We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan

[harish]

And this is called an example of 'weaseling' into a tangential topic when one finds their original argument refuted.

Since the argument raised by some was on the issue of who created the Taliban, my responses were also meant to clarify that point.

Your clarification of the point conveniently glossed over the patently obvious fact that regardless of who gave birth to the Taliban, Pakistan had a major role in hosting them and helping them thrive and become the menace they are today. Its like one country nuking another, and then getting prissily sanctimonious by claiming 'Oh not us, the US invented the bomb.' Hope that's clarity enough for you on what I wanted to point out with regard to your holier than thou stand.

 

[afriend]

The public unease in India over our government agreeing to talk to yours has in large part been quelled by the rapidity of the demise of said talks. It was amply evident that no talks can be fruitful with the spectre of terrorism looming over both nations. The best recourse for India today would be to ensure that Pakistan cannot hurt us. Not by an all out war, which it is in no position to start or sustain, and also not by random acts of terrorism, where our state apparatus has been found wanting. I believe that Nirupama Rao has very firmly and simply verbalized what Pakistan already knows. That forget waging war, even war by proxy and stealth will come at a steep price for Pakistan. A price which hopefully sooner rather than later the people of Pakistan will refuse to pay on behalf of their rulers. Or face the choice of a price that will become steeper with every act of violence on Indian soil originating from Pakistan. To sum up, we need to protect ourselves to the extent possible. And for those incidents that happen in spite of our best efforts, extract a price that makes future misdemeanours an unattractive proposition. And here we have a lot to learn from Israel and their response to any risk to their own. If I were a Pakistani, I would wonder and ask my leaders whether having 20 people blown up in India was really important enough in the larger scheme of things to warrant 200 of my own blown up in my own cities and towns and villages every day. When that happens, and the sentiments and questioning gathers steam, maybe we can all have a reasonable shot at making such 'talks' actually work.

Yes all out war is not an option..!! But infact we can try to send in spies and try to take out these anti india elements just like what israel did with hamas leaders....!!! Pakistan can't touch them.. but we should do it..!!! But the problem we might face unlike pakistan.. there will be very few who would be willing to go for such a suicdical mission..!! But ultimately we gotta do something about these people who openly roam around in pakistan working towards promoting terror in india..!!!!

 

[harish]

Pakistan rarely sends their own into India. Project Karachi hinges on swaying the minds of disgruntled Indian youth to take up arms against their own country controled by handlers in Pakistan.

 

[karan.1970]

Justifying an argument on the basis of numbers is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad numerum - it is fallacious to argue that 'because SO MANY people believe X, then X must be true'. This typically comes under the heading of 'rumor and gossip'.




In terms of people who do know of the facts, Steve Coll's book on the Afghan conflict, Taliban and Al Qaeda won a Pulitzer award, and he, with many other analysts such as Ahmed Rashid (who can be called anything but pro-Pakistan) have laid out the rise of the Taliban in detail and made the same point - Pakistan did not create the Taliban and did not start supporting the Taliban until the Taliban had already established themselves to a degree in Afghanistan and gained the support of various other warlords, Tribal leaders and the local populace.

Pakistan therefore had nothing to do with the creation of the Taliban - any one who has taken the time to research the Taliban rise would know that. The only people who continue to cling to this myth and perpetuate it are uninformed individuals and Pakistan bashers.

Both argumentum ad numerum and its reversal (just because most people believe it, it must be false) suffer from the same shortcoming. Niether of them is fact based. But I would expect the president of Pakistan to be in the know about what Pakistan did and did not..

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | US, Pakistan gave birth to Taliban: Zardari


On a side note, If the world believes that you created them, does it really matter if you did or not? True or false, if the world believes that Pakistan did this, they would react to and interact with you accordingly. So while argumentum ad numerum may not prove something, but if the numbers believing it are large enough, it no longer matters whether its true or not..As they say, one's perception is one's reality..

 

[karan.1970]

Rather, I am because of Pakistan and not the other way round.!!

Hence more of your bankrupt thoughts.

Ooops.. Bogey... Looks like i need to go step by step

Replace You with Pakistan in your sentence

"What, to rub you up the wrong way. ??"

so that it becomes

"What, to rub Pakistan up the wrong way. ??"

hmmm.. for some one getting compared to Taimikhan by some members, you need too much of spoonfeeding..

 

[Windjammer]

Ooops.. Bogey... Looks like i need to go step by step

Replace You with Pakistan in your sentence

"What, to rub you up the wrong way. ??"

so that it becomes

"What, to rub Pakistan up the wrong way. ??"

hmmm.. for some one getting compared to Taimikhan by some members, you need too much of spoonfeeding..

They say, when the other person uses your logic to lend weight to their own argument, usually it's a sign of desperation and bewilderment and also acknowledgement to the other party, hence i accept your lack luster compliment.
As for the comparison with Taimikhan, well it's for you to guess and me to know as to your detriment, you are oblivious to the other half but then you haven't reached that stage.

