US worried over Pak perception of India's role in Afghanistan

[TechLahore]

Country who have more than 170 million muslim population
(I think second biggest) is not a member of this muslim group called OIC so do you think its credible ?????

Just go and watch the record of those countries who are member you find out answer of your question.

57 countries getting together on any issue are indeed credible. And by the way, India tried to enter the OIC... it has been trying since the Rabat conference. Each and every attempt has been frustrated. At Rabat the Jordanians, Moroccans, Saudis and others prevented the Indian envoy from even physically being present.

As for the "record of those countries", don't get this desperate. Your own record isn't anything to write home about.

 

[India Rising]

[/COLOR]

By "tangential" if you mean solid logic with facts that tears the original claim apart, then yes, I wholeheartedly agree.

As for when Kashmir came up last at the UN, here's a link from the Times of India:

Pakistan raises Kashmir issue at UN committee, India reacts strongly - The Times of India

Also, this question you are asking wreaks of extreme ignorance by the way. The issue is not that Pakistan needs to get another UN resolution on Kashmir. The issue is that the current UN resolutions are not being adhered to. Right or wrong, Pakistan has decided that the best way to support Kashmiris is to do exactly that. Support Kashmiris. In 63 years of independence, India has not been able to extinguish the fire in Kashmir and it is one of the world's most heavily militarized regions, with something like 600,000 Indian troops sitting there.

You will do well to go back and read the original post made by your Indian friend. He claimed that the UN no longer recognized Kashmir on their "list", that the OIC had not recently condemned India on Kashmir and that Iran didn't matter. Those three statements are all bullshit. I addressed them by posting links to dozens of news stories. If in your disappointment at seeing all this, the best you can come up with is your post above, then I'm done with the exchange with you.

UN, OIC and Iran donot matter to us....you know why ???

there is no political, economical and diplomatic pressure exerted on India by these forces... the business is as usual..

it is economy stupid-- Bill clinton

and their magnitude is of so low level that only pakistan hears that

 

[TechLahore]

UN, OIC and Iran donot matter to us....you know why ???

there is no political, economical and diplomatic pressure exerted on India by these forces...

and their magnitude is of so low level that only pakistan hears that

Janay do yaar. You're now off in la la land. Go back and read that article I posted which has your Foreign Sec waxing eloquent about how critical Iran is to India.

What percentage of your oil do you get from OIC countries, by the way?

 

[CaptainJackSparrow]

[/COLOR]

By "tangential" if you mean solid logic with facts that tears the original claim apart, then yes, I wholeheartedly agree.

Most certainly, I did not mean that. What I meant is as follows:

hardly touching a matter; peripheral:

definition of tangential from Oxford Dictionaries Online

I'm sorry but I didn't know oxford was banned in Pakistan.

As for when Kashmir came up last at the UN, here's a link from the Times of India:

Pakistan raises Kashmir issue at UN committee, India reacts strongly - The Times of India

Since you seem to exhibit an appreciable skill in English language, I request you to kindly spot the difference between the following two sentences:

1. Bringing up a topic for discussion in a meeting.

2. The topic being adopted by the members for discussion.

What you are referring to, is '1' while what I was referring to is '2'.

Now you know why I called your logic 'tangential'.

Also, this question you are asking wreaks of extreme ignorance by the way. The issue is not that Pakistan needs to get another UN resolution on Kashmir. The issue is that the current UN resolutions are not being adhered to. Right or wrong, Pakistan has decided that the best way to support Kashmiris is to do exactly that. Support Kashmiris. In 63 years of independence, India has not been able to extinguish the fire in Kashmir and it is one of the world's most heavily militarized regions, with something like 600,000 Indian troops sitting there.

You will do well to go back and read the original post made by your Indian friend. He claimed that the UN no longer recognized Kashmir on their "list", that the OIC had not recently condemned India on Kashmir and that Iran didn't matter. Those three statements are all bullshit. I addressed them by posting links to dozens of news stories. If in your disappointment at seeing all this, the best you can come up with is your post above, then I'm done with the exchange with you.

Circular logic. You are going round and round the same thing like a bhains goes round the khoonta.

Sirjee Bas ek simple sentence mein jawab de do.

Why has UN not discussed kashmir or 'The India-Pakistan question' since 1965?

 

[TechLahore]

But then thats investments in treasury bonds which we are not factoring in anyway.

Also that will hold true for all countries that have a surplus trade balance. Say Japan, with a surplus of approx $ 50 billion.. Takes away from the world and is still the 3rd largest economy with a significant impact on world economy..

I would think that gross imports would be a better metric / truer reflection than balance of payments..


Anyway I agree to your point of current numbers being miniscule compared to world numbers, but the thing I would remember here is the trajectory. While most of the countries contributing towards 60% of that $ 70 trillion are on a downward trend, only a few like China Brazil, Rusia and India have both the size and an upward trend to make a difference. Now the term growth engine for the world does use a lot of creative liberty , but I guess the intent was to highlight the trend and prospects. Counting chickens before they are hatched is bad, but then so is ignoring a trend..

What does the US do with T-bills? What are they? They are debt taken on by the US Government? To do what? To fund US government spending. So buying T-bills is like handing the US Government money to go spend. It is a direct infusion in the world economy.

You talked about Japan, but perhaps you don't know that Japan is one of the largest lenders to the US. They have a ton of Tbills too. They've been funding the US' spending habits since decades, even before the Chinese took over the Alpha role.

 

[foxbat]

UN, OIC and Iran donot matter to us....you know why ???

there is no political, economical and diplomatic pressure exerted on India by these forces...

and their magnitude is of so low level that only pakistan hears that

I dont agree.. Dont fall into the same jingoistic trap that you see a lot of our friends to the west falling in. No country is an island. And the bodies you mentioned matter a lot. The key is to ensure that India matters to them as much if not more. No country or organization lives purely on ideals. Interests are paramount. And as long as India is big enough, rich enough and strong enough that these organizations' interests are in having amicable relationship with India, we are good.

