Mostly Pakistani nationals fighting for ISIS in Afghanistan: Taliban

[pakistani342]

not fully control Baluchistan.

So post a link which shows rebellion in Baluchistan or talks about Baluchistan as an ungovernable territory under British rule close to 1947. Let's see it.

Further post a link which says Pakistan forcibly annexed Baluchistan.

Oh and please from a news source of record: NYT, Telegraph, etc.

 

[hkdas]

you stupid idiot -- post a single reference where the British didn't control Baluchistan -- what stupidity

read my post.... british raj don't had full control of Baluchistan region.... and there was a strong resistance from natives against the british rule in that area. just like resistance in afghanistan british had to face.

 

[pakistani342]

read my post.... british raj don't had full control of Baluchistan region.... and there was a strong resistance from natives against the british rule in that area. just like resistance in afghanistan british had to face.

Post sources to back your claims up -- if you are an eminent historian then reveal yourself

You have made two claims -- let's see some scholarship to back them up -- the one which interests me is that Pakistan forcibly annexed Baluchistan

Or please: shut up

 

[nForce]

Slight defect -- before you annexed them they were not internal India
Further my point was -- what is good for India might possibly be good for Pakistan?

And who wrote the rule book ? I want to meet that guy..

Well the answer is in your statement -- so far ... so if tomorrow it was a success it would OK?
The future is always in motion: said Yoda?

So India was a failure in the 1950s -- maybe Pakistan will succeed in 2050?

success is only transient -- Indians were snake charmers in the 1950 (according to your Union Minister) now they are leaders in the computing revolution

The history of Pakistan does not start with 1947 nor does it end with the recognition of the Taliban government.

Nations fall, nations stand, nations fall again, they stand again

Change is the law of nature, change is inevitable, but we cannot always predict the future. One just needs to ensure he is on the right side of history, which is again, written by the survivors.
My points were specific to your questions raised in relation to Goa or Sikkim or Hyderabad.

Morality is very important to me -- may not be to you

A powerless can always take refuge in morality, because he is incapable of doing anything. If that same person becomes powerful, he will also do things which will be considered immoral by the third powerless guy. With all your books in the library, you still could not figure out this very basic human nature ?

And for that matter you cannot even take refuge in that. Your country's history begins with an attempt of forceful annexation of then an independent state. October 1947 it was, when Pakistan attacked Kashmir ?Probably the new map of Pakistan was not even out of the printing-presses then and you are doing military adventurism from that time.

So, sorry, we don't want a Pakistani or for that matter anybody what we should do with Goa or Sikkim, and that, without even going into the history the then circumstances of each of these individual cases.

 

[hkdas]

Post sources to back your claims up -- if you are an eminent historian then reveal yourself

You have made two claims -- let's see some scholarship to back them up -- the one which interests me is that Pakistan forcibly annexed Baluchistan

Or please: shut up

http://www.nihcr.edu.pk/Downloads/The_Baloch.pdf

The ruler of the Khanate of Balochistan, Mir Ahmad Yar Than, was forced to sign the document of accession. The Khan was not an absolute monarch; he was required to act under the provisions of the Rawaj (the Baloch constitution) and had no authority to sign the merger document without the consent of the parliament. The Khan in his autobiography has admitted that he violated his mandate by signing the merger document.
TheBaloch National Resistance (1948)

http://www.nihcr.edu.pk/Downloads/The_Baloch.pdf
The Baloch and Balochistan: A Historical Account from the Beginning to the ... - Naseer Dashti - Google Books

 

[pakistani342]

And who wrote the rule book ? I want to meet that guy..

There is no rule applied here -- I was finding flaws in your statements.

Change is the law of nature, change is inevitable, but we cannot always predict the future. One just needs to ensure he is on the right side of history, which is again, written by the survivors.
My points were specific to your questions raised in relation to Goa or Sikkim or Hyderabad.

Aaa, so that is the point I was making? were you not crying foul?

A powerless can always take refuge in morality, because he is incapable of doing anything. If that same person becomes powerful, he will also do things which will be considered immoral by the third powerless guy. With all your books in the library, you still could not figure out this very basic human nature ?

