. Since you are an expert on culture, please tell us specific reason for your above statements.
most pindos don’t know that Bengali Muslims struggle for the creation of Pakistan. They were most educated, cultured and civilized people.
Real struggle was done by Mohajir and Bengalis for the creation of Pakistan.




A Pakistani Punjabi, Pushtun, Balouchi or Persianised Nomadic tribesmen have FAR more in common with each other racially than they do with a bengali, 3000 kms away whom we have NEVER EVER shared ANYTHING in common with.
 
A Pakistani Punjabi, Pushtun, Balouchi or Persianised Nomadic tribesmen have FAR more in common with each other racially than they do with a bengali, 3000 kms away whom we have NEVER EVER shared ANYTHING in common with.

Those who Claim to be Baloch are the descendent of Assyrians. Pushtun are lost tribe of Jews. Who the hell care about Nomadic Tribes. What cave have you been living in? We are living in 21th century.
 
The creation of bangladesh was inevitable. They are nearly 3000 kms away from us and are racially the same as indians. They have your DNA. They are not racially Pakistani and have 0 Pakistani DNA. They have NOTHING in common with Pakistanis either. The creation of bangladesh was as certain as the creation of Pakistan. You CANNOT form a sustainable nation with a people who have NOTHING in common with you in terms of race, DNA, genetics, heritage, culture etc. Doesn't matter if it happened in 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011 or 2021 for the matter. The creation of bangladesh was ALWAYS a certainty.
Why didn't your leaders notice that at the time of Independence then?
Anyway, India is way too diverse than what West and East Pakistan was. We are still together even then. I have seen people of myriad colour tones in my company. If you are associating everything with race, then you are living in the 19th century where race politics was prominent.
Also, just imagine the tactical advantage Pakistan would have if you still had East Pakistan in 2020.
 
Why didn't your leaders notice that at the time of Independence then?
Anyway, India is way too diverse than what West and East Pakistan was. We are still together even then. I have seen people of myriad colour tones in my company. If you are associating everything with race, then you are living in the 19th century where race politics was prominent.
Also, just imagine the tactical advantage Pakistan would have if you still had East Pakistan in 2020.




During independence, the main concern was not being a part of india. All other concerns would have been dealt with in the coming years/decades.
 
There were things that happened prior to Mukti Bahini.



That did not apply for the princely states. Mental gymnastics done.
retard gymnastics incoming.
If you read what i said after that, I said it didn't apply to princely states.
Thus Hyderabad and Junagar, but your very admittance should go to Pakistan.

India did not Invade. it was Pakistani forces that Invaded Kashmir.
We pitched in only at the end after the request was made from then Maharaja of Kashmir.

other points are more or less correct.

Also, Kashmir problem will never solve. but, there is a good possibility that Asia will become Nuclear field on this issue.
India invaded after Pakistani forces, no one denies this.
The problem is what business did India have in getting involved?

If your point is that "India did not invade, so it's the good guy"
Then by that very logic, India DID invade Hyderabad, Junagar , Goa and many many other places.
Thus making India the bad guy on a much larger scale.

This is what our forefathers warned us about when they said 'incomplete knowledge is dangerous'.
1. True, as it should have been, but there was no agreement.

2. Neither was it feasible for any princely state to stay independent.

3. If you wanna compare Kashmir to Junagarh, I suggest you look at timeline. It was in September that Pakistan actually accepted the accession of Junagarh. Kashmir war started in Oct end.
The main reason for this was to use it as a bargaining chip for J&K. Even after this, India didn't sent military to Junagarh, but to its vassal states and Nawab had threatened them against joining India, which they wanted to do. Nawab didn't meet VP Menon, who went there to discuss issue and when things deteriorated with the locals, he fled to Pakistan. Soon after a plebiscite was held and 91% locals chose India.

4. India did not invade Kashmir, infact, even before Sheikh came to power, India maintained diplomatic relations with the state and friendly relations with Sheikh. Even supported freedom. But it was Pak's acceptance of Junagarh and Travancore's request for accession that made Patel change his mind, as you yourself say that Patel at the start was against taking kashmir forcefully.

5. It was the tribals (whether with or without support of Pak state and military, although it does seem surprising that they would get modern weapons, have knowledge of military tactics without state support) who invaded kashmir and that's when Maharaja asked for India's assistance in protecting the land from the invasion for which India laid down the condition for accession.

Blaming the mess in Kashmir entirely on India saying 'its coz India INVADED' is incorrect. Im not saying India hasn't been at fault in kashmir, but India certainly didn't start the mess.

True, complete knowledge that India indoctrinates it's people with has brought us to the brink of Nuclear war.

I am sorry, I didn't really read what you wrote as it is the same nonsense I have already addressed.
Non of you Indians ever want to address the question of what the Kashmiri democratic aspirations are.
Kashmir is for Kashmiris and they have a democratic and human right to self determination.
You know for a fact that they will choose Pakistan or independence over you, so you people do mental gymnastic to justify your genocidal regime.
That is really it. End of story.
 
But they weren't dealt with properly were they?




Probably not but the main concern was getting a safe space to preserve one's own unique race, culture, heritage, religion and way of life. Away from those we wish us harm, oppression and genocide.
 
Probably not but the main concern was getting a safe space to preserve one's own unique race, culture, heritage, religion and way of life. Away from those we wish us harm, oppression and genocide.
Congrats on getting your safe place then.
 
retard gymnastics incoming.
If you read what i said after that, I said it didn't apply to princely states.
Thus Hyderabad and Junagar, but your very admittance should go to Pakistan.

There was also the contiguous area clause. Which is why Junagarh and Hyderabad does not go to Pakistan
 
There was also the contiguous area clause. Which is why Junagarh and Hyderabad does not go to Pakistan
Show me where the rules said "princely states get a vote to choose India, Pakistan, or independence... but only if they continuous"

You are making up fake facts to justify your bad behavior.

No way how you slice it, India is wrong here.
They were either wrong to invade Kashmir, or they were wrong to invade Hyderabad and Junagar.

Problem with Indians is that their scientifically proven low IQ does not let them see this fact.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom