What's new

Does Pakistan need another Zia-ul-Haq or Aurangzeb to deal with a mischievous neighbor like India?

The Bald Eagle

The Bald Eagle

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 25, 2023
Runs
22,113
Pakistan has always put the hand of friendship towards India for a broader peace in the region but unfortunately all these good will gestures and endeavors have been met with hostility.

Recently, Pakistan invited Indian EAM to the SCO conference in Islamabad but still the Indian side didn't show any warmth and instead blamed Pakistan recklessly for a fishy incident like Pahalgam attacks. So bearing in my mind the current bloodshed in Balochistan, would it be plausible for Pakistan to wish for another leader like General Zia-ul-Haq just to deal with India.

A brief overview of Pakistan India relations under General Zia-ul-Haq 👇

General Zia-ul-Haq played a significant role in shaping Pakistan's hostile stance against India. After coming to power through a military coup that deposed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Zia implemented a strategy known as "Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts," which involved covert warfare, militancy, and backing of Mujahideens aimed at liberating Kashmir and Punjab.

Zia's approach to India was marked by a mix of military brinkmanship and nuclear ambiguity. In a 1987 visit to India under the guise of watching a cricket match, Zia warned Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi that any attack on Pakistan could lead to a nuclear war with devastating consequences for India, emphasizing that while Pakistan might be destroyed, the Muslim community would survive, but Hinduism could vanish from the earth. This threat highlighted the intense hostility and the high stakes of the Pakistan-India conflict during his regime.

Despite these tensions, Zia also engaged in limited diplomacy, such as his unannounced visit to India in 1987, which was part of "cricket diplomacy" aimed at easing border tensions. However, his tenure was largely defined by the militarization of Pakistan's policy towards India and the promotion of Islamist policies internally.

In summary, Zia-ul-Haq's stance against India combined aggressive covert operations, nuclear deterrence threats, and occasional diplomatic overtures, all within the broader context of Pakistan's long-standing conflict with India over Kashmir and regional dominance
 
Yes please.

I hope you have a strong military dictatorship for at least another two decades.

It will be fantastic.
 
Bhaijaan said:
Yes please.

I hope you have a strong military dictatorship for at least another two decades.

It will be fantastic.
Click to expand...
We don't need dictators or field marshals but some tough guys who could keep Indian mischievous tendencies in place especially in Balochistan. Zia kept India at bay even dealing with Soviets at one end.... phenomenal
 
The Bald Eagle said:
We don't need dictators or field marshals but some tough guys who could keep Indian mischievous tendencies in place especially in Balochistan. Zia kept India at bay even dealing with Soviets at one end.... phenomenal
Click to expand...
This contradicts your first line
 
The Bald Eagle said:
We don't need dictators or field marshals but some tough guys who could keep Indian mischievous tendencies in place especially in Balochistan. Zia kept India at bay even dealing with Soviets at one end.... phenomenal
Click to expand...

I am with you on this.

Making a dua that Pakistan gets its Zia up Haq golden era back.
 
This was never just about Zia, India, or the Soviets, it was always shaped by America's Cold War playbook.

During the Cold War, while the US fueled a proxy war in Afghanistan through Pakistan, India sought to maintain plausible neutrality, careful not to appear entangled. That’s why the conflict remained largely confined to Indian occupied Kashmir.

Today, the dynamics have shifted. India may not be at war with Pakistan outright, but it is certainly entangled in a proxy confrontation with China, on Pakistani soil. The recent events and China's help to Pakistan is clear evidence to that.

Regardless of who governs, military or civilian, Pakistan’s long term foreign policy cannot afford to be reset every time leadership changes. With military reliance on China and economic dependency on Western institutions, Pakistan must walk a geopolitical tightrope. Striking the right balance won’t stop India’s covert campaigns, but it will blunt their narrative advantage.

What Pakistan needs is not another strongman, but a strong strategy. Sadly, that remains more a hope than a plan.

One thing is certain, China will not allow Baluchistan to be separated from Pakistan.
 
Major said:
Lol OP and zia ul haq fan boyism.

Zia did more damage to Pakistan than any good.
Click to expand...
It's not about Zia as a dictator but as a strategist who kept India under check and that too when Indira Gandhi was in power...guys like Modi would have been nothing.
 
HalBass9 said:
This was never just about Zia, India, or the Soviets, it was always shaped by America's Cold War playbook.

During the Cold War, while the US fueled a proxy war in Afghanistan through Pakistan, India sought to maintain plausible neutrality, careful not to appear entangled. That’s why the conflict remained largely confined to Indian occupied Kashmir.

Today, the dynamics have shifted. India may not be at war with Pakistan outright, but it is certainly entangled in a proxy confrontation with China, on Pakistani soil. The recent events and China's help to Pakistan is clear evidence to that.

Regardless of who governs, military or civilian, Pakistan’s long term foreign policy cannot afford to be reset every time leadership changes. With military reliance on China and economic dependency on Western institutions, Pakistan must walk a geopolitical tightrope. Striking the right balance won’t stop India’s covert campaigns, but it will blunt their narrative advantage.

What Pakistan needs is not another strongman, but a strong strategy. Sadly, that remains more a hope than a plan.

One thing is certain, China will not allow Baluchistan to be separated from Pakistan.
Click to expand...
How can that strategy ever evolve now when an institution is more busy serving some Individuals egos
 
The Bald Eagle said:
It's not about Zia as a dictator but as a strategist who kept India under check and that too when Indira Gandhi was in power...guys like Modi would have been nothing.
Click to expand...
India captured the Siachen Glacier on April 13, 1984, during Operation Meghdoot and Zia was the dictator of Pakistan. Lol. :kp
 
Devadwal said:
India captured the Siachen Glacier on April 13, 1984, during Operation Meghdoot and Zia was the dictator of Pakistan. Lol. :kp
Click to expand...
And under him Pakistan became a nuclear power, also why didn't your government back then attack Pakistan...after all Soviets had made numerous overtures too...or your country doesn't know how to return favor....Poor Soviets to have such weak hearted friends
 
The Bald Eagle said:
And under him Pakistan became a nuclear power, also why didn't your government back then attack Pakistan...after all Soviets had made numerous overtures too...or your country doesn't know how to return favor....Poor Soviets to have such weak hearted friends
Click to expand...
Do you even know when was Pakistan becomes nuclear State?

And what had Zia did when India captured Siachen Glacier. Anyway Pakistan can give the Power to anyone ,we simply don't care .

Btw Asim Munir promoted Asim Munir after a humiliation defeat 🤣🤣
:kp
 
Devadwal said:
Do you even know when was Pakistan becomes nuclear State?

And what had Zia did when India captured Siachen Glacier. Anyway Pakistan can give the Power to anyone ,we simply don't care .

Btw Asim Munir promoted Asim Munir after a humiliation defeat 🤣🤣
:kp
Click to expand...
It seems like your history is weak my friend...just simply google when exactly Pakistan attained nuclear weapons not when they openly tested.
 
Indians will be dealt with last time they had to run to paw paw trump and had a lucky escape
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I suggest someone like Zia it doesn't mean Zia the dictator but Zia the Indian nightmare 👇
 
Sure. You need a Zia who gets blasted everyday online by Pakistanis for screwing up their country. Regarding Aurangzeb, what can a fanatic like him do? You already have enough of them in Pakistan. If Zaid Hamid becomes your Army head, he will be your new Aurangzeb. It will be a good show to watch Pakistan disintegrate even faster.
 
Pakistan doesn’t need another Zia. What it needs is diplomacy grounded in consistency, a long-term foreign policy that isn’t torn up and rewritten every time a new uniform or ego takes charge. No more Musharraf experiments or Bajwa doctrines masquerading as national strategy.

