Your thoughts on Bangladesh's position on Baluchistan

[GenerallyKhan]

Pakistan's energy consumption is pretty puny and insignificant even if its quadrupled and fully carbon based (like coal).

Climate change threatens India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. In case of India (population density: 386 est.), people can migrate. Pakistan (population density: 215 est.) will have to contend with changing weather patterns impacting our agriculture and food supply. Bangladesh (population density: 1,146) could lose up to 15% of the land and space is already quite limited there.

As for the coal politics is concerned, it works in our favour. We can argue to legitimise our nuclear industry or we will start building coal plants.

 

[Nilgiri]

Climate change threatens India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. In case of India (population density: 386 est.), people can migrate. Pakistan (population density: 215 est.) will have to contend with changing weather patterns impacting our agriculture and food supply. Bangladesh (population density: 1,146) could lose up to 15% of the land and space is already quite limited there.

As for the coal politics is concerned, it works in our favour. We can argue to legitimise our nuclear industry or we will start building coal plants.

Don't dipsute all of that (assuming climate change is 100% accurate model which is another debate)...but my point is that Pakistan alone cannot create climate change to the level that would affect Bangladesh coastline.

 

[GenerallyKhan]

Don't dipsute all of that (assuming climate change is 100% accurate model which is another debate)...but my point is that Pakistan alone cannot create climate change to the level that would affect Bangladesh coastline.

Don't tempt us.

 

[Nilgiri]

Don't tempt us.

BTW, welcome to the forum. Hope to see you around and discuss more with you.

 

[GenerallyKhan]

BTW, welcome to the forum. Hope to see you around and discuss more with you.

Bahoot shukriya app ka! I forgot the password to my old account so created a new one.

 

[Anubis]

Shouldn't the natural extension be Kashmir is a part of India as long as the Kashmiris consider themselves to be Indian?

Why the inconsistency?

Because Kashmir started out "independent"...Balochistan didn't......There is a significant number of Kashmiri's who consider themselves either independent or Pakistani....while other's consider themselves to be Indian....so we have 3 claims over this land....all to some point valid....Balochistan can either be independent or Pakistani...India has no valid claim over Balochistan.

 

[Mentee]

Don't throw stone if you live in a glass house.Your entire Karachi city and southern Sindh will go under water before any part of Bangladesh.

Actually we are witnessing expansion in Pak territory----- and who told you I live in a glass house , its made of cement

Brother, that's quite an insensitive remark. Given our history with Bangladesh, we shouldn't be saying things even in a light manner.

Don't you worry bro next time I'll launch nuke tipped shaheen on dhaka

 

[GenerallyKhan]

Don't you worry bro next time I'll launch nuke tipped shaheen on dhaka

Shahzaday ho, lala.

 

[Mentee]

Bahoot shukriya

Bahoot shukria? khan SB do you have any sort of link with u.p or bihar?

 

[GenerallyKhan]

Bahoot shukria? khan SB do you have any sort of link with u.p or bihar?

Mere urdu key toheen maat karo yaar.

 

[Mentee]

Shahzaday ho, lala.

, Vo to HM paydaishi hain, nvazish jnab

 

[Nilgiri]

Because Kashmir started out "independent"...Balochistan didn't.

Um Khan of Kalat? How was that any different to the maharajah of Kashmir?

Balochistan can either be independent or Pakistani...India has no valid claim over Balochistan.

That's not what I was asking.

Besides how exactly did India get the andaman and nicobar islands? India by default is the successor to the British Raj....so can technically claim anything that was not assigned to Pakistan directly through partition....if it feels the partition agreement was not followed in any subsequent accession. Pakistan can do the same.

If the Khan of Kalat acceded to Pakistan (by choice or by force) the same logic applies to Kashmir.

If it doesn't apply to Kashmir, then neither does it for Balochistan. It can't apply to one and not the other.

 

[Luffy 500]

Muslims whether in Bangladesh or Burkina faso , should look at only one criterion when it comes to this kind of issues - and that is the unity of muslim nations and interest of muslims. Muslims world is already divided into 57 nation states . As a muslim I don't want it divided any further. Whether its BLA in Pakistan or PKK in turkey , ethnic nationalist terrorist should be crushed with an iron fist. Balochistan is an integral part of Pakistan and the interest of muslims in kashmir lies with the Pakistani federation. This is the golden rule. Any other narrative opposing this golden rule are just satanic ranting of enemies of Islam and muslims.

 

[Joe Shearer]

They were comprehensively surrounded, why throw away their lives recklessly and unecessarily?

You can listen to the Pak army officer here as to the reason around 1.20 minute mark:

They fought hard and gave it their all, so there is no dishonour in surrendering. Anyone else would have done the same in same position.

You are right. Whatever they had done earlier, during the actual outbreak of fighting, they fought very bravely. Read about the battle of Hilli. Brigadier Tajammul Husain Malik was among the bravest of the brave. His performance in command, outnumbered, surrounded, hemmed in, but defiant, should be taught to every young officer of the Indian Army.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Why drag Modi into your assertion? Modi is a PM, he covers every facade and realm of the Indian govt and can comment on any damn thing he pleases including foreign policy and human rights in another country .

Why drag Modi? Well he is the one who initiated it, no? But sure he can. But then, there's also the matter of professional politics. And that isn't one of them.