 

[prithwidw]

"We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan"
Can you get any more desparate than this? It's a new low in Indian foreign policy. Who needs "diplomacy" when you can throw a hissy fit!

My friend, that was a headline from some Indian newspaper, which you guys seldom trust, wanna talk about or care. Not the voice of the GoI.

 

[karan.1970]

They say, when the other person uses your logic to lend weight to their own argument, usually it's a sign of desperation and bewilderment and also acknowledgement to the other party, hence i accept your lack luster compliment.
As for the comparison with Taimikhan, well it's for you to guess and me to know as to your detriment, you are oblivious to the other half but then you haven't reached that stage.

Well if your logic is usable to refute your own arguement, then that says a lot about your logical reasoning..
Rest of your post anyway is incomprehensible as it is most of the time... Guess you are running out of logical things to say.. So may be in some other thread...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Your clarification of the point conveniently glossed over the patently obvious fact that regardless of who gave birth to the Taliban, Pakistan had a major role in hosting them and helping them thrive and become the menace they are today. Its like one country nuking another, and then getting prissily sanctimonious by claiming 'Oh not us, the US invented the bomb.' Hope that's clarity enough for you on what I wanted to point out with regard to your holier than thou stand.

You can read can't you? My clarification focused very specifically on the claim that Pakistan created the Taliban - there was no question of 'glossing over' anything since the question of the subsequent rise to power of the Taliban was not part of the discussion at that point.

Again, another example on your part of trying to hide the fact that the original argument was debunked and seeking to raise a tangential issue.

If you can't stick to a discussion without meandering off on tangential diatribes don't participate and hijack the threads please. If you wish to make a point different from the one that was being discussed, raise it separately, don't weasel it into an existing discussion when the Indian POV is being thrashed and try to gain the high ground.

The original statement and my clarification were very specific - 'Pakistan did not create the taliban' - if you can show it to be otherwise please do so or accept that position and move on to the argument you wish to make.

 

[Windjammer]

Well if your logic is usable to refute your own arguement, then that says a lot about your logical reasoning..
Rest of your post anyway is incomprehensible as it is most of the time... Guess you are running out of logical things to say.. So may be in some other thread...

A nice twist of words for your own liking doesn't exactly portray your affiliation with a logical argument.
And since you are unable to comprehend the sarcasm you are always oozing with, well some other thread is indeed a convenient escape route.

 

[rangbaaz]

i knew what this thread would lead to

i warned the creator of this thread earlier on

 

[TechLahore]

No need to anyway.. Fear is not the diplomatic tool of choice for India anyway... Fear equates to terror and we do not make it our state policy

Good one Karan! Wonderful backhanded point scoring! I see you have now completely dispensed with the pretense of being rational and someone given to the expression of at least slightly considered views. Daer aiey, durast aiey. Good luck to you.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Both argumentum ad numerum and its reversal (just because most people believe it, it must be false) suffer from the same shortcoming. Niether of them is fact based. But I would expect the president of Pakistan to be in the know about what Pakistan did and did not..

That is a broad generalization that misses the nuance of why it is a logical fallacy. The point being made is that an argument is not valid or invalid because of the number of people that believe in the argument, but that an argument is valid or invalid based on the evidence supporting it.

Both Coll and Rashid utilize direct and secondary sources from the Taliban, Pakistani, Saudi and American (among others) civilian, military and intelligence officials and extensive research to come up with their conclusions on the rise to power of the Taliban.

Their work therefore has significant evidence supporting it, whereas your claim of 'the world believes it' does not, and is merely a claim that your argument is valid because X number of people believe it to be valid.

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | US, Pakistan gave birth to Taliban: Zardari


On a side note, If the world believes that you created them, does it really matter if you did or not? True or false, if the world believes that Pakistan did this, they would react to and interact with you accordingly. So while argumentum ad numerum may not prove something, but if the numbers believing it are large enough, it no longer matters whether its true or not..As they say, one's perception is one's reality..

Zardari's opinion fails when tested against the facts and extensive research done by scholars on the Taliban movement.

And on your side not, if world opinion was all that mattered, then issues would be settled through global opinion polls. On this forum at least we seek to engage in discourse and present whatever sources and evidence we can in support of a particular position - global public opinion does not count as evidence.

Secondly, yes it does matter that facts be clarified, especially when global opinion believes a lie. People should be made aware that that the attribution of the creation of the Taliban to Pakistan is inaccurate.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Good one Karan! Wonderful backhanded point scoring! I see you have now completely dispensed with the pretense of being rational and someone given to the expression of at least slightly considered views.

That unfortunately becomes obvious when participants in a discussion start resorting to 'global public opinion' as validation of their arguments.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

What?
Whom are you even trying to kid'?

Asim, seriously, this one was a beamer.

Read the thread and the arguments made in support of that position instead of nonsensical rants.

If you still disagree, make your own case supporting your position.