Meanwhile, India has done what Pakistan did in the 70's and 80's, it elected its own Zia, his name is Modi, also known as the Butcher of Gujarat. Where Zia ushered in Islamization, Modi has mainstreamed Hindutva. And just as Pakistan is still grappling with Zia’s legacy, India will soon reckon with the cost of turning majoritarianism into national identity.

History may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes, and the consequences don’t discriminate.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Pakistan has always put the hand of friendship towards India for a broader peace in the region but unfortunately all these good will gestures and endeavors have been met with hostility.

Recently, Pakistan invited Indian EAM to the SCO conference in Islamabad but still the Indian side didn't show any warmth and instead blamed Pakistan recklessly for a fishy incident like Pahalgam attacks. So bearing in my mind the current bloodshed in Balochistan, would it be plausible for Pakistan to wish for another leader like General Zia-ul-Haq just to deal with India.

A brief overview of Pakistan India relations under General Zia-ul-Haq 👇

General Zia-ul-Haq played a significant role in shaping Pakistan's hostile stance against India. After coming to power through a military coup that deposed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Zia implemented a strategy known as "Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts," which involved covert warfare, militancy, and backing of Mujahideens aimed at liberating Kashmir and Punjab.

Zia's approach to India was marked by a mix of military brinkmanship and nuclear ambiguity. In a 1987 visit to India under the guise of watching a cricket match, Zia warned Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi that any attack on Pakistan could lead to a nuclear war with devastating consequences for India, emphasizing that while Pakistan might be destroyed, the Muslim community would survive, but Hinduism could vanish from the earth. This threat highlighted the intense hostility and the high stakes of the Pakistan-India conflict during his regime.

Despite these tensions, Zia also engaged in limited diplomacy, such as his unannounced visit to India in 1987, which was part of "cricket diplomacy" aimed at easing border tensions. However, his tenure was largely defined by the militarization of Pakistan's policy towards India and the promotion of Islamist policies internally.

In summary, Zia-ul-Haq's stance against India combined aggressive covert operations, nuclear deterrence threats, and occasional diplomatic overtures, all within the broader context of Pakistan's long-standing conflict with India over Kashmir and regional dominance
Click to expand...
Rethinking Pakistan’s Strategic Posture: Passive Defense Isn’t a Deterrent

We all agree — Pakistan doesn’t need another military dictator eroding civil liberties and suppressing dissent. However, it also doesn’t need leadership that is overly conciliatory in the face of hostile actions. The current regional dynamic demands a firmer, more strategically assertive approach — not for adventurism, but for national security and deterrence.

I believe it's time for Pakistan’s military and its numerous intelligence agencies — including the ISI, MI, and IB — to refocus on their core mandate: safeguarding national security with a clear strategic emphasis on the threat posed by India.

Over the years, these institutions have been drawn into internal political affairs and non-essential entanglements that dilute their effectiveness and distract from their primary responsibility. It's crucial that they return to their foundational mission — developing robust external security strategies, especially in countering cross-border threats and hybrid warfare tactics originating from India.

A disciplined, outward-facing intelligence and defense posture will not only strengthen Pakistan’s deterrence but also help restore public trust in these institutions.

If hostile elements from across the border are actively supporting insurgency, targeting civilians, or aiding operations that result in the loss of innocent lives in Pakistan — especially children — then passive restraint is not a viable long-term strategy. A nation cannot afford to absorb such losses indefinitely while relying solely on diplomatic or moral appeals.

Pakistan must consider leveraging all available tools to protect its interests. This could include providing strategic, logistical, and diplomatic support to indigenous freedom movements across the region — whether in Indian-administered Kashmir, Manipur, Nagaland, Assam, or elsewhere — wherever people are struggling against systemic marginalization or military repression.

