India - Pakistan Crisis

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SagaLore

Elite Member
Dec 18, 2001
24,036
21
81
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Typical fundamentalist/extremist response coupled with homophobia.

It doesn't matter if the people are majority Muslim if there is a legitimate property claim.

It does if people are constantly dying. Just give it up... its not worth it...
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse

LOL! I don't even know where to begin in describing just how ignorant you are, on all things... wow.

Retard, is that all your "superiors" have taught you? Now get lost from this thread. I am tired of your BS.
stop exporting terrorism.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Aimster
Pakistan's govt. does not support any of the terrorist that live there. Especially since it was the terrorists that killed the current leader's wife.

The civilian government may not, but ISI does continue to fund and support Taliban groups and LeT.

Proof?

Kashmir.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be an idiot Dari, Kashmir has been disputed between India and Pakistan, Muslim and Hindu, for centuries.

To get freaked out by the latest chapter of tit for tat violence, or to infer government policy from the random acts of terrorists groups and mobs, is
total stupidity.

The root mistake may be in the Brits drawing random borders based on nothing but
long ago British interests that no longer exist now.

I certainly hope the world diplomatic community and Obama move to redraw more rational borders ethnic based borders in some sort of a third party binding arbitration process, and then at least the border disputes can be put behind us.

Or otherwise, terrorists and not governments will drive the process.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse

LOL! I don't even know where to begin in describing just how ignorant you are, on all things... wow.

Retard, is that all your "superiors" have taught you? Now get lost from this thread. I am tired of your BS.
stop exporting terrorism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if the USA in its stupidity based current Afghan occupation is doing anything but imported terrorism and promoting total anarchy and instability.

Sad to say as a US citizen, the USA and Nato is not any part of a solution, its now the main problem.
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Typical fundamentalist/extremist response coupled with homophobia.

It doesn't matter if the people are majority Muslim if there is a legitimate property claim.

property claim?
Please explain. Actually don't. You are not too bright to come up with a good response.
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: Aimster
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Typical fundamentalist/extremist response coupled with homophobia.

It doesn't matter if the people are majority Muslim if there is a legitimate property claim.

property claim?
Please explain. Actually don't. You are not too bright to come up with a good response.

You are simply illogical. A land is not purely one religion, and even if it were, it does not necessarily have an impact on a property or territorial dispute or claim.

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse

LOL! I don't even know where to begin in describing just how ignorant you are, on all things... wow.

Retard, is that all your "superiors" have taught you? Now get lost from this thread. I am tired of your BS.
stop exporting terrorism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if the USA in its stupidity based current Afghan occupation is doing anything but imported terrorism and promoting total anarchy and instability.

Sad to say as a US citizen, the USA and Nato is not any part of a solution, its now the main problem.
yes, because the U.S. is responsible for bringing instability, violence, and terrorism to Afghanistan and Pakistan... in fact, the place was actually a Utopia prior to our arrival and involvement. That must be it... :roll:

You're a fucking clown.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse

LOL! I don't even know where to begin in describing just how ignorant you are, on all things... wow.

Retard, is that all your "superiors" have taught you? Now get lost from this thread. I am tired of your BS.
stop exporting terrorism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if the USA in its stupidity based current Afghan occupation is doing anything but imported terrorism and promoting total anarchy and instability.

Sad to say as a US citizen, the USA and Nato is not any part of a solution, its now the main problem.
yes, because the U.S. is responsible for bringing instability, violence, and terrorism to Afghanistan and Pakistan... in fact, the place was actually a Utopia prior to our arrival and involvement. That must be it... :roll:

You're a fucking clown.



The only fucking clown here is you. The US directly contributed to the volatility of Afghanistan after funneling billions of dollars worth of arms there during the 80s to further it's war against Communism and after the war ended, it conveniently abandoned Afghanistan.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Do Muslims have three gonads? A tail? WTF makes a Muslim more different than any other human being?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse

LOL! I don't even know where to begin in describing just how ignorant you are, on all things... wow.

