He is not the first choice opener for India because India have Rohit, who is better than any ODI opener Pakistan has ever produced barring Saeed Anwar (perhaps). Being second fiddle to someone like him doesn't mean anything, and who knows, he might overtake him in the future.
KL Rahul has succeeded in every conditions as well, including a Test hundred in Australia on his debut series. Same place where Babar failed. Now please don't bring the flat pitch logic, because on the pitches where Babar failed, our so-called world class bowling attack was ripped into pieces. So far, Babar has only played one good Test innings; KL Rahul has played several, and he has shown more versatility as well.
He has accumulated runs and also powered his way to a 50 ball ton in T20Is. He is simply a superior and versatile batsman compared to Babar unless you live in a parallel universe, which you clearly do. Same universe where Miller, McLaren and Duminy are better hitters than Dhoni and de Villiers. Yes, that is why no one takes you seriously.
If he becomes a Rohit Sharma in ODIs, Pakistan will be extremely blessed. He most definitely has to develop his power hitting to improve his impact in ODIs. That again, is a non-debatable fact.
If Babar becomes our Amla, Pakistan will never win any ICC tournament again. Amla is below openers like Jayasuriya and Gilchrist, well below.
Clarke was past it when Australia toured the UAE and he retired shortly after. His back was done. Similarly, Johnson is not much of a threat on Asian pitches. Current Australian attack is more skilled and versatile, and they have a stronger batting lineup. India also hasn't lost a Test match in Zimbabwe and neither did they get whitewashed in South Africa and Australia. In addition, they haven't lost a home Test to WI either while both have been good in Sri Lanka, although we did get whitewashed their in 2014. As I said before, Pakistan were a better Test team than India during the 2012-2013 period when they were in transition, but apart from that, they have been better. One series in England doesn't override the fact that they have done better than us in Australia and South Africa, and currently have the best top 5 in the world.
And a person who believes that Miller, Duminy and McLaren are better hitters than de Villiers should be criticizing others for living in an alternate reality? Let's not go there. We know why you support players you like. Standing by what you believe in means nothing when you are biased. You clearly refuse to acknowledge that you were wrong about Ajmal not chucking and that you are delusional to think that Junaid can rediscover his old form. If you don't have the capacity to call a spade what it is, don't take pride in standing by your opinions, because it really doesn't mean anything. You come across as biased and that is why no one takes you seriously.
What a gem. This surely takes the cake.
No, a top order batsmen doesn't always encounter a situation where he has to chase down a total unless he is Kohli, but when such a situation arises, his inability to slog means that he often fails to chase down big totals, which is what Amla does, so how is it a 'strength'?

) What is it his strength when he failed to chase down 30 in 30 balls vs Pakistan?