Such support must always be principled and targeted, avoiding harm to civilians and staying within the boundaries of international norms — but it should also be firm in reciprocating hostile state-sponsored actions, especially when those result in bloodshed inside Pakistan.

Moreover, in regions like Ladakh or Jammu, where China has overlapping strategic interests, coordination — even if tacit — should not be dismissed outright if it serves to rebalance the strategic equation in South Asia.

This isn’t about escalation for the sake of it, or undermining peace efforts, but about restoring deterrence and sending a clear message: continued destabilization of Pakistan will have consequences.

Pakistan cannot afford to wait for more "little coffins" before it rethinks its red lines. I am neither a Zionist nor an Indian so can never agree to targeting random civilians or harming water supplies or using rape etc but India needs to feel the pain for the "little coffins" which Pakistan and its people have been lifting!
 
HalBass9 said:
Pakistan doesn’t need another Zia. What it needs is diplomacy grounded in consistency, a long-term foreign policy that isn’t torn up and rewritten every time a new uniform or ego takes charge. No more Musharraf experiments or Bajwa doctrines masquerading as national strategy.

Meanwhile, India has done what Pakistan did in the 70's and 80's, it elected its own Zia, his name is Modi, also known as the Butcher of Gujarat. Where Zia ushered in Islamization, Modi has mainstreamed Hindutva. And just as Pakistan is still grappling with Zia’s legacy, India will soon reckon with the cost of turning majoritarianism into national identity.

History may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes, and the consequences don’t discriminate.
Click to expand...

I am starting to see some real backlash from Indians on social media after a long time. The penny is finally starting to drop that BJP is a one trick pony whose answer to everything is to blame either Pakistan, or their own Muslims instead of addressing real issues while China surges ahead and takes charge of Asia.
 
sweep_shot said:
I don't think soft/peaceful approach would work with India. It is because India currently has an extremist government backed by many extremist sanghis. You can't be soft with extremists.

Therefore, a strong leader is needed definitely. :inti
Click to expand...
Imran Khan was so much better than current lot...it's so irony that Modi even turned back on those who invited him to weddings
 
HalBass9 said:
This was never just about Zia, India, or the Soviets, it was always shaped by America's Cold War playbook.

During the Cold War, while the US fueled a proxy war in Afghanistan through Pakistan, India sought to maintain plausible neutrality, careful not to appear entangled. That’s why the conflict remained largely confined to Indian occupied Kashmir.

Today, the dynamics have shifted. India may not be at war with Pakistan outright, but it is certainly entangled in a proxy confrontation with China, on Pakistani soil. The recent events and China's help to Pakistan is clear evidence to that.

Regardless of who governs, military or civilian, Pakistan’s long term foreign policy cannot afford to be reset every time leadership changes. With military reliance on China and economic dependency on Western institutions, Pakistan must walk a geopolitical tightrope. Striking the right balance won’t stop India’s covert campaigns, but it will blunt their narrative advantage.

What Pakistan needs is not another strongman, but a strong strategy. Sadly, that remains more a hope than a plan.

One thing is certain, China will not allow Baluchistan to be separated from Pakistan.
Click to expand...
Excellent post especially the bold. Sadly the entire elite is drunk celebrating a 'victory' - some victory where they knew in advance of the enemy attack but did nothing but there we go. Your point about the Cold War is spot on. The US also warned India a few times in the back channels as they needed Pakistan at the time against the Soviets.
 
You just wrote two very nonsensical sentences.

Clearly you are a zia apologist. No we don't want zia back.

He deserved his ending though: sadar sahab ka tayara hawa mein phat gaya. bahwalpur, 17Aug'88. Music to ears still today.
 
Farhan The Man said:
You just wrote two very nonsensical sentences.

Clearly you are a zia apologist. No we don't want zia back.

He deserved his ending though: sadar sahab ka tayara hawa mein phat gaya. bahwalpur, 17Aug'88. Music to ears still today.
Click to expand...

No, but you seems to be his avowed hater. May be you were one of those famous poor guys who got lashed publicly. Anyway read my sentence again...I still appreciate his manhandling of India.

If you still have comprehension issues, then that is understandable...after all you are the same guy who can't even quote a single Quranic verse rightly...need to mention your Madrassah name for the betterment of others 😉
 
Farhan The Man said:
You just wrote two very nonsensical sentences.

Clearly you are a zia apologist. No we don't want zia back.

He deserved his ending though: sadar sahab ka tayara hawa mein phat gaya. bahwalpur, 17Aug'88. Music to ears still today.
Click to expand...
You remember his passing?
 
Farhan The Man said:
Like yesterday.

By 8pm the news spread in karachi like wildfire of his fortunate demise. Celebrations and fireworks ensued.

He was so hated that to date even the army didn't follow up on investigation. Everyone was relieved.
Click to expand...
Isn't it widely believed it was a sabotage? But by whom?
 
You already got it .just a matter of time... Failed marshall munir
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hitman said:
Isn't it widely believed it was a sabotage? But by whom?
Click to expand...
The amreekans did him in. Every dictator they've supported met similar fate. He was in too deep with them.

He knew his end was near. When his hand was forced that day to visit a failed US tank demo. He didn't want to go.

amreekans reeled him in, and shot him out of the sky in their C130 transport. An hour after the entire area was water hosed. By zia's own army. Redudant to say, them also on amreekan payroll.
 
israel = islamic republick of pakistan

Equivalency confirmed by mard-e-momin: ziaulhaq.

Must be true then.

"Pakistan is like Israel, an ideological state. Take out Judaism from Israel and it will collapse like a house of cards. Take Islam out of Pakistan and make it a secular state; it would collapse. For the past four years we have been trying to bring Islamic values to this country."​
Chief Martial Law Administrator, Pakistan, 1981.
As quoted from Tariq Ali - The Clash of Fundamentalisms_ Crusades, Jihads and Modernity​
 
Aurangzeb was human, but a great leader overall, especially compared to the fools of today.

A lot of false narratives, over exaggeration, and erasure of Islamic history takes place today regarding him where he once ruled, yet the crimes of the current chai stirring criminal ruling the land are ignored.
 
Another Zia would be phaantastic for us. How about another Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto? Such true patriots, both of them.​
 
Pakistan has been always about friendship? 🤣🤣

Pakistan made a fool out of PM Bajpayee. He was giving a hand for friendship, while Pak army did a Kargil. Indian leaders won't be taken for a ride anymore unless a real fool becomes a PM.
 
Josh said:
Pakistan has been always about friendship? 🤣🤣

Pakistan made a fool out of PM Bajpayee. He was giving a hand for friendship, while Pak army did a Kargil. Indian leaders won't be taken for a ride anymore unless a real fool becomes a PM.
Click to expand...
Their friendship means give up Kashmir and give primacy to Muslims in a largely non muslim nation
 
Josh said:
Pakistan has been always about friendship? 🤣🤣

Pakistan made a fool out of PM Bajpayee. He was giving a hand for friendship, while Pak army did a Kargil. Indian leaders won't be taken for a ride anymore unless a real fool becomes a PM.
Click to expand...
Yes hand of friendship has been extended but never accepted by Indians who have burned and tried their best to delegitimise and isolate Pakistan, unfortunately this plan fell flat under Modi.
 
It’s one thing to want more internet traffic another to ask for genocide by mods. Unfortunate thread title including Aurangzeb who beheaded many non-Muslims including ninth Sikh Guru.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Chinese conscripts will run away at the first sign of resistance
Click to expand...
China is more powerful economically and militarily but they have few useful allies.

The himalayas nullify any air force or armored advantages they have.

Just firing missiles are not going to defeat India.

Any incursion by Chinese infantry in the plains will be a blood bath for them without any armored support aside from the Ladhak plains.

Chinese Navy is not a TRUE blue water navy .they can't compete in Indian ocean or near Malacca strait. Their navy is more powerful than India's but they will be fighting on Indian waters


So all in all China cannot Hope to annex and hold any Indian territory beyond some border posts ..due to geography
 
straighttalk said:
China is more powerful economically and militarily but they have few useful allies.

The himalayas nullify any air force or armored advantages they have.

Just firing missiles are not going to defeat India.

Any incursion by Chinese infantry in the plains will be a blood bath for them without any armored support aside from the Ladhak plains.

Chinese Navy is not a TRUE blue water navy .they can't compete in Indian ocean or near Malacca strait. Their navy is more powerful than India's but they will be fighting on Indian waters


So all in all China cannot Hope to annex and hold any Indian territory beyond some border posts ..due to geography
Click to expand...
At the rate China is going, their navy will exceed the US. Their production rate for navel vessels exceeds any country on the planet. They are already working on their 4th Aircraft Carrier and are inducting J-35s. They are increasing their tonnage and VLS capacity.
 
May be you guys need the good old sharia. 👍

Zia or Zebbu will not do anything. Those days are gone. But dreams are free. Dream on!!🙄
 
JaDed said:
It’s one thing to want more internet traffic another to ask for genocide by mods. Unfortunate thread title including Aurangzeb who beheaded many non-Muslims including ninth Sikh Guru.
Click to expand...
Then they pretend to act like the friends of online Khalistani Sikhs.
Mods themselves are trolls. It’s their forum and they can troll all day if they choose to👍😂
 
DeadlyVenom said:
Yes hand of friendship has been extended but never accepted by Indians who have burned and tried their best to delegitimise and isolate Pakistan, unfortunately this plan fell flat under Modi.
Click to expand...
Deadly brother, ISPR shouldn't be the only source of news for an intellectual like yourself.
 
JaDed said:
It’s one thing to want more internet traffic another to ask for genocide by mods. Unfortunate thread title including Aurangzeb who beheaded many non-Muslims including ninth Sikh Guru.
Click to expand...
From Sikh perspective, globally and amongst free thinking SIkhs, Operation Blue Star was a genocide.
 
1760986604084.png

he was a complex man, he did some wrong things, but which human doesn't.
Some hindus may say Modi have some of these qualities, and they elected him 3 times for this reason.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
View attachment 158863

he was a complex man, he did some wrong things, but which human doesn't.
Some hindus may say Modi have some of these qualities, and they elected him 3 times for this reason.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Massacring civilians is never right. We mustn’t lose our humanity by defending wrong actions like the killing of Hindus by successive Muslim invasions/rulers. Wrong actions need to be called out for what they are.
 
Patriot said:
Agreed. Massacring civilians is never right. We mustn’t lose our humanity by defending wrong actions like the killing of Hindus by successive Muslim invasions/rulers. Wrong actions need to be called out for what they are.
Click to expand...
The killing of the Sikh gurus and the kids and burning the young sikhs alive is condemnable by the Mughals.

However, the right-wing Hindus are quick to judge it using a purely religious lens. The Mughals also killed their own family members, allied with Hindus, Hindus held big roles in the administration.

We cannot make it into a black white issue like they attempt to.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
The killing of the Sikh gurus and the kids and burning the young sikhs alive is condemnable by the Mughals.

However, the right-wing Hindus are quick to judge it using a purely religious lens. The Mughals also killed their own family members, allied with Hindus, Hindus held big roles in the administration.

We cannot make it into a black white issue like they attempt to.
Click to expand...
The Arabs are also collaborating right now with Israel to kill Palestinians, is it not a black white issue?
 
JaDed said:
The Arabs are also collaborating right now with Israel to kill Palestinians, is it not a black white issue?
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood me or I didn't explain properly

I mean that framing Aurangzeb actions in purely religious angle is incorrect - it was not black or white that he killed Hindu and Spared Muslim.

This is a simplification of the history by the right wing modern Hindus.

If we are judging, we must judge fairly and reasonably and judge Aurungzeb like other sub continent rulers.

Unfortunately Muslim side give clean blank chit but without a doubt the Hindu side give clean blank chit to Marathas and other apparently Hindu kingdoms/rulers.
 
Patriot said:
At the rate China is going, their navy will exceed the US. Their production rate for navel vessels exceeds any country on the planet. They are already working on their 4th Aircraft Carrier and are inducting J-35s. They are increasing their tonnage and VLS capacity.
Click to expand...
I find it tough to believe that a country that so ruthlessly suppresses it's citizens' desires...stuff like religion, freedom of expression etc. can really work as a concept in the long term. Religion in particular is an ancient desire of human beings to explain things they don't understand and find some meaning to existence.

But maybe I'm wrong and folks like the Chinese have gotten past the need for human constructs like religion. Gives me hope...not that I particularly like the deprivals of freedom in societies like China but the fact that humankind can look beyond religion and still find meaning.
 
No, a genuine democracy within Pakistan can resolve most of the country’s internal issues and counter the far right extremist threat emanating from India. In fact, a truly democratic Pakistan naturally limits the breathing space for India’s far right extremism.
 
Red-Indian said:
I find it tough to believe that a country that so ruthlessly suppresses it's citizens' desires...stuff like religion, freedom of expression etc. can really work as a concept in the long term. Religion in particular is an ancient desire of human beings to explain things they don't understand and find some meaning to existence.

But maybe I'm wrong and folks like the Chinese have gotten past the need for human constructs like religion. Gives me hope...not that I particularly like the deprivals of freedom in societies like China but the fact that humankind can look beyond religion and still find meaning.
Click to expand...
China has existed for thousands of years. Though I’ll admit its non-religious ideology is fairly recent.
 
There is little evidence that Aurangzeb did half of what Hindus and Sikhs accuse him of! He was a ruler and a human and he made mistakes but he didn't commit any genocides or anything of that nature.

There is no evidence of Aurangzeb being "Anti-Hindu" or "Anti-Sikh" or Anti-any religion.

He was a King and suppressed rebellion and many Kings have done that.​
 
Patriot said:
At the rate China is going, their navy will exceed the US. Their production rate for navel vessels exceeds any country on the planet. They are already working on their 4th Aircraft Carrier and are inducting J-35s. They are increasing their tonnage and VLS capacity.
Click to expand...
Yes but their military is focused on fighting USA near the Taiwan strait...they are focusing on submarines and missiles to sink us aircraft carriers ... not to dominate USA in blue water or us waters...these are what makes China compete with USA in defensive war in Taiwan straits..... China unless it builds major carrier groups..cant compete with India near Indian shores. But I do agree that in blue water Indian navy is no match to Chinese Navy... We will be defending against China not sending our navy to their waters....the war is all about Malacca stranglehold, economic choking and letting Himalaya serve as a barrier...unless they have a working belt and road initiative.

China has some options...open up a front in Pakistan ..two front warfare with paks help, etc...but those are quite far fetched.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IAJ
  • Poll Poll
Does the new defence pact with KSA imply that Saudi will defend Pakistan against Indian aggression?
5 6 7
Replies
501
Views
6K
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
emranabbas
Why Are Indians So Obsessed With Pakistan?
Replies
37
Views
1K
straighttalk
S
Bhaijaan
U.S. intelligence believes Pakistan is developing a nuclear-armed ICBM capable of reaching the United States.
Replies
43
Views
1K
Boyka
B
Cricket Warrior
Pakistan’s Strategic Dilemma: Can it handle simultaneous tensions with India and Afghanistan?
Replies
17
Views
296
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
Operation Bunyan ul Marsoos - Objective of Pakistan?
Replies
65
Views
3K
uppercut
U
Back
Top