Pakistan's growing arsenal NYT editorial

[nForce]

Dialogue is conducted on a set agenda, based upon the wish to achieve desired objectives. Giving and receiving certificates of good conduct have no place in it. What matters is that the objectives are achieved. and in order to do so, the parties need to be realistic and indulge in some give-and-take. That's how politics works. And that is how international diplomacy works as well. At least let the Indian government make an offer that is genuine enough. Then they can be truthful in their claim that they tried, not otherwise.

As I said in my last post. There is a time frame for everything and it also matters to whom you are offering and what.

India had offered a plebiscite back in 1948. Right now, there is no offer and I will be surprised to see if there will ever be any, after Mumbai.

 

[iioal malik]

How old are you?

When I quoted the word forward..it should have given you clear impression about my age.either way your question is irrelevant for this thread

 

[Ifteqar Aisan]

As I said..This is an old argument and has run its course a thousand times on pdf or elsewhere in newsrooms too. There have been umpteen bilateral talks and it has always ended up in disaster...mysteriously cross border firing increases..or there is a Kargil invasion...or there is a terrorist attack on Indian soil...or there is a dharna kind of drama where your establishment threatens to takeover if the friendly overtures aren't cut off.

Hafiz Sayeed threatens that there can be no compromise on Kashmir and the civilian govt backs off..

The issue is with the number of power centers ..The right power center is the Pakistani army and India as policy does not engage with it...neither do the khakhis want a resolution because it deprives them of their bread and butter..its clearly understood that the pakistani army runs pakistan's foreign policy..and until they come on board directly for talks. .wasting time on the civilian setup...is just that...A waste of time.

For e.g. whatever happened in Ufa when your civilian setup signed on the dotted kine that terrorism will be the first point of discussion..which was overridden by your establishment the moment it came in the open..hence..discussion gets cut off.

Manmohan, Vajpayee, Gujral all made their attempts with talks..but had to face defeat. The present Indian govt has made it a policy that only when pakistan abandons it's anti India terror proxies will they be interested in any talks. .and that's their stand.

The only way things can move forward is if both parties see some gain in it. Let's do a thought experiment. Assume for a second, regardless of the fact that the Army calls the shots in Pakistan, that the government had a mandate to talk. Suppose the Pakistani government realizes that it needs to put Kashmir on the backburner. Shouldn't the Indian government do the same about "must stop all terrorist activities before talking"? If they don't talk, who will determine whether Pakistan has taken sufficient action? There has hardly been a major terrorist attack in India in the past year. So when will the Indian government decide enough has been done? Two years without any attack, five years? And then, if there is a single incident after the timeframe, and they were getting ready to talk, then what? Will they then abandon the process? This is what has been happening till now. And it works only to the perceived advantage of the military establishment in Pakistan and the terrorists who thrive due to this lack of engagement. Indian policy, ironically, benefits only those it so clearly sees as inimical to its interests.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Our combined hatred of the Jew, the Hindu, the Christian, the Shia, the Sikh, the liberal, the atheist, the secular, the homosexual, etc. etc. etc. is never-ending. We need to limit that list or soon we will run out of people to hate.

Who I like or hate is completely irrelevant. The point is that Pakistan needs to become super strong militarily by any means whatsoever. I could not care less what the rest of the world thinks of us. They mean nothing to us. The Iraqis and Libyans did. Look at what happened to them. I did'nt see the rest of the world come to their aid.

 

[deepak.chauhan2312]

Kashmir is the Nuclear flash-point between Pakistan and india. Resolve this issue as early as possible considering sufferings of people of Kashmir.
One more suggestion for India is to reduce conventional military strength to 1:1 against Pakistan.
Develop your economy and focus on regional peace through cooperation and peaceful resolution of disputes.

then what about asking china to start this noble cause of reducing army 1:1

 

[Ifteqar Aisan]

As I said in my last post. There is a time frame for everything and it also matters to whom you are offering and what.

India had offered a plebiscite back in 1948. Right now, there is no offer and I will be surprised to see if there will ever be any, after Mumbai.

Then you are playing right into the hands of those in Pakistan who say that Kashmir is the "core" issue. The Indian response should have been, "we will talk about everything else and concede as much as possible, but not on Kashmir".

As I said in my last post. There is a time frame for everything and it also matters to whom you are offering and what.

India had offered a plebiscite back in 1948. Right now, there is no offer and I will be surprised to see if there will ever be any, after Mumbai.

Then you are playing right into the hands of those in Pakistan who say that Kashmir is the "core" issue. The Indian response should have been, "we will talk about everything else and concede as much as possible, but not on Kashmir".