Retard, is that all your "superiors" have taught you? Now get lost from this thread. I am tired of your BS.
stop exporting terrorism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if the USA in its stupidity based current Afghan occupation is doing anything but imported terrorism and promoting total anarchy and instability.

Sad to say as a US citizen, the USA and Nato is not any part of a solution, its now the main problem.
yes, because the U.S. is responsible for bringing instability, violence, and terrorism to Afghanistan and Pakistan... in fact, the place was actually a Utopia prior to our arrival and involvement. That must be it... :roll:

You're a fucking clown.

The only fucking clown here is you. The US directly contributed to the volatility of Afghanistan after funneling billions of dollars worth of arms there during the 80s to further it's war against Communism and after the war ended, it conveniently abandoned Afghanistan.
ohhhhh, OK... so, before the 1980's, Afghanistan was a shining example of peace and stability for all the world to emulate?! :confused:

ya... righto.

nice nose bozo! you and TGB should form a fucking circus!
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Do Muslims have three gonads? A tail? WTF makes a Muslim more different than any other human being?


I think his point is that if the majority in that area do not want to be part of India any longer, then as the proclaimed "largest world democracy" India should allow them to vote and decide if they wish to secede or stay with India.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse

LOL! I don't even know where to begin in describing just how ignorant you are, on all things... wow.

Retard, is that all your "superiors" have taught you? Now get lost from this thread. I am tired of your BS.
stop exporting terrorism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if the USA in its stupidity based current Afghan occupation is doing anything but imported terrorism and promoting total anarchy and instability.

Sad to say as a US citizen, the USA and Nato is not any part of a solution, its now the main problem.
yes, because the U.S. is responsible for bringing instability, violence, and terrorism to Afghanistan and Pakistan... in fact, the place was actually a Utopia prior to our arrival and involvement. That must be it... :roll:

You're a fucking clown.

The only fucking clown here is you. The US directly contributed to the volatility of Afghanistan after funneling billions of dollars worth of arms there during the 80s to further it's war against Communism and after the war ended, it conveniently abandoned Afghanistan.
ohhhhh, OK... so, before the 1980's, Afghanistan was a shining example of peace and stability for all the world to emulate?! :confused:

ya... righto.

nice nose bozo! you and TGB should form a circus!


Actually it was a stable country with very little problems, especially compared to the ones it faces today--of course you would ignore that obvious fact. .
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Do Muslims have three gonads? A tail? WTF makes a Muslim more different than any other human being?


I think his point is that if the majority in that area do not want to be part of India any longer, then as the proclaimed "largest world democracy" India should allow them to vote and decide if they wish to secede or stay with India.

It is the religio-feudal mindset of a set of Muslim leaders and their inability to be part of multi-religious societies that's at the root of this problem, nothing more, nothing less. It manifests itself anywhere there is a substantial number of Muslims like in Britain, Denmark, Holland, France, Thailand, Phillipines ... you name it.

India has drawn the line in the sand at Kashmir after caving in to these leaders tantrums and agreeing to Pakistan at independence. And, as the tragic evolution of Pakistan has shown, it was the right choice.
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: Aimster
Why the hell does India want Kashmir? It's Muslim.
so ghey

Do Muslims have three gonads? A tail? WTF makes a Muslim more different than any other human being?


I think his point is that if the majority in that area do not want to be part of India any longer, then as the proclaimed "largest world democracy" India should allow them to vote and decide if they wish to secede or stay with India.

Democracies don't necessarily allow land or states to secede if the local population wishes it so. People making such comments are simply illogical. People have the ability to migrate if they so wish, but countries do not necessarily have to secede its own territory.

Democracies are not mob rule under all sorts of levels.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Aimster
Pakistan's govt. does not support any of the terrorist that live there. Especially since it was the terrorists that killed the current leader's wife.

The civilian government may not, but ISI does continue to fund and support Taliban groups and LeT.

Proof?

Kashmir.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be an idiot Dari, Kashmir has been disputed between India and Pakistan, Muslim and Hindu, for centuries.

To get freaked out by the latest chapter of tit for tat violence, or to infer government policy from the random acts of terrorists groups and mobs, is
total stupidity.