This is a stupid statement by all accounts -- not worthy of a response -- I'd try telling the Jewish people that on the account of Hitler -- it is a coward who makes such statements from behind an Internet handle

And for that matter you cannot even take refuge in that. Your country's history begins with an attempt of forceful annexation of then an independent state. October 1947 it was, when Pakistan attacked Kashmir ?Probably the new map of Pakistan was not even out of the printing-presses then and you are doing military adventurism from that time.

And, yes, if forceful annexation of Hyderabad was correct then so was the forceful annexation of Kashmir -- in law the principal is called equity -- or in common parlance "unclean hands"

So, sorry, we don't want a Pakistani or for that matter anybody what we should do with Goa or Sikkim, and that, without even going into the history the then circumstances of each of these individual cases.

Sorry but no -- international conventions, norms do not comply with what you have said -- for example Germany pays reparations to the state of Israel -- if what you said is true there would be no basis for it.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

indian is not middling in any affairs of sovereign states. what you are saying is your army propaganda.

we didn't annexed any one after 1947.

you better learn how Pakistan got Baluchistan. why they still resist pakistan occupation of Baluchistan.

Lol "occupation." Have you seen Quetta on Independence Day? Spare yourself the trouble and stop making yourself look like an ignorant fool which uses and gains false info from INDIAN media. Possibly the most unreliable media in the world. So please if ur going to come and contribute to a Pakistani forum you better have at least good back up for your complete BS claims.

 

[hkdas]

Lol "occupation." Have you seen Quetta on Independence Day? Spare yourself the trouble and stop making yourself look like an ignorant fool which uses and gains false info from INDIAN media. Possibly the most unreliable media in the world. So please if ur going to come and contribute to a Pakistani forum you better have at least good back up for your complete BS claims.

i already posted some links.. pls read it/

 

[pakistani342]

http://www.nihcr.edu.pk/Downloads/The_Baloch.pdf

The ruler of the Khanate of Balochistan, Mir Ahmad Yar Than, was forced to sign the document of accession. The Khan was not an absolute monarch; he was required to act under the provisions of the Rawaj (the Baloch constitution) and had no authority to sign the merger document without the consent of the parliament. The Khan in his autobiography has admitted that he violated his mandate by signing the merger document.
TheBaloch National Resistance (1948)

http://www.nihcr.edu.pk/Downloads/The_Baloch.pdf
The Baloch and Balochistan: A Historical Account from the Beginning to the ... - Naseer Dashti - Google Books

This is even shameful even for you? actually no it is shameful for me that I'm wasting my time with you.

Do you even know what a news source of record is? see here

 

[WaLeEdK2]

i already posted some links.. pls read it/

Lol links. Go see Quetta and then talk.

 

[Hiptullha]

And for that matter you cannot even take refuge in that. Your country's history begins with an attempt of forceful annexation of then an independent state. October 1947 it was, when Pakistan attacked Kashmir ?Probably the new map of Pakistan was not even out of the printing-presses then and you are doing military adventurism from that time.

India's military adventures didn't begin far after that, did they? If Pakistan was dirty, India was completely filthy. We proposed an arbitration or a plebiscite in Kashmir. Hyderabad was seized and dismantled, with the Indian govt. giving free hand to the Hindu villagers in the state to slaughter Muslims at will.

 

[pakistani342]

i already posted some links.. pls read it/

Sorry you have just disgraced yourself -- please see my response

In case you missed it -- let me paste:

This is even shameful even for you? actually no it is shameful for me that I'm wasting my time with you.

Do you even know what a news source of record is? see here

 

[hkdas]

This is even shameful even for you? actually no it is shameful for me that I'm wasting my time with you.

what the hell are you talking man?? i posted the links you wanted.. now what?? can't accept the facts??

 

[pakistani342]

what the hell are you talking man?? i posted the links you wanted.. now what?? can't accept the facts??

I asked you to post from News Sources of Record -- as would be required for any serious research -- do yourself a favor and educate yourself you idiot

I guess the Indian education system is not all what it's cranked up to be,

 

[hkdas]

I asked you to post from News Sources of Record -- do yourself a favor and educate yourself you idiot

did any major news paper care about balugistan's history?? for them it don't have any news value.