 

[Albatross]

Coooooool. Never knew we are this strong and fearsome .

 

[nForce]

Then you are playing right into the hands of those in Pakistan who say that Kashmir is the "core" issue. The Indian response should have been, "we will talk about everything else and concede as much as possible, but not on Kashmir".

Its simple. Unless there is closure, unless perpetrators are brought to justice, nothing is happening.

 

[Ifteqar Aisan]

Who I like or hate is completely irrelevant. The point is that Pakistan needs to become super strong militarily by any means whatsoever. I could not care less what the rest of the world thinks of us. They mean nothing to us. The Iraqis and Libyans did. Look at what happened to them. I did'nt see the rest of the world come to their aid.

Too much hatred for the "other" created internal strife in Iraq and Libya, that lead to their current state. Also, who told you that the Libyan's or Iraqis cared about world opinion any more than Pakistanis do? Learning all the wrong lessons is not helpful.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Too much hatred for the "other" created internal strife in Iraq and Libya, that lead to their current state. Also, who told you that the Libyan's or Iraqis cared about world opinion any more than Pakistanis do? Learning all the wrong lessons is not helpful.

They disarmed themselves to please the West. Saddam Hussein saw the white man as his god. The result of that tragedy will be there for many 1000s of years to come. I don't want the same fate for the Pakistani race. These people want every Muslim country to be militarily impotent.

 

[nForce]

Who I like or hate is completely irrelevant. The point is that Pakistan needs to become super strong militarily by any means whatsoever. I could not care less what the rest of the world thinks of us. They mean nothing to us. The Iraqis and Libyans did. Look at what happened to them. I did'nt see the rest of the world come to their aid.

Can you even afford it ? Do you have any idea where your economy is going ? IMF grudgingly agreed for yet another round of loan, with the suggestion of devaluation of Pakistani currency by a figure as high as 20%. Do you know what that means ?

It means eating grass, this time, literally.

 

[Slayer786]

Kashmir is the root cause of all the ills of Pakistan...you have a choice. It is up to you.

And we have made that choice long time ago in 1947. We are two different people and would like to stay apart with Kashmiris given the right to choose who they want to live with. India has Western countries and their media to support it(economic benefits, containing China), that's why NYT will write articles like that.
We really don't care now do we. Now if you guys have a problem let's settle this. We are always ready my Indian friend.

 

[illusion8]

The only way things can move forward is if both parties see some gain in it. Let's do a thought experiment. Assume for a second, regardless of the fact that the Army calls the shots in Pakistan, that the government had a mandate to talk. Suppose the Pakistani government realizes that it needs to put Kashmir on the backburner. Shouldn't the Indian government do the same about "must stop all terrorist activities before talking"? If they don't talk, who will determine whether Pakistan has taken sufficient action? There has hardly been a major terrorist attack in India in the past year. So when will the Indian government decide enough has been done? Two years without any attack, five years? And then, if there is a single incident after the timeframe, and they were getting ready to talk, then what? Will they then abandon the process? This is what has been happening till now. And it works only to the perceived advantage of the military establishment in Pakistan and the terrorists who thrive due to this lack of engagement. Indian policy, ironically, benefits only those it so clearly sees as inimical to its interests.

1. What's the point of assuming? When it's crystal clear that this government doesn't run the foreign policy..wouldn't you agree that its a waste of exercise in engaging the civilian setup if you were in India's position?.

2. There are clear beacons or landmarks of performance available when it comes to terrorism - Dawood, Hafiz Sayeed, Lakhvi, Tiger memon, Bhatkal brothers of IM, Mohd azar of JUM, Salauddin of HUM..A few khalistani leaders etc. Action against them will count as action against anti India terrorism and will have a declining effect against terrorism.

The first step of course would be to accept that pakistani soil is being used for terrorism against India ..and these individuals are to be tried for cross border terrorism.

 

[waz]

Pakistan isn't going to disarm, rapidly curb what it is doing etc. Why should it? No country can guarantee another's security, history is full of such broken promises.
I would recommend that the military build does take a slight step back, with a focus on the economy.

 

[nForce]

And we have made that choice long time ago in 1947. We are two different people and would like to stay apart with Kashmiris given the right to choose who they want to live with. India has Western countries and their media to support it(economic benefits, containing China), that's why NYT will write articles like that.
We really don't care now do we. Now if you guys have a problem let's settle this. We are always ready my Indian friend.

ohh.. you have absolutely no idea about history of your own country.