What's new

India Not Mentally Prepared For Peace Talks

Sure, there is no point talking to Pakistan. Let the cold war continue, your country is suffering from widespread poverty & aids, it has 2 rivals, Pakistan and China. It has a seperatist struggle in one of it's regoins. Pakistan could hold the key to most of these, so the answer is in your face.

Brother Azad, as far as India is concerned, Pakistan holds the key to nothing. There is nothing we can realistically gain from engaging you. Yet again.

But let me take your points up individually.

Poverty - How? When Pakistan is poorer than India and close to being bankrupt? And if you're alluding to the peacenik line of peace between our countries meaning less money on defence and more money for our poor, sorry bro, but we still have our primary concern to prepare for in the form of China.

AIDS - How man? Got a vaccine breakthrough we don't know of yet?

Separatist struggle? You mean the Maoists? They are not separatists man. They are anarchists. And there is no lever that you have on them, much as some in your country would like to.

Yes, you could promise to stop bomb blasts and infiltrations into India, and we could return the favor if at all we are really involved (of which there is not a "shred of evidence"), but that is as far as it will go for now.

You can forget about Afghanistan. And you can forget about Kashmir.

Cheers, Doc
 
.
Have the India-Pakistan peace talks collapsed?

Are India and Pakistan back to square one as far as peace talks are concerned? Has the dialogue between South Asia's warring neighbours - which appeared to be limping back to some normalcy in the past six months - collapsed?

Triggering off this frenzied debate in India has been Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi's surprising outburst on Friday blaming India for the talks deadlock: "It seems India is not mentally prepared to engage in a dialogue," he said.

Mr Qureshi's feelings appear to have been provoked by familiar frustrations that have traditionally bedevilled ties between the two sides. Only this time, Pakistan appears to be complaining about India's inflexibility - meaning, among other things, a refusal to discuss thornier issues like Kashmir - impeding a fair dialogue. This is nothing new. India has always held Pakistan is obsessed with Kashmir; Pakistan says India cannot see beyond alleged Pakistani involvement in the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

What prompted Mr Qureshi's sudden broadside against India even as his Indian counterpart was getting ready to board the flight to Delhi? Many in Delhi say that the Pakistani establishment was seething after India's Home Secretary, GK Pillai, accused the Pakistani spy agency Inter-Services Intelligence of being involved in the Mumbai attacks on the eve of the talks. Some are already wondering whether the comments were deliberately aimed to derail the talks - Delhi's foreign policy pundits talks about hawks and doves in the government who are divided over the need for talks with Pakistan. On the other hand, most Indians believe that the Pakistani leadership is not doing enough to rein in militants launching attacks on India, and clerics indulging in hate campaigns against India.

What left most baffled was Mr Qureshi's personal attack on Mr Krishna, that he kept interrupting their meeting by taking calls from Delhi - something which many in India find a breach of diplomatic etiquette. Mr Krishna has denied the allegation.

But then nobody expected any dramatic breakthroughs in the Islamabad talks. The Indian media echoed the sentiment in their coverage today. One bland headline simply said: "India, Pakistan decide to remain engaged." That is how low expectations are in India about ties with its estranged sibling these days.

But browsing the Pakistani media, I came away with the impression that the frustration was higher on the other side of the border. The News, a Pakistan daily, lamented that the talks had "collapsed, not for the sheer absence of the right momentum, but because of India's inflexibility."

Clearly, Mr Qureshi's outburst will make it difficult for India to sell the talks to its people - a leader of the main opposition BJP, a Hindu nationalist party, has already demanded that talks be called off. But the two sides need to keep talking. Because when it comes to two nuclear-armed hostile neighbours, not talking can be more perilous for both. Pakistan's frustration with a stalemate should not surprise many. "Stalemate [between India and Pakistan] seems to be more attractive to each side than finding a solution," says Stephen Cohen, a regional specialist at the Brookings Institution, a US foreign policy think tank. The problem is that this prolonged, agonising stalemate hurts the people of both the countries, and ensures the region's future remains in jeopardy.
 
.
every act of any person is bassed on its interest and hope for gains.

Pakistan got Kashmir...........water..................balochistan..................saichen....................sir chreek.................etc etc etc....................to gain

What India has to gain from the talks????????
 