So far we are on the right path and is visible from the changes in India's stature in last 2 decades.. Another 2 and these things wont really matter..

 

[TechLahore]

Most certainly, I did not mean that. What I meant is as follows:


definition of tangential from Oxford Dictionaries Online

I'm sorry but I didn't know oxford was banned in Pakistan.

It isn't. I suppose here's another thing you are clueless on.

Circular logic. You are going round and round the same thing like a bhains goes round the khoonta.

Sirjee Bas ek simple sentence mein jawab de do.

Why has UN not discussed kashmir or 'The India-Pakistan question' since 1965?

Mind your bloody language.

Now that we have that over and done with, wear a #$#ing pair of glasses, stop trolling and go read my post again. I answered your question.

 

[Ammyy]

Janay do yaar. You're now off in la la land. Go back and read that article I posted which has your Foreign Sec waxing eloquent about how critical Iran is to India.

What percentage of your oil do you get from OIC countries, by the way?

Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq are more than enough for us ...

And BTW Russia also have oil reserve

 

[India Rising]

Janay do yaar. You're now off in la la land. Go back and read that article I posted which has your Foreign Sec waxing eloquent about how critical Iran is to India.

What percentage of your oil do you get from OIC countries, by the way?

u didn't get my point sir, i was not saying that these countries are not important but i am saying that they do not put pressure on india to do anything on kashmir....apart from providing you lip service once in a period of five years...

 

[foxbat]

What does the US do with T-bills? What are they? They are debt taken on by the US Government? To do what? To fund US government spending. So buying T-bills is like handing the US Government money to go spend. It is a direct infusion in the world economy.

You talked about Japan, but perhaps you don't know that Japan is one of the largest lenders to the US. They have a ton of Tbills too. They've been funding the US' spending habits since decades, even before the Chinese took over the Alpha role.

I understand that, however there is no way to seggregate that financing into what goes into the world vs what goes back to China.
Also isnt is possible that a part of that investment is used domestically and does not contribute to net imports of the US?

Hence my question , dont you think gross imports and not net imports will make a better and a more transperant metric??

And I guess we are way off topic now, so tell me when to stop...

 

[Peshwa]

[/COLOR]

Also, this question you are asking wreaks of extreme ignorance by the way. The issue is not that Pakistan needs to get another UN resolution on Kashmir. The issue is that the current UN resolutions are not being adhered to. Right or wrong, Pakistan has decided that the best way to support Kashmiris is to do exactly that. Support Kashmiris. In 63 years of independence, India has not been able to extinguish the fire in Kashmir and it is one of the world's most heavily militarized regions, with something like 600,000 Indian troops sitting there.

You will do well to go back and read the original post made by your Indian friend. He claimed that the UN no longer recognized Kashmir on their "list", that the OIC had not recently condemned India on Kashmir and that Iran didn't matter. Those three statements are all bullshit. I addressed them by posting links to dozens of news stories. If in your disappointment at seeing all this, the best you can come up with is your post above, then I'm done with the exchange with you.

I wholeheartedly disagree....

The UN resolutions are completely outdated....and to top it all....NOT MANDATORY!
The current resolutions allow UN to act as mediators....less enforcers...any resolution on Kashmir is held hostage to India being on board to discuss....let alone the solution....

Pakistan at the moment has no options where in the UN can force India into action on Kashmir.....so yes....Pakistan does need another resolution on Kashmir...which in the current scenario is a daunting task for Pak.

Secondly, The current solution does not provide "Independence" as an option that greatly hurts the Kashmiri cause.....Pakistan's insistance on the adherence to the 2 options only makes it harder for Kashmiris...


Lastly....Irans importance in "support for Kashmir" is insignificant....especially considering
a. Political clout India enjoys currently
b. World ire Iran faces with its irresponsible actions and comments

I would be surprised if Iran can move a resolution in OIC, let alone the UN.

 

[SaifullahK]

Musharraf had told the Balochis - “Don’t push us. It isn’t the 1970s when you can hit and run and hide in the mountains. This time you won’t even know what hit you.”

The same message now needs to be given to the Afghans.

They cannot expect Pakistan to do nothing while they make friends with the Indians.

Afghans need to be told in no uncertain terms that the Pakistan Army has a veto on their foreign policy.

 

[CaptainJackSparrow]

stop trolling

@ TL: So am I trolling now? How exactly?

I asked you one simple question as to why has UN not discussed Kashmir since November 1965 and it becomes trolling? Kindly enlighten me how so that I shall avaoid making the same mistake in future.

I'm asking you a simple question. Give me an answer and I'll just shut up.

 

[somebozo]

whatever happens in Afghanistan will deeply affects us and god forbid any calamity breaks out Pakistan will be naturally the first destination they will head or forced by nature to head. Also Pakistan is the closest sea port Afghanistan can attain. We have already suffered the non-friendly indo-soviet aligned Afghanistan back in the 70-80's. Therefore we have every right to project influential power. End of the day we are geostrategically more powerful than Afghanistan. Whatever happens in Afghanistan will always spill over into Pakistan due to deep rooted cultures and soviets but there reverse is not necessary true. India is looking forward for the same goals in Afghanistan which once soviet union did..Instead of being at the suffering end we tend to take charge of events on our own. Hence it becomes very important to keep Afghanistan out of Indian immature reach!

 

[Rig Vedic]

Pakistanis claim that Indians are doing terrorism from Afghanistan.

No country in the world accepts that claim.

What to do? Does the problem lie in the Pakistani mind-set.