The root mistake may be in the Brits drawing random borders based on nothing but
long ago British interests that no longer exist now.

I certainly hope the world diplomatic community and Obama move to redraw more rational borders ethnic based borders in some sort of a third party binding arbitration process, and then at least the border disputes can be put behind us.

Or otherwise, terrorists and not governments will drive the process.

The problem is not how the borders were drawn, the problem is the basis for the partition. The creation of Pakistan as a "anti-India" requires fuel for keeping that ideology going. Kashmir has been that fuel. You can bet that if somehow the curmudgeon Pakistani leaders got their hands on it, they'll anoint themselves spokesmen for some other part of India that has a substantial Muslim population and start this process all over again.

The current constitution of Pakistan suits only one set of interests, viz. the Punjabi ruling clique. Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP are basically serfs in this setup. If this problem is to be solved, Pakistan should be broken up and the natural borders of historic India restored.

As for your last sentence, if the world had stood up against Hitler at the outset, you can bet that we would have had Nazi terrorism. Terrorism is the price the world pays for standing up to the Islamists. A far better choice than another world war which the Nazislamists have shown they have no hesitation in starting, time and again.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: tvarad


The current constitution of Pakistan suits only one set of interests, viz. the Punjabi ruling clique. Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP are basically serfs in this setup.


Wow something we finally agree on....let me check outside my window, I think I see a pig flying.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Actually it was a stable country with very little problems, especially compared to the ones it faces today--of course you would ignore that obvious fact. .
That's simply false. Beyond the Taliban's violent totalitarian rule during the 90's -- which you'd probably support or encourage in spite of their atrocities -- Afghanistan and NW Pakistan have not been stable for hundreds of years.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Looks like the rumors India was going to retaliate militarily are dying a natural death. The reports of Pakistani troop movemments appear to be normal re-deployments. The move of the 14th DV from NWFP is simply a return to its peacetime base. Other units reported to be on the move such as an armored brigade and an artillery corps are simply movements to planned training.

The reports of 2 Pakistani AF squadrons on "high alert" is laughable. If Pakistan thought any attack possible, the entire AF wouldbe on high alert and all formations would be headed to their forward positions.

So it seems as of this writing the hype is just that. So much hype. Bluster on both sides, but it seems war is not imminent.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: dphantom
Looks like the rumors India was going to retaliate militarily are dying a natural death. The reports of Pakistani troop movemments appear to be normal re-deployments. The move of the 14th DV from NWFP is simply a return to its peacetime base. Other units reported to be on the move such as an armored brigade and an artillery corps are simply movements to planned training.

The reports of 2 Pakistani AF squadrons on "high alert" is laughable. If Pakistan thought any attack possible, the entire AF wouldbe on high alert and all formations would be headed to their forward positions.

So it seems as of this writing the hype is just that. So much hype. Bluster on both sides, but it seems war is not imminent.

:)
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Actually it was a stable country with very little problems, especially compared to the ones it faces today--of course you would ignore that obvious fact. .
That's simply false. Beyond the Taliban's violent totalitarian rule during the 90's -- which you'd probably support or encourage in spite of their atrocities -- Afghanistan and NW Pakistan have not been stable for hundreds of years.


Actually I'm completely against the Taliban's philosophy--one which originated out of Saudi Arabia (the true epicenter of terrorism). As for your remarks, YOU are incorrect. The frontier (NWFP) and Afghanistan are two different places and situations. Afghanistan was a governed nation that wasn't ruled by the Taliban/Mujahadeen and various factions. NWFP has always been a semi-autonomous region in Pakistan but it was never a source of terrorism.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Actually it was a stable country with very little problems, especially compared to the ones it faces today--of course you would ignore that obvious fact. .
That's simply false. Beyond the Taliban's violent totalitarian rule during the 90's -- which you'd probably support or encourage in spite of their atrocities -- Afghanistan and NW Pakistan have not been stable for hundreds of years.

Actually I'm completely against the Taliban's philosophy--one which originated out of Saudi Arabia (the true epicenter of terrorism). As for your remarks, YOU are incorrect. The frontier (NWFP) and Afghanistan are two different places and situations. Afghanistan was a governed nation that wasn't ruled by the Taliban/Mujahadeen and various factions. NWFP has always been a semi-autonomous region in Pakistan but it was never a source of terrorism.
You really need to pick up a history book, or two, on the subject of Central Asia. Separating their histories using modern borders is an epic mistake -- one that indicates to me that you know next to nothing about the region.

wow.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Actually it was a stable country with very little problems, especially compared to the ones it faces today--of course you would ignore that obvious fact. .
That's simply false. Beyond the Taliban's violent totalitarian rule during the 90's -- which you'd probably support or encourage in spite of their atrocities -- Afghanistan and NW Pakistan have not been stable for hundreds of years.

Actually I'm completely against the Taliban's philosophy--one which originated out of Saudi Arabia (the true epicenter of terrorism). As for your remarks, YOU are incorrect. The frontier (NWFP) and Afghanistan are two different places and situations. Afghanistan was a governed nation that wasn't ruled by the Taliban/Mujahadeen and various factions. NWFP has always been a semi-autonomous region in Pakistan but it was never a source of terrorism.
You really need to pick up a history book, or two, on the subject of Central Asia. Separating their histories using modern borders is an epic mistake -- one that indicates to me that you know next to nothing about the region.

wow.



Considering the depth of most of your posts, I'd say I know a whole lot more than you about Afghanistan and NWFP. And I'll reiterate, NWFP as a REGION has always been semi-autonomous (even during British times) while Afghanistan as a NATION did not have a fraction of the problems it faces today prior to the Soviet invasion. America's direct involvement in that war (supply of arms + training of the Mujahadeen) and subsequent abandonment of Afghanistan created a fertile breeding ground for terrorists--thats why Osama bin laden decided to stay there and use it as a base to wage his campaign of terror.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Actually it was a stable country with very little problems, especially compared to the ones it faces today--of course you would ignore that obvious fact. .
That's simply false. Beyond the Taliban's violent totalitarian rule during the 90's -- which you'd probably support or encourage in spite of their atrocities -- Afghanistan and NW Pakistan have not been stable for hundreds of years.

Actually I'm completely against the Taliban's philosophy--one which originated out of Saudi Arabia (the true epicenter of terrorism). As for your remarks, YOU are incorrect. The frontier (NWFP) and Afghanistan are two different places and situations. Afghanistan was a governed nation that wasn't ruled by the Taliban/Mujahadeen and various factions. NWFP has always been a semi-autonomous region in Pakistan but it was never a source of terrorism.
You really need to pick up a history book, or two, on the subject of Central Asia. Separating their histories using modern borders is an epic mistake -- one that indicates to me that you know next to nothing about the region.

wow.

Considering the depth of most of your posts, I'd say I know a whole lot more than you about Afghanistan and NWFP. And I'll reiterate, NWFP as a REGION has always been semi-autonomous (even during British times) while Afghanistan as a NATION did not have a fraction of the problems it faces today prior to the Soviet invasion. America's direct involvement in that war (supply of arms + training of the Mujahadeen) and subsequent abandonment of Afghanistan created a fertile breeding ground for terrorists--thats why Osama bin laden decided to stay there and use it as a base to wage his campaign of terror.
I won't argue with your history of the last 29 years, nor the various policy mistakes made by the U.S. during that time; however, you seem willfully ignorant of everything prior to 1980 -- especially given the fact that you think the U.S. is the originator of all instability and violence in the region. I also hope you realize that the ancient tribal boundaries do not mirror the modern drawn borders in any way, shape, or form.

I also won't argue with your statement that Saudi Arabia is the ultimate epicenter of fanaticism -- Wahabism -- and that much must still be done to somehow counter or change that in the coming years. However, in terms of trained personnel, the Afghan/NWFP region has been the world's primary source of actual terrorists for the last decade. IOW, my original statement still stands: Pakistan is currently the world's leading exporter of violent Islamic terrorism.

There is simply no denying that fact...

Have you ever been there?