.
What India has to gain from the talks????????

Nothing.

All we can hope from Pakistan is to stop fingering India in India.

But if that's what we hope to achieve, then we are talking to the wrong Pakistanis.

And the right Pakistanis are never going to listen. Not to words at least.

So lets just back off. We've made the right diplomatic noises. Too bad it did not work.

Cheers, Doc
 
.
Indias vision of peace talk

Kashmir is Atoot Ang,
Siachen is atoot ang
Kargil is atoot ang
Azad Kasmir is atoot Ang
The lahore forte it atoot ang because Moughals made it
Afghanistan is ours
Hindi-BLA bhai bhai.


We want resolution of Mumbai terrorist attacks??
Kashmiro ko GEO TV dekhana band karo..!!

At this point Mehmood Qureshi gives an absolute WTF expression and ends the talks.



You made my Day :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
.
Wow vsdoc! r u on pot? that was some pretty lame analogy presented by you regarding the lions and all that national geographic commentary of yours. Well, to start with, you forgot a small little 'N' word (yep I mean the Nukes) in that attempt of yours to portray india as if clamping down on Pakistan's jugular. Well, if thats what you are pointing towards then I would like you to elaborate on it. Your statement also does support the fact that your country is deeply involved in all fomenting all sorts of trouble inside Pakistan.

You talk about bomb blasts in india? Well could you tell me how many have been going off over there compared to us? I hardly hear about any blasts in your country however the world comes to know every other day of a blast/s inside Pakistan. So, plz cut that crap.

One more thing you mentioned about Real Peace being brought about in the case one is not in a position to wage war?! Yep, I am sure Hitler must be proud of you. After all he was seeking peace against every other non Aryan nation I guess.

So, sorry to burst your bubble but your posts show immaturity filled with an air of sophistication.

A lot more can be said regarding your comments but frankly I ain't got much time, so I guess this shall suffice.
 
.
Survivor, it was dogs, and I did not see that on National Geographic. At any given time, we have had at least 5 dogs in my house, and like me, they all like a good fight.

The nukes will never be used, cause neither side is going to make the mistake of threatening the territorial integrity of the other overtly and directly my friend.

Do you know what happens to a frog when you drop it into a pan of boiling water?

He gets scalded and jumps out.

Do you know what happens to a frog sitting in a pan of water that is slowly brought to a boil?

Cheers, Doc
 
.
Let us anlyse things with a cool head politically .....

Why talk to Pakistan?

Do we like talking to them?

Are we going to get anything by talking to them?

Are we going to lose anything by not talking to them?

I am willing to accept the need for dialogue if the answer to any ONE of the above three is a YES.

Cheers, Doc


pakistan doesn't want to talk to india

india will gain transit route and a market for export by talking to pakistan!!! while paksitan gains nothing economically

SO YES INDIA WILL LOSE BY NOT TALKING TO US! we will loose or gain nothing! :coffee: :wave:
 
.
Well there in nothing Kashmir is talk
and talk about economic growth and other issues

Sure, we are not an industrial might but poor agricultural nation. Our survival depends on waters flowing through rivers which India would very much like to control. Therfore, Pakistan first Kashmir first. :pakistan::pakistan::pakistan::pakistan:
 
.
Oh please man! Enough of this transit havva!

Do you know the size of Indian exports in 2009 without Pakistani transit?

Export market? Pakistan? On credit or cash?

Cheers, Doc
 
.
no doubt "India Not Mentally Prepared For Peace Talks" because india knows it very well that we will nothing found by bilateral talk(totally fake)....
 
.
pakistan doesn't want to talk to india

india will gain transit route and a market for export by talking to pakistan!!! while paksitan gains nothing economically

SO YES INDIA WILL LOSE BY NOT TALKING TO US! we will loose or gain nothing! :coffee: :wave:

transit routes are just a myth..The mullahs of Iran are more than happy to give India transit route via chahabar. We are utter fools to have have helped them with centrifuge design.
 
.
Do you know what happens to a frog sitting in a pan of water that is slowly brought to a boil?

Cheers, Doc

Well you went through it, so you know better. Lol.

On another note, are you a veterinarian doctor, considering your expertise in animal experiments?
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom